DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 8 and 13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,120,753 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claims are directed to performing trigger-based uplink resource allocation. Below is a table showing the correspondence between instant Claims 1 and 10 and Claims 1, 8 and 13 of the conflicting Patent, with differences underlined.
Claim No.
instant application
(18/886,933)
Conflicting Patent
(US 12,120,753 B2)
Claim No.
1
A communication apparatus that supports multi-band operation over at least a first band and a second band, the communication apparatus comprising:
A station (STA) apparatus comprising:
1
a receiver which, in operation, receives, on the first band, a Trigger frame allocating one or more Random Access Resource Units (RA-RUs) on either of the first band or the second band; and
a receiver which, in operation, receives a Trigger frame allocating Random Access Resource Units (RA-RUs) over multiple bands,
the Trigger frame including a first User Info field that comprises a first Band Indication subfield for specifying a first band among the multiple bands, a first RU Allocation subfield for indicating a first RA-RU of one or more contiguous RA-RUs in the first band specified by the first Band Indication subfield, and a first Number of RA-RU subfield for indicating a number of the contiguous RA-RUs minus one in the first band specified by the first Band Indication subfield; and
a controller which, in operation: updates a first Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) random access backoff (OBO) counter for the first band according to a number of RA-RUs determined to be eligible based on the Trigger frame; and
a controller which, in operation:
sets a first Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) random access backoff (OBO) counter to 0 if an initial value of the first OBO counter is not larger than a number of first eligible RA-RUs in the first band, which is a first subset of contiguous RA-RUs specified by the Trigger frame; and
randomly selects an eligible RA-RU in the first band for a first Trigger Based (TB) Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) transmission when the first OBO counter is updated as 0,
randomly selects one of the first eligible RA-RUs in the first band.
wherein after the first TB PPDU transmission, the first OBO counter is initialized according to a first OFDMA Contention Window (OCW).
The STA apparatus of claim 6,
…
wherein the second OBO counter is initialized according to a second OCW.
8
10
A communication method for a communication apparatus that supports multi-band operation over at least a first band and a second band, the communication method comprising:
A communication method for uplink Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) based random access, the method comprising:
13
receiving, on the first band, a Trigger frame allocating one or more Random Access Resource Units (RA-RUs) on either of the first band or the second band; and
receiving a Trigger frame having Random Access Resource Units (RA-RUs) over multiple bands,
the Trigger frame including a first User Info field that comprises a first Band Indication subfield for specifying a first band among the multiple bands, a first RU Allocation subfield for indicating a first RA-RU of one or more contiguous RA-RUs in the first band specified by the first Band Indication subfield, and a first Number of RA-RU subfield for indicating a number of the contiguous RA-RUs minus one in the first band specified by the first Band Indication subfield;
updating a first Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) random access backoff (OBO) counter for the first band according to a number of RA-RUs determined to be eligible based on the Trigger frame; and
setting the first OBO counter to 0 if an initial value of the first OBO counter is not larger than a number of first eligible RA-RUs in the first band, which is a first subset of contiguous RA-RUs specified by the Trigger frame; and
randomly selecting an eligible RA-RU in the first band for a first Trigger Based (TB) Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) transmission when the first OBO counter is updated as 0,
randomly selecting one of the first eligible RA-RUs in each of the multiple bands.
wherein after the first TB PPDU transmission, the first OBO counter is initialized according to a first OFDMA Contention Window (OCW).
initializing a first Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) random access backoff (OBO) counter according to a first OFDMA Contention Window (OCW);
As indicated above, the subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the conflicting Patent and is covered by the conflicting Patent. The instant application and the conflicting Patent are claiming common subject matter, and the difference in limitation(s) are merely differences in wording. Therefore, Claims 1 and 10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness type double patenting in light of the conflicting Patent Claims 1, 8 and 13
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stacey (US 2016/0227579 A1) in view of Ryu (US 2018/0338325 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Stacey discloses the below limitation(s): a receiver (Stacey Fig 7 network interface device/transceiver 920) which, in operation, receives, on the first band, a Trigger frame allocating one or more Random Access Resource Units (RA-RUs) (Fig 1 block 104 trigger frame and/or Fig 2 block 210 trigger frame; Fig 4 block 406 send the trigger frame to one or more user devices including a first user device; Fig 5 block 504 receive, on a communication channel, at least one trigger frame and block 506 detect one or more random access resource allocations (i.e. RA-RUs) associated with a first trigger frame; [0023] teaches that the trigger frame indicates resource units available for random access (i.e. RA-RU))
a controller (Fig 7 hardware processor 902) which, in operation:
updates a first Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) random access backoff (OBO) counter for the first band according to a number of RA-RUs determined to be eligible based on the Trigger frame (Fig 5 block 508 decrement (i.e. update) a backoff count (i.e. OBO) for each of the detected one or more random access resource allocations); and
randomly selects an eligible RA-RU in the first band for a first Trigger Based (TB) (Fig 1 block 106 UL data transmitted on RU2 and/or Fig 2 block 204 UL frame transmitted on RU1; Fig 4 block 408 receive from the first user device, in response to sending the trigger frame, a first uplink frame based on a first backoff count associated with the first user device; Fig 5 block 512 send an uplink frame using the first resource allocation (i.e. RA-RU) to the computing device; [0025] backoff counter may be decremented by 1 every time the user device detects a resource unit in the sequence of resource units reference in the trigger frame until the backoff count reaches 0 ... in other words, the user device may decrement the backoff count until it reaches a predetermined integer value (e.g. 0) and then select the resource unit that was reached; [0027] user device may send its uplink data (e.g. data 106) if it was determined that at backoff count equal to 0 (i.e. OBO counter is 0) the user device would send its data), wherein after the first TB PPDU transmission, the first OBO counter is initialized according to a first OFDMA Contention Window (OCW) (Fig 5 block 502 initialize a backoff count (i.e. OBO) to a contention window (CWO) value; [0089] the initial backoff count (i.e. OBO) may be initialized to a random integer value between 0 and the contention window (CW); [0042] backoff count of a user device may be based on a contention window for OFDMA (CWO)).
Stacey does not disclose the below limitation(s): on either of the first band or the second band; and
a first Trigger Based (TB) Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) transmission …;
In the same field of endeavor of uplink OFDMA random access, Ryu does disclose the below limitation(s): on either of the first band or the second band (Ryu Fig 4-6 teaches a plurality of bands of different frequencies (i.e. 20 MHz, 40 MHz, and 60 MHz) each comprising a plurality of resource units; see associated [0050]-[0059]; [0087] different frequency resources respective to each of the multiple STAs are indicated through a trigger frame); and
a first Trigger Based (TB) Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) transmission (Fig 19 block 1920 wherein the uplink data is a PPDU#1 on RU2 (i.e. an eligible RA-RU)) …;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teaching of Stacey to include an explicit teaching of different bands used for uplink random access as well as an explicit teaching of uplink random access transmission comprising a PPDU as taught by Ryu. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable the transmission of random access uplink transmission in a network with a plurality of bands and resource units. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 2, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 1.
Stacey further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the Trigger frame received on the first band allocates one or more RA-RUs on the second band or another band (Stacey [0026] in a frequency band of 20 MHz, there are a total of 9 resource units and the AP may assign one or more of these RUs to one or more user device(s) to transmit their UL data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include allocating RUs on the available frequency band(s) as taught by Stacey. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable a first band to carry, e.g. a trigger frame that allocates a RU at a different frequency resource. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 3, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 1.
Stacey does not disclose the below limitation(s): wherein an RA-RU is determined to be eligible if the communication apparatus supports all transmit parameters indicated in a Common Info field of the Trigger frame and in a User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU; and
if the communication apparatus is not associated with a Basic Service Set (BSS) it intends to transmit to and a predetermined subfield of the User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU is a first predetermined number.
In the same field of endeavor of uplink OFDMA random access, Ryu does disclose the below limitation(s): wherein an RA-RU is determined to be eligible if the communication apparatus supports all transmit parameters indicated in a Common Info field of the Trigger frame and in a User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU (Ryu [0093] TA field includes the common information which includes common control information applied to the receiving STA for receiving the trigger frame; trigger frame includes per user information fields corresponding to the number of received STAs receiving the trigger frame); and
if the communication apparatus is not associated with a Basic Service Set (BSS) it intends to transmit to and a predetermined subfield of the User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU is a first predetermined number ([0294] user information field includes a fourth user identifier field in which an AID value for an on-AP STA unassociated with the AP is set to 2045, and a fourth RU allocation field indicating a fourth resource unit (RU4); see also Fig 9 and/or Fig 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include field(s) in a trigger frame comprising user information to assist with uplink resource allocation as taught by Ryu. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to provide information in the trigger frame to reduce the latency between triggering resource assignment and assigning resources. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 4, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 1.
Stacey does not disclose the below limitation(s): wherein an RA-RU is determined to be eligible if the communication apparatus supports all transmit parameters indicated in a Common Info field of the Trigger frame and in a User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU; and
if the communication apparatus is an associated communication apparatus and a Transmitter Address (TA) field of the Trigger frame is set to a BSS identifier (ID) of an associated BSS and a predetermined subfield of the User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU is a second predetermined number.
In the same field of endeavor of uplink OFDMA random access, Ryu does disclose the below limitation(s): wherein an RA-RU is determined to be eligible if the communication apparatus supports all transmit parameters indicated in a Common Info field of the Trigger frame and in a User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU (Ryu [0093] TA field includes the common information which includes common control information applied to the receiving STA for receiving the trigger frame; trigger frame includes per user information fields corresponding to the number of received STAs receiving the trigger frame); and
if the communication apparatus is an associated communication apparatus and a Transmitter Address (TA) field of the Trigger frame is set to a BSS identifier (ID) of an associated BSS and a predetermined subfield of the User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU is a second predetermined number ([0291] user information field includes a first user identifier field in which an AID value for a non-AP STA associated with the AP is set to 0, and a first RU Allocation field indicating a first resource unit (RU1); see also Fig 9 and/or Fig 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include field(s) in a trigger frame comprising user information to assist with uplink resource allocation as taught by Ryu. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to provide information in the trigger frame to reduce the latency between triggering resource assignment and assigning resources. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 5, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 1.
Stacey further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the controller, in operation, updates a second OBO counter for the second band according to the number of RA-RUs determined to be eligible based on the Trigger frame (Stacey [0027] teaches a per-user device backoff count (i.e. OBO); Fig 2 wherein there are at least two user devices 224 and 226, and wherein each communicates on a different band); and
randomly selects an eligible RA-RU in the second band for a second TB PPDU transmission when the second OBO counter is updated as 0 (Fig 2 block 206 second UL frame), wherein after the TB PPDU transmission, the second OBO counter is initialized according to a second OCW ([0042] backoff count of a user device may be based on a contention window for OFDMA (CWO)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include a plurality of OBOs (e.g. per-device backoff count) as taught by Stacey. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to maintain a plurality of OBOs for assigning frequency resources so as to enable multiple RU allocations simultaneously, thus improving throughput. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 7, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 5.
Stacey further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein a range of the first OCW is specific to the first band and a range of the second OCW is specific to the second band (Stacey [0042] backoff count of a user device (wherein there are multiple user devices e.g. Fig 2 and each has a backoff count i.e. OBO) may be based on a Contention Window for OFDMA (CWO i.e. OCW) and the CWO may have a minimum value (CWO_min) and a maximum value (CWO_max)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include establishing a range of possible OCW (i.e. CWO) values as taught by Stacey. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to limit OCW values to a predetermined range so as to avoid out-of-bounds exceptions that could cause errors in the random access procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 8, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 1.
Stacey further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the Trigger frame comprises a User Info field which includes a subfield (Stacey Fig 9 section 960 user information comprising per user subfields 960#1-960#N; [0095] per user information fields 960#N includes multiple sub-fields), and the subfield is set to a first predetermined value to indicate the RA-RU(s) allocated by the User Info field reserved for associated communication apparatuses operating in one of at least the first band and the second band ([0094] per user information field of Fig 9 may also be referred to as a "RU Allocation field").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include fields for user information in the trigger frame as taught by Stacey. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to provide user information in the trigger frame to reduce the latency between triggering resource allocation and assigning one or more RU(s). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 9, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 8.
Stacey does not disclose the below limitation(s): wherein the subfield is set to a second predetermined value to indicate the RA-RU(s) allocated by the User Info field reserved for communication apparatuses which are operating in one of at least the first band and the second band and are not associated with a BSS it intends to transmit to.
In the same field of endeavor of uplink OFDMA random access, Ryu does disclose the below limitation(s): wherein the subfield is set to a second predetermined value to indicate the RA-RU(s) allocated by the User Info field reserved for communication apparatuses which are operating in one of at least the first band and the second band and are not associated with a BSS it intends to transmit to (Ryu [0294] fourth user information field includes a fourth user identifier field in which an AID value for a non-AP STA unassociated with the AP is set top 2045, and a fourth RU allocation field indicating a fourth resource unit; see also Fig 19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include a user info field that indicates allocated RA-RUs as taught by Ryu. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to indicate allocated RA-RUs to enable the user device to transmit uplink on the allocated resource(s). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 10, Stacey discloses the below limitation(s): receiving, on the first band, a Trigger frame allocating one or more Random Access Resource Units (RA-RUs) (Stacey Fig 1 block 104 trigger frame and/or Fig 2 block 210 trigger frame; Fig 4 block 406 send the trigger frame to one or more user devices including a first user device; Fig 5 block 504 receive, on a communication channel, at least one trigger frame and block 506 detect one or more random access resource allocations (i.e. RA-RUs) associated with a first trigger frame; [0023] teaches that the trigger frame indicates resource units available for random access (i.e. RA-RU)) …;
updating a first Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) random access backoff (OBO) counter for the first band according to a number of RA-RUs determined to be eligible based on the Trigger frame (Fig 5 block 508 decrement (i.e. update) a backoff count (i.e. OBO) for each of the detected one or more random access resource allocations); and
randomly selecting an eligible RA-RU in the first band for a first Trigger Based (TB) (Fig 1 block 106 UL data transmitted on RU2 and/or Fig 2 block 204 UL frame transmitted on RU1; Fig 4 block 408 receive from the first user device, in response to sending the trigger frame, a first uplink frame based on a first backoff count associated with the first user device; Fig 5 block 512 send an uplink frame using the first resource allocation (i.e. RA-RU) to the computing device; [0025] backoff counter may be decremented by 1 every time the user device detects a resource unit in the sequence of resource units reference in the trigger frame until the backoff count reaches 0 ... in other words, the user device may decrement the backoff count until it reaches a predetermined integer value (e.g. 0) and then select the resource unit that was reached; [0027] user device may send its uplink data (e.g. data 106) if it was determined that at backoff count equal to 0 (i.e. OBO counter is 0) the user device would send its data),
wherein after the first TB PPDU transmission, the first OBO counter is initialized according to a first OFDMA Contention Window (OCW) (Fig 5 block 502 initialize a backoff count (i.e. OBO) to a contention window (CWO) value; [0089] the initial backoff count (i.e. OBO) may be initialized to a random integer value between 0 and the contention window (CW); [0042] backoff count of a user device may be based on a contention window for OFDMA (CWO)).
Stacey does not disclose the below limitation(s): on either of the first band or the second band; and
a first Trigger Based (TB) Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) transmission …;
In the same field of endeavor of uplink OFDMA random access, Ryu does disclose the below limitation(s): on either of the first band or the second band (Ryu Fig 4-6 teaches a plurality of bands of different frequencies (i.e. 20 MHz, 40 MHz, and 60 MHz) each comprising a plurality of resource units; see associated [0050]-[0059]; [0087] different frequency resources respective to each of the multiple STAs are indicated through a trigger frame); and
a first Trigger Based (TB) Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) transmission (Fig 19 block 1920 wherein the uplink data is a PPDU#1 on RU2 (i.e. an eligible RA-RU)) …;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teaching of Stacey to include an explicit teaching of different bands used for uplink random access as well as an explicit teaching of uplink random access transmission comprising a PPDU as taught by Ryu. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable the transmission of random access uplink transmission in a network with a plurality of bands and resource units. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 11, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 10.
Stacey further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the Trigger frame received on the first band allocates one or more RA-RUs on the second band or another band (Stacey [0026] in a frequency band of 20 MHz, there are a total of 9 resource units and the AP may assign one or more of these RUs to one or more user device(s) to transmit their UL data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include allocating RUs on the available frequency band(s) as taught by Stacey. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable a first band to carry, e.g. a trigger frame that allocates a RU at a different frequency resource. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 12, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 10.
Stacey does not disclose the below limitation(s): wherein an RA-RU is determined to be eligible if the communication apparatus supports all transmit parameters indicated in a Common Info field of the Trigger frame and in a User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU; and
if the communication apparatus is not associated with a Basic Service Set (BSS) it intends to transmit to and a predetermined subfield of the User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU is a first predetermined number.
In the same field of endeavor of uplink OFDMA random access, Ryu does disclose the below limitation(s): wherein an RA-RU is determined to be eligible if the communication apparatus supports all transmit parameters indicated in a Common Info field of the Trigger frame and in a User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU (Ryu [0093] TA field includes the common information which includes common control information applied to the receiving STA for receiving the trigger frame; trigger frame includes per user information fields corresponding to the number of received STAs receiving the trigger frame); and
if the communication apparatus is not associated with a Basic Service Set (BSS) it intends to transmit to and a predetermined subfield of the User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU is a first predetermined number ([0294] user information field includes a fourth user identifier field in which an AID value for an on-AP STA unassociated with the AP is set to 2045, and a fourth RU allocation field indicating a fourth resource unit (RU4); see also Fig 9 and/or Fig 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include field(s) in a trigger frame comprising user information to assist with uplink resource allocation as taught by Ryu. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to provide information in the trigger frame to reduce the latency between triggering resource assignment and assigning resources. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 13, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 10.
Stacey does not disclose the below limitation(s): wherein an RA-RU is determined to be eligible if the communication apparatus supports all transmit parameters indicated in a Common Info field of the Trigger frame and in a User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU; and
if the communication apparatus is an associated communication apparatus and a Transmitter Address (TA) field of the Trigger frame is set to a BSS identifier (ID) of an associated BSS and a predetermined subfield of the User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU is a second predetermined number.
In the same field of endeavor of uplink OFDMA random access, Ryu does disclose the below limitation(s): wherein an RA-RU is determined to be eligible if the communication apparatus supports all transmit parameters indicated in a Common Info field of the Trigger frame and in a User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU (Ryu [0093] TA field includes the common information which includes common control information applied to the receiving STA for receiving the trigger frame; trigger frame includes per user information fields corresponding to the number of received STAs receiving the trigger frame); and
if the communication apparatus is an associated communication apparatus and a Transmitter Address (TA) field of the Trigger frame is set to a BSS identifier (ID) of an associated BSS and a predetermined subfield of the User Info field of the Trigger frame corresponding to the RA-RU is a second predetermined number ([0291] user information field includes a first user identifier field in which an AID value for a non-AP STA associated with the AP is set to 0, and a first RU Allocation field indicating a first resource unit (RU1); see also Fig 9 and/or Fig 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include field(s) in a trigger frame comprising user information to assist with uplink resource allocation as taught by Ryu. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to provide information in the trigger frame to reduce the latency between triggering resource assignment and assigning resources. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 14, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 10.
Stacey further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the controller, in operation, updates a second OBO counter for the second band according to the number of RA-RUs determined to be eligible based on the Trigger frame (Stacey [0027] teaches a per-user device backoff count (i.e. OBO); Fig 2 wherein there are at least two user devices 224 and 226, and wherein each communicates on a different band); and
randomly selects an eligible RA-RU in the second band for a second TB PPDU transmission when the second OBO counter is updated as 0 (Fig 2 block 206 second UL frame), wherein after the TB PPDU transmission, the second OBO counter is initialized according to a second OCW ([0042] backoff count of a user device may be based on a contention window for OFDMA (CWO)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include a plurality of OBOs (e.g. per-device backoff count) as taught by Stacey. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to maintain a plurality of OBOs for assigning frequency resources so as to enable multiple RU allocations simultaneously, thus improving throughput. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 16, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 14.
Stacey further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein a range of the first OCW is specific to the first band and a range of the second OCW is specific to the second band (Stacey [0042] backoff count of a user device (wherein there are multiple user devices e.g. Fig 2 and each has a backoff count i.e. OBO) may be based on a Contention Window for OFDMA (CWO i.e. OCW) and the CWO may have a minimum value (CWO_min) and a maximum value (CWO_max)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include establishing a range of possible OCW (i.e. CWO) values as taught by Stacey. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to limit OCW values to a predetermined range so as to avoid out-of-bounds exceptions that could cause errors in the random access procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 17, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 10.
Stacey further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the Trigger frame comprises a User Info field which includes a subfield (Stacey Fig 9 section 960 user information comprising per user subfields 960#1-960#N; [0095] per user information fields 960#N includes multiple sub-fields), and the subfield is set to a first predetermined value to indicate the RA-RU(s) allocated by the User Info field reserved for associated communication apparatuses operating in one of at least the first band and the second band ([0094] per user information field of Fig 9 may also be referred to as a "RU Allocation field").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include fields for user information in the trigger frame as taught by Stacey. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to provide user information in the trigger frame to reduce the latency between triggering resource allocation and assigning one or more RU(s). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 18, Stacey and Ryu disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 10.
Stacey does not disclose the below limitation(s): wherein the subfield is set to a second predetermined value to indicate the RA-RU(s) allocated by the User Info field reserved for communication apparatuses which are operating in one of at least the first band and the second band and are not associated with a BSS it intends to transmit to.
In the same field of endeavor of uplink OFDMA random access, Ryu does disclose the below limitation(s): wherein the subfield is set to a second predetermined value to indicate the RA-RU(s) allocated by the User Info field reserved for communication apparatuses which are operating in one of at least the first band and the second band and are not associated with a BSS it intends to transmit to (Ryu [0294] fourth user information field includes a fourth user identifier field in which an AID value for a non-AP STA unassociated with the AP is set top 2045, and a fourth RU allocation field indicating a fourth resource unit; see also Fig 19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method that supports multi-band operation to include a user info field that indicates allocated RA-RUs as taught by Ryu. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to indicate allocated RA-RUs to enable the user device to transmit uplink on the allocated resource(s). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stacey and Ryu to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 6 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: a thorough and complete search has been conducted and no prior art has been found that solely, or in any reasonable combination, reads on each element of the indicated claim(s).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAWN D MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8599. The examiner can normally be reached M-TR 8-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Charles C Jiang can be reached at (571) 270-7191. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHAWN D MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights