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 .
DETAILED ACTION
a. Claims 1-20 in the present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, are being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
b. This is a first action on the merits based on Applicant’s claims submitted on 09/25/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/30/2025 and 04/15/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
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 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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 8, 10-12, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vermani et al. US Pub 2018/0234135 (hereinafter “Vermani”), and in view of Quan et al. US Pub 2022/0123804 (hereinafter “Quan”).
Regarding claim 1
Vermani discloses a method (“methods for group formation and sounding for distributed multi-user multiple input multiple output (MU-MIMO)” [0002]) comprising:
receiving, by a first access point (i.e. “AP 110b” in Fig. 4) from a second access point (i.e. “AP 110a” in Fig. 4), a first frame (“the AP 110a may send a trigger frame to indicate the TTI and coordinate the data transmission” [0086]) of a first downlink channel between the second access point (i.e. “AP 110a” in Fig. 4) and a first station (i.e. “UT 120a” in Fig. 4) associated with the second access point (“Further, user terminals 120c and 120d are shown as part of BSS2 and therefore only the AP 110b may transmit signal intended for the user terminals 120c and 120d. The user terminals 120a through 120d, in some implementations, refer to the user terminal 120 described with respect to FIG. 1. However, as discussed, the coverage area of the AP 110a and the AP 110b may overlap, and therefore signals transmitted by the AP 110a may reach the user terminals 120c and 120d in BSS2 as OBSS signals. Similarly, signals transmitted by the AP 110b may reach the user terminals 120a and 120d in BSS1 as OBSS signals.” [0062]); and
sending, by the first access point and based on receiving the first frame, a second frame indicating a first beamforming transmission (“At 802, a first access point of a plurality of access points transmits an announcement frame (such as NDPA) for performing a beamforming procedure for a distributed transmission (such as distributed MU-MIMO). In some implementations, the distributed transmission includes a transmission from the plurality of access points. In some implementations, the announcement frame includes at least one identifier of a user terminal in a different basic service set than a basic service set of the first access point.” [0101]) by the second access point to the first station (“To perform beamforming, the AP 110 may exchange frames with the user terminal 120 to measure a channel between the AP 110 and the user terminal 120. For example, the AP 110 may transmit a null data packet (NDP) including one or more long training fields (LTFs) that the user terminal 120 uses to measure the channel. The user terminal 120 may generate a channel feedback information (such as a feedback matrix) based on the channel measurements, and send the feedback matrix to the AP 110. Using the feedback matrix, the AP 110 may derive a steering matrix, which the AP 110 uses to determine how to transmit a signal on each antenna 224 of the AP 110 to perform beamforming. For example, the steering matrix may be indicative of a phase shift, power level, etc. to transmit a signal on each of the antennas 224. For example, the AP 110 may be configured to perform similar beamforming techniques as described in the 802.11ac standard.” [0059]).
Vermani does not specifically teach a first frame comprising a parameter associated with a first coherence time.
In an analogous art, Quan discloses a first frame comprising a parameter associated with a first coherence time (“FIG. 3 is one of frame structures for beam tracking and data transmission in channel coherence time according to the disclosure;” [0039]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vermani’s method for group formation and sounding for distributed MU-MIMO, to include Quan’s data-driven beam tracking method, in order to support beam tracking (Quan [0058]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Quan’s data-driven beam tracking method into Vermani’s method for group formation and sounding for distributed MU-MIMO since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 3
Vermani, as modified by Quan, previously discloses the method of claim 1,
Vermani further discloses wherein the second frame further indicates a second beamforming transmission by the first access point to a second station associated with the first access point (“To perform beamforming, the AP 110 may exchange frames with the user terminal 120 to measure a channel between the AP 110 and the user terminal 120. For example, the AP 110 may transmit a null data packet (NDP) including one or more long training fields (LTFs) that the user terminal 120 uses to measure the channel. The user terminal 120 may generate a channel feedback information (such as a feedback matrix) based on the channel measurements, and send the feedback matrix to the AP 110. Using the feedback matrix, the AP 110 may derive a steering matrix, which the AP 110 uses to determine how to transmit a signal on each antenna 224 of the AP 110 to perform beamforming. For example, the steering matrix may be indicative of a phase shift, power level, etc. to transmit a signal on each of the antennas 224. For example, the AP 110 may be configured to perform similar beamforming techniques as described in the 802.11ac standard.” [0059]; see also Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 4
Vermani, as modified by Quan, previously discloses the method of claim 3,
Vermani further discloses wherein the first beamforming transmission comprises a first beam carrying a third frame in a direction of the first station and a null beam in a direction of the second station, and wherein the second beamforming transmission comprises a second beam carrying a fourth frame in a direction of the second station and a null beam in a direction of the first station (“For example, the user terminals 120a and 120b are shown as part of BSS1 and therefore only the AP 110a may transmit signals intended for the user terminals 120a and 120b. Further, user terminals 120c and 120d are shown as part of BSS2 and therefore only the AP 110b may transmit signal intended for the user terminals 120c and 120d. The user terminals 120a through 120d, in some implementations, refer to the user terminal 120 described with respect to FIG. 1. However, as discussed, the coverage area of the AP 110a and the AP 110b may overlap, and therefore signals transmitted by the AP 110a may reach the user terminals 120c and 120d in BSS2 as OBSS signals. Similarly, signals transmitted by the AP 110b may reach the user terminals 120a and 120d in BSS1 as OBSS signals. In COBF, the APs 110a and 110b may be configured to perform beamforming to form nulls in the direction of user terminals in OBSS, such that any signals received at an OBSS user terminal are of a low power. For example, the AP 110a may be configured to perform beamforming to form nulls toward the user terminals 120c and 120d, and the AP 110b may be configured to form nulls toward the user terminals 120a and 120b to limit the interference at the user terminals. Accordingly, in COBF, APs are configured to form nulls for OBSS user terminals and configured to beamform signals to in-BSS user terminals.” [0062]).
Regarding claim 5
Vermani, as modified by Quan, previously discloses the method of claim 3,
Vermani further discloses wherein the first beamforming transmission comprises a first beam carrying a third frame in a direction of the first station and a second beam carrying a fourth frame in a direction of the second station, and wherein the second beamforming transmission comprises a third beam carrying the fourth frame in a direction of the second station and a fourth beam carrying the third frame in a direction of the first station (“In JT, signals for a given user terminal may be transmitted by multiple APs. For example, one or more of user terminals 120a through 120d may receive signals from both the AP 110a and the AP 110b. For the multiple APs to transmit data to a user terminal, the multiple APs may all need a copy of the data to be transmitted to the user terminal. Accordingly, the APs may need to exchange the data (such as through a backhaul) between each other for transmission to a user terminal. For example, the AP 110a may have data to transmit to user terminal 120a, and may further communicate that data over a backhaul to the AP 110b. The AP 110a and the AP 110b may then beamform signals including the data to the user terminal 120a.” [0063]).
Regarding claim 8
A method comprising:
sending, by a second access point to a first access point, a first frame comprising a parameter associated with a first coherence time of a first downlink channel between the second access point and a first station associated with the second access point; and
receiving, by the second access point from the first access point and based on sending the first frame, a second frame indicating a first beamforming transmission by the second access point to the first station.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 8 is reciprocal to method claim 1. Therefore method claim 8 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 10
The method of claim 8, wherein the second frame further indicates a second beamforming transmission by the first access point to a second station associated with the first access point.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 10 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 3. Therefore method claim 10 corresponds to method claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 3 rejection above.
Regarding claim 11
The method of claim 10, wherein the first beamforming transmission comprises a first beam carrying a third frame in a direction of the first station and a null beam in a direction of the second station, and wherein the second beamforming transmission comprises a second beam carrying a fourth frame in a direction of the second station and a null beam in a direction of the first station.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 11 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 4. Therefore method claim 11 corresponds to method claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 4 rejection above.
Regarding claim 12
The method of claim 10, wherein the first beamforming transmission comprises a first beam carrying a third frame in a direction of the first station and a second beam carrying a fourth frame in a direction of the second station, and wherein the second beamforming transmission comprises a third beam carrying the fourth frame in a direction of the second station and a fourth beam carrying the third frame in a direction of the first station.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 12 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 5. Therefore method claim 12 corresponds to method claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 5 rejection above.
Regarding claim 15
A method comprising:
receiving, by a first station from a first access point, a first beamforming transmission by a second access point to the first station; and
receiving, by the first station from the first access point, a second beamforming transmission by the first access point to a second station associated with the first access point.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 15 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claims 1 and 3. Therefore method claim 15 corresponds to method claims 1 and 3 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claims 1 and 3 rejections above.
Regarding claim 16
The method of claim 15, wherein the first beamforming transmission is based on the first access point receiving a parameter associated with a first coherence time of a first downlink channel between the second access point and the first station associated with the second access point.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 16 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 1. Therefore method claim 16 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 17
The method of claim 15, wherein the first beamforming transmission comprises a first beam carrying a first frame in a direction of the first station and a null beam in a direction of the second station, and wherein the second beamforming transmission comprises a second beam carrying a second frame in a direction of the second station and a null beam in a direction of the first station.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 17 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 4. Therefore method claim 17 corresponds to method claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 4 rejection above.
Regarding claim 18
The method of claim 15, wherein the first beamforming transmission comprises a first beam carrying a first frame in a direction of the first station and a second beam carrying a second frame in a direction of the second station, and wherein the second beamforming transmission comprises a third beam carrying the second frame in a direction of the second station and a fourth beam carrying the first frame in a direction of the first station.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 18 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 5. Therefore method claim 18 corresponds to method claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 5 rejection above.
Claims 2, 9, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vermani, in view of Quan, and further in view of Ma et al. US Pub 2022/0353702 (hereinafter “Ma”).
Regarding claim 2
Vermani, as modified by Quan, previously discloses the method of claim 1,
Vermani and Quan do not specifically teach wherein a start time of the first beamforming transmission is based on the parameter associated with the first coherence time.
In an analogous art, Ma discloses wherein a start time of the first beamforming transmission is based on the parameter associated with the first coherence time (“the first indication includes a starting time associated with the loss of coherence, a duration associated with the loss of coherence, or a combination thereof.” [0170]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vermani’s method for group formation and sounding for distributed MU-MIMO, as modified by Quan, to include Ma’s method for detecting a loss of coherence, in order to adjust to a transmission parameter or a reception parameter based at least in part on the indication of the loss of coherence (Ma [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Ma’s method for detecting a loss of coherence into Vermani’s method for group formation and sounding for distributed MU-MIMO since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 9
The method of claim 8, wherein a start time of the first beamforming transmission is based on the parameter associated with the first coherence time.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 9 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 2. Therefore method claim 9 corresponds to method claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 2 rejection above.
Regarding claim 19
The method of claim 16, wherein a start time of the first beamforming transmission is based on the parameter associated with the first coherence time.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 19 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 9. Therefore method claim 19 corresponds to method claim 9 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 9 rejection above.
Claims 6 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vermani, in view of Quan, and further in view of Yang et al. US Pub 2018/0352523 (hereinafter “Yang”).
Regarding claim 6
Vermani, as modified by Quan, previously discloses the method of claim 3,
Vermani and Quan do not specifically teach wherein the first coherence time is longer than a second coherence time of a second downlink channel between the first access point and the second station associated with the first access point.
In an analogous art, Yang discloses wherein the first coherence time is longer than a second coherence time of a second downlink channel between the first access point and the second station associated with the first access point (“At step 506, a second channel correlation is calculated between the first access terminal and each of the at least one remaining access terminal. At step 508, a third channel correlation is calculated between the second access terminal and each of the at least one remaining access terminal. At step 510, one of the first access terminal and the second access terminal is dropped from service from the population of access terminals based on the second channel correlations and the third channel correlations. In one embodiment, if a maximum correlation of the second channel correlations is greater than a maximum correlation of the third channel correlations (i.e., the first access terminal has a higher correlation with the remaining access terminals than the second access terminal), the first access terminal is dropped. Otherwise, if the maximum correlation of the third channel correlations is greater than a maximum correlation of the second channel correlations (i.e., the second access terminal has a higher correlation with the remaining access terminals than the first access terminal), the second access terminal is dropped. Dropping the selected one of the first and second access terminals may comprise reallocating the selected access terminal to a different resource (e.g., a different coherence time slot or frequency)” [0094]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vermani’s method for group formation and sounding for distributed MU-MIMO, as modified by Quan, to include Yang’s active user selection in massive multiple-input multiple-output wireless systems, in order to determine which access terminals to drop within a coherence interval (Yang [0004]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Yang’s active user selection in massive multiple-input multiple-output wireless systems into Vermani’s method for group formation and sounding for distributed MU-MIMO since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 20
The method of claim 16, wherein the first coherence time is longer than a second coherence time of a second downlink channel between the first access point and the second station associated with the first access point.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 20 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 6. Therefore method claim 20 corresponds to method claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 6 rejection above.
Claims 7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vermani, in view of Quan, and further in view of Chun et al. US Pub 2017/0223665 (hereinafter “Chun”).
Regarding claim 7
Vermani, as modified by Quan, previously discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
Vermani further discloses wherein the first frame further comprises an indication of a time offset, and wherein the time offset comprises a time difference between a measurement of the sounding procedure and the first beamforming transmission (“In some implementations, the transmit power backoff used by the APs may be kept constant between NDP and data transmission of the APs to ensure proper beamforming (such as prevent phase rotations). Further, in some implementations, for sequential sounding procedure, the RxAGC at the user terminals may be kept constant between when one AP sounds and another AP sounds to prevent gain offsets. In some implementations, the NDPA may (such as implicitly) indicate to the user terminals to keep RxAGC constant.” [0093]).
Vermani and Quan do not specifically teach sending, by the first access point to the second access point, a fifth frame configured to trigger the second access point to perform a sounding procedure, wherein the fifth frame is configured to solicit a buffer status report, and wherein the receiving, by the first access point from the second access point, the first frame comprises receiving the first frame based on the fifth frame.
In an analogous art, Chun discloses sending, by the first access point to the second access point, a fifth frame configured to trigger the second access point to perform a sounding procedure, wherein the fifth frame is configured to solicit a buffer status report, and wherein the receiving, by the first access point from the second access point, the first frame comprises receiving the first frame based on the fifth frame (“Furthermore, the transmission of the sync signals 3221, 3222, and 3223 may be omitted, and the AP may include adjustment information in the UL MU trigger frame 3210 through implicit measurement and transmit the UL MU trigger frame 3210. For example, in a pre-procedure to be described later, the AP may generate adjustment information for adjusting an error, such as a time/frequency/power between the STAs, through an NDP or buffer status/sounding frame transmitted by each of the STAs, and may transmit the adjustment information to each of the STAs through the UL MU trigger frame 3210.” [0597])
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vermani’s method for group formation and sounding for distributed MU-MIMO, as modified by Quan, to include Chun’s method for multi-user (MU) uplink or downlink (UL or DL) data transmission, in order to facilitate MU transmission in a wireless communication system (Chun [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Chun’s method for multi-user (MU) uplink or downlink (UL or DL) data transmission into Vermani’s method for group formation and sounding for distributed MU-MIMO since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 13
The method of claim 8, further comprising:
receiving, by the second access point from the first access point, a fifth frame configured to trigger the second access point to perform a sounding procedure, wherein the fifth frame is configured to solicit a buffer status report, and wherein the sending, by the second access point to the first access point, the first frame comprises sending the first frame based on the fifth frame; and wherein the first frame further comprises an indication of a time offset, and wherein the time offset comprises a time difference between a measurement of the sounding procedure and the first beamforming transmission.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 13 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 7. Therefore method claim 13 corresponds to method claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 7 rejection above.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vermani, in view of Quan and Chun, and further in view of Ma et al. US Pub 2022/0353702 (hereinafter “Ma”).
Regarding claim 14
Vermani, as modified by Quan and Chun, previously discloses the method of claim 13,
Vermani, Quan, and Chun do not specifically teach wherein the first coherence time is longer than the time offset.
In an analogous art, Ma discloses wherein the first coherence time is longer than the time offset (“the old coherence configuration indicates a time offset, a duration, a periodicity, or a combination thereof.” [0146] and furthermore “wherein the new coherence configuration indicates a time offset, a duration, a periodicity, or a combination thereof.” [0221]). One skilled in the art can easily choose an appropriate value of time offset with regard to the old or new coherence time.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vermani’s method for group formation and sounding for distributed MU-MIMO, as modified by Quan and Chun, to include Ma’s method for detecting a loss of coherence, in order to adjust to a transmission parameter or a reception parameter based at least in part on the indication of the loss of coherence (Ma [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Ma’s method for detecting a loss of coherence into Vermani’s method for group formation and sounding for distributed MU-MIMO since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/CHUONG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights