DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority to Provisional Application 63/542328 filed 10/4/2023 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-20 as filed 10/4/2024 remain pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/6/2025 and 5/29/2025 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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-7, 14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US20210120427A1; “Wang”).
Regarding claim 1,
Wang (Title: Multi-Access Point Coordinated Reuse Protocol and Algorithm) discloses a method (Fig. 25) comprising receiving, by a first access point (master AP1) from a second access point (slave AP2), a first frame (SR Request) indicating a first spatial mapping for a transmission of a PPDU, from the second access point to a station (STA2), in a TXOP of the first access point (paragraph 77 and Fig. 25; Fig. 25, UL PPDUs between AP1-STA1 and AP2-STA2 after master AP1 as the TXOP owner transmits indication to selected neighboring AP(s) of an obtained spatial reuse (SR) transmission opportunity (TXOP), AP2 responds with SR Request including SR parameter of AP2 to AP1) and sending, by the first access point to the second access point and based on the received first frame, a second frame indicating a second spatial mapping for the transmission (paragraph 77 and Fig. 25; AP1 uses master AP SR algorithm to determine SR allocation send to AP2 having SRP of AP1 relative to the expected interference level of AP2; trigger frames for UL PPDUs).
Regarding claim 14,
Wang discloses a method (Fig. 25) comprising sending, by a second access point (slave AP2) to a first access point (master AP1), a first frame (SR Request) indicating a first spatial mapping (SRP of AP2) for a transmission of a PPDU, from the second access point to a station (STA2), in a TXOP of the first access point (paragraph 77 and Fig. 25; UL PPDUs between AP1-STA1 and AP2-STA2 after master AP1 as the TXOP owner transmits indication to selected neighboring AP(s) of an obtained spatial reuse (SR) transmission opportunity (TXOP), AP2 responds with SR Request including SR parameter of AP2 to AP1).
Wang further shows receiving, by the second access point from the first access point and after sending the first frame, a second frame indicating a second spatial mapping for the transmission of the PPDU (paragraph 77 and Fig. 25; AP1 uses master AP SR algorithm to determine SR allocation send to AP2 having SRP of AP1 relative to the expected interference level of AP2; subsequent trigger frames for UL PPDUs) and sending, by the second access point to the station, the transmission of the PPDU using the second spatial mapping (Fig. 25; subsequent trigger frames for UL PPDU to STA2 based on SRP1 relative to expected interference level of AP2).
Regarding claim 3,
Wang discloses determining, based on the first spatial mapping, the second spatial mapping (Fig. 25; paragraph 77; AP2 responsive SR request based on received SR TXOP indication from AP1).
Regarding claims 4 and 16,
Wang discloses sending, by the first access point to the second access point, a third frame soliciting the first frame (Fig. 25; SR TXOP Indication solicits SR request which solicits the SR Allocation described above; subsequent trigger frames for the UL PPDU between AP1-STA1 and AP2-STA2).
Regarding claims 5 and 17,
Wang discloses sending, by the first access point to the second access point, a third frame requesting that the second access point use a third spatial mapping for the transmission of the PPDU (Fig. 25; SR TXOP Indication solicits SR request which solicits the SR Allocation having SRP of AP1 relative to expected interference level of AP2; subsequent trigger frames PPDUs from AP1-STA1 and AP2-STA2).
Regarding claims 6 and 19,
Wang discloses receiving, by the first access point from the sending second access point, a first indication of supporting a spatial mapping coordination capability by the second access point (Fig. 25, SR request responsive to the SR TXOP Indication) and sending, by the first access point to the receiving second access point, a second indication of supporting the spatial mapping coordination capability by the first access point (Fig. 25; paragraph 77; SR Allocation having SRP of AP1 relative to expected interference level of AP2 in response to the SR request indicating AP2 intent/capability to participate in SR transmission).
Regarding claim 7,
Wang discloses training symbols in a training field of the PPDU by using the first spatial mapping or the second spatial mapping (paragraph 51-52, 90, 107; use of long training fields/LTFs to coordinate/cancel interference in coordinated/OBSS(s)).
Regarding claim 18,
Wang discloses receiving, by the second access point from the station, a fourth frame comprising a third spatial mapping for the transmission of the PPDU, wherein the first spatial mapping is based on the third spatial mapping and the fourth frame comprises capability information indicating support of the third spatial mapping by the station (Fig. 25; paragraph 77; SR Allocation having SRP of AP1 relative to expected interference level of AP2 in response to the SR request indicating AP2 intent/capability to participate in SR transmission).
Regarding claim 20,
Wang discloses the second access point belongs to a basic service set (BSS) and the first access point belongs to an overlapping basic service set (OBSS) relative to the BSS (Abstract; Fig. 5, 9-12; paragraphs 6, 42-45, 52-61; overlapping BSS/OBSS).
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, 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.
Claims 2, 8-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Saad et al. (US20240243862A1; “Saad”).
Regarding claims 2 and 15,
Wang discloses the transmission of the PPDU is a part of a multi-access point transmission from the second access point to the station and the second spatial mapping for the transmission of the PPDU is based on the first spatial mapping (paragraph 77 and Fig. 25; AP2 responds to SR TXOP indication from AP1 by sending SRP request; subsequent SR allocation for AP2 to STA2) but does not expressly disclose mutli-access point sounding transmission.
Saad discloses analogous art (Title: Multi-AP Channel Sounding Procedures for WLAN systems) including a multi-access point sounding transmission (Fig. 2; paragraph 104-108, 121; sequential/joint multi-AP channel sounding in obtained TXOP including sharing of spatial reuse parameters).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Wang by providing for a multi-access point sounding transmission, as shown by Saad, thereby coordinating a combination of explicit and implicit sounding for improved spectral efficiency.
Regarding claim 8,
Wang discloses a method (Fig. 25) comprising receiving, by a first access point (AP1) from a second access point (AP2), a first frame (SR Request) indicating a first spatial mapping for a transmission from the second access point to a station (SR Req. including SRP of AP2) and sending, by the first access point to the second access point, a second frame (SR Allocation) indicating a second spatial mapping (SRP of AP1 considering expected interference level of AP2) for a multi-access point transmission from the second access point to the station (UL PPDU from AP2 to STA2), wherein the second spatial mapping is based on the first spatial mapping (paragraph 77 and Fig. 25; AP1 uses master AP SR algorithm to determine SR allocation send to AP2 having SRP of AP1 relative to the expected interference level of AP2; subsequent trigger frames for UL PPDUs) but does not expressly disclose a mutli-access point sounding transmission.
Saad discloses analogous art (Title: Multi-AP Channel Soudning Procedures for WLAN systems) including a multi-access point sounding transmission (Fig. 2; paragraph 104-108, 121; sequential/joint multi-AP channel sounding in obtained TXOP including sharing of spatial reuse parameters).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Wang by providing for a multi-access point sounding transmission, as shown by Saad, thereby coordinating a combination of explicit and implicit sounding for improved spectral efficiency.
Regarding claim 9,
The combination of Wang and Saad discloses the first spatial mapping or the second spatial mapping is for a transmission of a PPDU from the second access point to the station (Fig. 25; UL PPDU from AP2 to STA2 based on exchange of SRPs of AP1 and AP2).
Regarding claim 10,
The combination of Wang and Saad discloses the transmission from the second access point to the station is scheduled in a TXOP of the first access point (master AP1 as the TXOP owner transmits indication to selected neighboring AP(s) of an obtained spatial reuse (SR) transmission opportunity (TXOP), AP2 responds with SR Request including SR parameter of AP2 to AP1).
Regarding claim 11,
The combination of Wang and Saad discloses the first frame comprises capability information indicating support of the first spatial mapping by the second access point (Fig. 25, SR request including SRP of AP2 responsive to the SR TXOP Indication) and the second frame comprises capability information indicating support of the second spatial mapping by the first access point (Fig. 25; paragraph 77; SR Allocation having SRP of AP1 relative to expected interference level of AP2 in response to the SR request from AP2 and running the master AP SR Algorithm).
Regarding claim 12,
The combination of Wang and Saad discloses the first frame comprises a management frame comprising a field indicating the first spatial mapping (Saad: paragraph 142, 205; management frame). See motivation above.
Regarding claim 13,
The combination of Wang and Saad discloses the first access point belongs to a BSS; and the second access point belongs to an overlapping basic service set (OBSS) relative to the BSS (Wang: Abstract; Fig. 5, 9-12; paragraphs 6, 42-45, 52-61; overlapping BSS/OBSS; Saad: paragraph 107; Multi-AP coordination for in-BSS and OBSS STAs). See motivation above.
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY B SEFCHECK whose telephone number is (571)272-3098. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-4PM.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached at 571-272-3144. 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.
/GREGORY B SEFCHECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights