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 .
This office action is in response to Application filed 10/11/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending and presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/18/2025 and 02/04/2025 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
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 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 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lim (“Relay transmission in UHR” IEEE 802.11-23/1139r0, published July 2023, previously cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 10, Lim discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a first computing device from an access point, a first frame (see slide 9, discloses a trigger frame) comprising:
a first indication indicating an allocation of a time period for communication by a second computing device (slide 5, second bullet, by using TXF TF, AP can allocate the time duration to relay STA for transmission between relay and non-AP STA), and
a second indication indicating that the first computing device is to be used as a relay device for communication by the second computing device during the time period (see slide 6-7, discloses indication of TxOP sharing mode = 3, indicating relay operation, further discloses relay using information in trigger frame to transmit PPDU2, for example the PPDU1 includes indication that the data is to be relayed in addition to transmission parameters); and
sending, to the second computing device, a second frame comprising the first indication indicating the allocation of the time period for communication by the second computing device (see slide 9, discloses that the trigger frame, i.e. second one, to be transmitted to both devices).
Regarding claim 11, Lim discloses the method wherein the first frame further comprises a second time period for communication by the first computing device (slide 5, second bullet, by using TXF TF, AP can allocate the time duration to relay STA for transmission between relay and non-AP STA).
Regarding claim 12, Lim discloses the method wherein the second indication is based on a triggered transmission opportunity (TXOP) sharing (TXS) mode subfield of a multi-user request-to-send triggered TXOP sharing (MU-RTS TXS) trigger (MRTT) frame (see slide 5, explicitly discloses TXS TF to be MU-RTS and setting the mode to indicate relay).
Regarding claim 13, Lim discloses the method wherein the first frame comprises a multi-user request-to-send triggered TXOP sharing (MU-RTS TXS) trigger (MRTT) frame (see slide 5, explicitly discloses TXS TF to be MU-RTS).
Regarding claim 14, Lim discloses the method wherein the first frame further indicates an uplink transmission (see slide 9).
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.
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.
Claims 1-9, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim in view of Ryu et al. (US 2024/0333373 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lim discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a first computing device from an access point, a first frame (see slide 9, discloses a trigger frame) comprising:
a second time period, of the TXOP, allocated for communication by a second computing device (slide 5, second bullet, by using TXF TF, AP can allocate the time duration to relay STA for transmission between relay and non-AP STA); and
a first indication for transmission of a second frame, by the first computing device, wherein the second frame indicates that the second time period is allocated for communication by the second computing device (see slide 6-7, discloses indication of TxOP sharing mode = 3, indicating relay operation, further discloses relay using information in trigger frame to transmit PPDU2, for example the PPDU1 includes indication that the data is to be relayed in addition to transmission parameters); and
sending, based on the first indication, the second frame (see slide 7, discloses sending the second PPDU).
Lim fails to disclose but Ryu discloses a first frame comprising a first time period, of a transmission opportunity (TXOP), allocated for communication by the first computing device (see para. 0089, discloses the trigger frame can include more than one allocation time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to include a trigger frame with first and second time period as described by Ryu.
The motivation for doing so would be to allow reducing the latency.
Regarding claim 16, Lim discloses a method comprising:
sending, by an access point to a first computing device, a first frame (see slide 9, discloses a trigger frame) comprising:
a second time period, of the TXOP, allocated for communication by a second computing device (slide 5, second bullet, by using TXF TF, AP can allocate the time duration to relay STA for transmission between relay and non-AP STA); and
a first indication of transmission of a second frame, by the first computing device, wherein the second frame indicates that the second time period is allocated for communication by the second computing device (see slide 6-7, discloses indication of TxOP sharing mode = 3, indicating relay operation, further discloses relay using information in trigger frame to transmit PPDU2, for example the PPDU1 includes indication that the data is to be relayed in addition to transmission parameters); and
receiving, by the access point and from the second computing device via the first computing device, the second frame (see slide 7, discloses sending the second PPDU2).
Lim fails to disclose but Ryu discloses a first time period, of a transmission opportunity (TXOP), allocated for communication by the first computing device (see para. 0089, discloses the trigger frame can include more than one allocation time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to include a trigger frame with first and second time period as described by Ryu.
The motivation for doing so would be to allow reducing the latency.
Regarding claims 2, 19, Lim discloses the method, wherein the first frame further comprises a second indication, and wherein the second indication indicates that the first time period and the second time period are allocated for transmission between at least one of: the access point and the second computing device via the first computing device; or the access point and a third computing device via the first computing device and via the second computing device (see slide 7, discloses relay transmission between AP and non-AP STA).
Regarding claims 3, 20, Lim discloses the method wherein the first frame further indicates an uplink transmission or a downlink transmission (see slide 9).
Regarding claim 4, Lim discloses the method wherein the first time period is a short inter-frame space (SIFS) after the second time period (see slide 9, discloses SIFS after PPDU1).
Regarding claim 5, Lim discloses the method further comprising receiving, after sending the second frame and before the first time period, by the first computing device and from the access point, a third frame (see slide 9, discloses transmission of ACK).
Regarding claim 6, Lim discloses the method further comprising sending, during the first time period, by the first computing device and to the second computing device, a fourth frame based on the third frame (see slide 9, discloses transmission of ACK).
Regarding claims 7, 17, Lim discloses the method wherein the first frame comprises a multi-user request-to-send triggered TXOP sharing (MU-RTS TXS) trigger (MRTT) frame (see slide 5, explicitly discloses TXS TF to be MU-RTS).
Regarding claims 8, 18, Lim discloses the method wherein the first indication of transmission of the second frame is based on a common info field of a multi-user request-to-send triggered TXOP sharing (MU-RTS TXS) trigger (MRTT) frame (see slide 6, discloses TXS mode = 3 as a common field).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Lim and Ryu discloses the method wherein the second frame comprises at least one of: a request-to-send (RTS) frame, or an extended control frame (see Ryu para. 0083-0085, discloses the second message as RTS).
Regarding claim 15, Lim fails to disclose but Ryu discloses the method, wherein the second frame comprises a request-to-send (RTS) frame or an extended control frame (see para. 0083-0085, discloses the second message as RTS).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to include wherein the second frame comprises a request-to-send (RTS) frame or an extended control frame as described by Ryu.
The motivation for doing so would be to allow reducing latency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NISHANT B DIVECHA whose telephone number is (571)270-3125. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM-6:00 PM.
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, Deborah J. Reynolds can be reached at 571-272-0734. 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.
NISHANT B. DIVECHA
Supervisory Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights