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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. PCT/US2024/059628, filed on 12/11/2024, and published as WO/2025/144602.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/16/2024 and 04/02/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 10-11, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Patil et al. (US 20180368049 A1), hereinafter Patil.
For claim 1,
Patil teaches a network device, comprising: a processor (at least [FIG. 1] and [0115] network device and processor);
a network interface controller configured to provide access to a network (at least [0115] wireless interface in a system-on-chip device coupled with an antenna functions as a network interface controller); and
a memory communicatively coupled to the processor, wherein the memory comprises a network management logic that is configured to (at least [0115] memory):
generate a wireless environment report request (at least [0039-0040] beacon report request),
wherein the wireless environment report request comprises at least one of a condition, a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) technology specification, a non-IEEE 802.11 technology specification, or an element restriction (at least [0039-0040] report request includes measurement frame under 802.11k, BSSID for which the information is to be gathered, and information gathering parameters that act as conditions.);
transmit the generated wireless environment report request (at least [0039-0040] AP transmits beacon report request to a STA); and
receive a wireless environment report based on the transmitted wireless environment report request (at least [0039-0040] STA returns a beacon report to the AP).
For claim 2, Patil teaches claim 1.
Patil further teaches wherein the wireless environment report request comprises the condition (at least [0039] the report request includes which channels to scan, which BSSID to gather information on, and mechanisms for gathering the information. These are considered conditions in the report request.).
For claim 3, Patil teaches claim 2.
Patil further teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is configured to indicate an excluded service set identifier (SSID). (at least [0039] the Beacon report request specifies which channel and which BSSID to gather information on. Specifying which channel and BSSID implies an exclusion of other BSSIDs on the channel.
For claim 4, Patil teaches claim 2.
Patil further teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is configured to indicate a service set identifier (SSID) and the condition associated with the SSID (at least [0039] the report request includes which BSSID to gather information on, mechanisms for gathering the information, and how the information is to be gathered. These are considered conditions in the report request and are associated with the BSSID specified in the report request.).
For claim 5, Patil teaches claim 2.
Patil further teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is configured to indicate at least one of a channel or a band (at least [0039] the beacon report request includes identification of which channel to scan.).
For claim 6, Patil teaches claim 5.
Patil further teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is further configured to indicate reporting of a local service set identifier (SSID) on the indicated at least one of the channel or the band (at least [0039-0040] the beacon report request includes identification of which channel to scan, as well as a BSSID for which information is to be gathered.).
For claim 10, Patil teaches claim 2.
Patil further teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is further configured to indicate reporting of a result of a criteria-based evaluation (at least [0039-0040] the beacon report request indicates reporting a result of evaluation of a specified channel and BSSID based on criteria outlined in the report request configuration.).
For claim 11, Patil teaches claim 10.
Patil further teaches wherein the criteria-based evaluation comprises one or more logical operations (at least [0039] the report request includes which BSSID to gather information on, specific mechanisms for gathering the information, and how the information is to be gathered. These are considered logical operations which are used to gather the required information and return a report based on the beacon report request.).
For claim 16, Patil teaches claim 1.
Patil further teaches wherein the wireless environment report request comprises the element restriction (at least [0039] the Beacon report request specifies which channel and which BSSID to gather information on. Specifying which channel and BSSID implies a restriction of other BSSIDs on the channel. The mechanisms and methods used for gathering information also act as element restrictions.).
For claim 17, Patil teaches claim 1.
Patil further teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is transmitted to a client device, and the wireless environment report is received from the client device (at least [0039-0040] AP transmits a beacon report request to a STA, and the STA returns the beacon report to the AP.).
For claim 18, it is rejected on the same basis as claim 1, with the additional limitation of a client device capable of performing the limitations (Patil: at least [FIG. 1] STAs performing the claimed limitations with a network device).
For claim 19, Patil teaches claim 18. Claim 19 is rejected on the same basis as claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil, in view of Xu et al. (US 20230156576 A1), hereinafter Xu.
For claim 7, Patil teaches claim 5.
Patil does not explicitly teach, however Xu teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is further configured to indicate reporting of an absence of a neighbor service set identifier (SSID) on the indicated at least one of the channel or the band (at least [0048-0049] a neighbor SSID is found to be absent from an indicated band.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Patil for sending a beacon report request with the method of Xu for the report request indicating the reporting of an absence of a neighbor SSID from the band to increase efficiency in the system and reduce scanning overhead.
For claim 8, Patil teaches claim 5.
Patil does not explicitly teach, however Xu teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is further configured to indicate reporting of all local service set identifiers (SSIDs) on the indicated at least one of the channel or the band based on a local SSID being detected on the indicated at least one of the channel or the band (at least [0043-0049] after a VAP determines its “home” SSID is detected in the band, all other SSIDs on the indicated bands are reported.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Patil for sending a beacon report request with the method of Xu for the report request indicating the reporting of all SSIDs on the indicated bands after determining its “home” SSID is in the band to reduce signaling overhead and eliminate empty or redundant reports.
For claim 9, Patil teaches claim 5.
Patil does not explicitly teach, however Xu teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is further configured to indicate reporting of all local service set identifiers (SSIDs) on the indicated at least one of the channel or the band based on a local SSID being undetected on the indicated at least one of the channel or the band (at least [0043-0049] it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to report all of the SSIDs on an indicated channel or band after a specific SSID was undetected as a diagnostic tool to determine why the SSID was undetected or to determine a different SSID that is available to be used on the channel or band.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Patil for sending a beacon report request with the method of Xu for the report request indicating the reporting of all SSIDs on the indicated bands after determining a specific SSID is absent in the band to diagnose why the SSID was undetected or to determine a different SSID that is available to be used on the channel or band as a fallback measure for the system.
Claims 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Patil, in view of Meier et al. (US 20130070641 A1), hereinafter Meier.
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
For claim 12, Patil teaches claim 1.
Patil does not explicitly teach, however Meier teaches wherein the wireless environment report request comprises the P2P technology specification (at least [0029] WiMax/WiFi, 802.11k, and 802.16e specifications).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Patil for sending a beacon report request with the method of Meier for the report request comprising P2P technology specification to allow the requesting device to target and filter for specific P2P technologies to be scanned.
For claim 13, Patil and Meier teach claim 12.
Patil does not explicitly teach, however Meier teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is configured to indicate reporting of a number of P2P pairs (at least [0029] a list of WiMax and WiFi neighbor Aps is generated and reported).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Patil for sending a beacon report request with the method of Meier for the report request indicating reporting of a number of P2P pairs to allow the requesting device to target specific P2P pairs to maximize efficiency and reduce signaling overhead and power consumption.
For claim 14, Patil teaches claim 1.
Patil does not explicitly teach, however Meier teaches wherein the wireless environment report request comprises the non-IEEE 802.11 technology specification (at least [0029] specification 802.16e is included).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Patil for sending a beacon report request with the method of Meier for the report request comprising a non-IEEE 802.11 technology specification to allow the requesting device to discover and measure cellular or alternative wireless technologies through Wi-Fi signaling.
For claim 15, Patil and Meier teach claim 14.
Patil further teaches wherein the wireless environment report request is configured to indicate at least one of a channel or a band (at least [0039] the beacon report request includes identification of which channel to scan.).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Claim 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Patil, in view of Monajemi et al. (US 20220086808 A1), hereinafter Monajemi.
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
For claim 20,
Patil teaches a client device, comprising: a processor (at least [FIG. 1] and [0115] client device and processor);
a network interface controller configured to provide access to a network (at least [0115] wireless interface in a system-on-chip device coupled with an antenna functions as a network interface controller); and
a memory communicatively coupled to the processor, wherein the memory comprises a network management logic that is configured to (at least [0115] memory):
generate a wireless environment report request (at least [0039-0040] beacon report request).
Patil does not explicitly teach, however Monajemi teaches transmit the generated wireless environment report request to another client device via a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) link (at least [0056] a first AP sends a signal requesting information (report request) from a second AP); and
receive a wireless environment report based on the transmitted wireless environment report request from the another client device via the P2P link (at least [0056] upon receiving the request, the second AP sends information (report) back to the first AP.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Patil for sending a beacon report request with the method of Monajemi for the report request being delivered to a client device via a P2P link and receiving a report from the client via the P2P link to reduce power consumption and reduce the round-trip time required for the communication to take place in the system, therefore increasing efficiency.
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin T. Ranew whose telephone number is (571)272-2746. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Ayman Abaza can be reached at (571) 270-0422. 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.
/BENJAMIN T. RANEW/Examiner, Art Unit 2465 /NATASHA W COSME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
