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 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. 12137361. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
For claim 21, ‘361 discloses the limitations in claim 1, except for “using a first logical station device (STA) of the apparatus; and transmit a second MAC frame, comprising the HT control field, using a first logical STA of the apparatus”; however, Examiner takes Official Notice that the transmission of frames generated by a device and transmission of additional MAC frames by the same device was common and well known in the art prior to the effective filing date. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify ‘361 to transmit frames generated by a device and to transmit additional MAC frames by the same device. The technical reasoning to combine would be to allow the generated frames to be used, to decrease needed hardware, and design choice.
For claims 22-29, ‘361 discloses the limitations in claim 2-9, respectively.
For claim 30, ‘361 discloses the limitations in claim 10, except for “using a first logical station device (STA) of the apparatus; and transmit a second MAC frame, comprising the HT control field, using a first logical STA of the apparatus”; however, Examiner takes Official Notice that the transmission of frames generated by a device and transmission of additional MAC frames by the same device was common and well known in the art prior to the effective filing date. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify ‘361 to transmit frames generated by a device and to transmit additional MAC frames by the same device. The technical reasoning to combine would be to allow the generated frames to be used, to decrease needed hardware, and design choice.
For claims 31-36, ‘361 discloses the limitations in claims 11-16, respectively.
For claim 37, ‘361 discloses the limitations in claim 17, except for “using a first logical station device (STA) of the apparatus; and transmit a second MAC frame, comprising the HT control field, using a first logical STA of the apparatus”; however, Examiner takes Official Notice that the transmission of frames generated by a device and transmission of additional MAC frames by the same device was common and well known in the art prior to the effective filing date. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify ‘361 to transmit frames generated by a device and to transmit additional MAC frames by the same device. The technical reasoning to combine would be to allow the generated frames to be used, to decrease needed hardware, and design choice.
For claims 38-40, ‘361 discloses the limitations in claims 18-20, respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record, Hedayat (US 2016/0323426) although disclosing an extended control field, does not appear to disclose “ set three bits of a receive number of spatial streams (RX NSS) subfield of the OM control subfield and one bit of a RX NSS extension subfield of the EHT OM control subfield to indicate more than eight RX NSS; set three bits of a transmit number of spatial streams (TX NSTS) subfield of the OM control subfield and one bit of a TX NSTS extension subfield of the EHT OM control subfield to indicate more than eight TX NSTS; set two bits of a channel width subfield of the OM subfield and one bit of a channel width extension subfield of the EHT OM subfield to indicate a bandwidth greater than 80 MHz “ in combination with the other claimed limitations.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Nabetani (US 2017/0251392) discloses extended HT control field.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER R CROMPTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3678. The examiner can normally be reached 10AM-4PM ET M-Th.
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, Asad Nawaz can be reached on (571)272-3988. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER R CROMPTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
