DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to Application No. 18/940,265 filed on 11/7/2024. Claims 1-20 have been examined.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/7/2024 and 6/9/2025 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, 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 1, 3, 5-7, 10, 12, 14-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciochina-Kar et al. (hereinafter Ciochina-Kar)(US 2024/0188129).
Regarding claims 1 and 19, Ciochina-Kar teaches as follows:
A first electronic device (interpreted as the station (STA)) comprising:
a first transceiver; at least one first processor; and a first memory configured to store at least one instruction which, when executed by the at least one first processor, causes the first electronic device to (a computer program comprising program means for causing a computer to carry out the steps of the methods disclosed herein, when said computer program is carried out on a computer, as well as a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium that stores therein a computer program product, which, when executed by a processor, causes the methods disclosed herein to be performed are provided, see, ¶ [0013])(each of the communication devices 10, 20, 30 comprises circuitry 11, 21, 31 that is configured to perform particular operations. The circuitries may be implemented by a respective processor or computer, i.e., as hardware and/or software, or by dedicated units or components, see, ¶ [0047] and figure 5):
transmit an action frame (interpreted as the request to send (hereinafter RTS)) to a second electronic device (interpreted as the access point (AP) in figure 10), wherein the action frame comprises a request that any downlink (DL) transmit opportunity (TXOP) initiated by the second electronic device (interpreted as the STA1 in figure 10) begin with an initial control frame (ICF)(equivalent to RTS) that signals a duration of the DL TXOP (the TXOP duration requested within the RTS is D_TXOP, see, ¶ [0040] and figure 10)(STA1 requests a TXOP which overlaps with an R-TWT with RTS, see, ¶ [0062] and figure 10),
receive the ICF requesting the DL TXOP from the second electronic device (STA1 requested TXOP with RTS in figure 10), wherein the ICF signals the duration of the DL TXOP (the TXOP duration requested within the RTS is D_TXOP, see, ¶ [0040] and RTS includes Required TXOP Length, see, figure 10),
based on determining that a coexistence event is scheduled to occur during the duration of the DL TXOP, transmit a clear-to-send extension (CTS-EXT) frame signaling a modification to the DL TXOP (the AP responds to the RTS with the NCF control frame, e.g. a modified type of trigger or modified CTS/DTS which contains an adjusted duration information… The shortened TXOP duration 101, allowed by the AP may be chosen such that the TXOP only runs until the expected start of the TWT 81, see, ¶ [0062] and figure 10), and
after the modification is implemented, receive at least one frame during the DL TXOP according to the modification (the AP may use a part of the TXOP interval requested by STA1 to ensure that it can access the channel for transmitting the first trigger frame, see, ¶ [0072] and TF in figure 10).
Ciochina-Kar teaches the modified CTS containing an adjusted duration information as presented above.
Ciochina-Kar does not explicitly teach the clear-to-send extension (CTS-EXT).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ciochina-Kar to include the well-known clear-to-send extension (CTS-EXT) in order for a specialized variant or field modifier used in advanced wireless framing formats to adjust medium reservation parameters.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Ciochina-Kar teaches as follows:
Wherein the modification comprises reducing the duration of the DL TXOP (the shortened TXOP duration 101, allowed by the AP may be chosen such that the TXOP only runs until the expected start of the TWT 81, see, ¶ [0062] and figure 10), and wherein the at least one frame comprises at least one data frame received during the reduced duration of the DL TXOP (the AP may use a part of the TXOP interval requested by STA1 to ensure that it can access the channel for transmitting the first trigger frame, see, ¶ [0072] and TF in figure 10).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Ciochina-Kar teaches as follows:
Wherein, based on the modification, the at least one instruction further causes the first electronic device to initiate TXOP sharing during the DL TXOP (if STA1 is able to adapt its transmission to the new duration, it sends its data, within its remaining TXOP, and informs the AP, e.g. separately or in the last PPDU, if it has more data to transmit, see, ¶ [0063] and PPDU in figure 10).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Ciochina-Kar teaches as follows:
Wherein the modification comprises reducing the duration of the DL TXOP, and wherein the CTS-EXT frame indicates that the coexistence event is scheduled to occur after the reduced duration of the DL TXOP (the shortened TXOP duration 101, allowed by the AP may be chosen such that the TXOP only runs until the expected start of the TWT 81, see, ¶ [0062] and figure 10)(the start time of a next scheduling interval 81, see, ¶ [0052]).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Ciochina-Kar teaches as follows:
Wherein the ICF and the CTS-EXT frame are received by an additional electronic device, and wherein the CTS-EXT frame signals to the additional electronic device to update a network allocation vector (NAV) according to the modification (by adjusting the end of the TXOP requested by STA1 and informing this via the duration of the control frame sent in response to the RTS, all STAs listening to the medium will update their NAV indication accordingly, thus reducing the chance of a rogue STA accessing the TWT SP, see, ¶ [0073])(therefore, all STAs receive changed information to update NAV properly).
Regarding claim 10, Ciochina-Kar teaches similar limitations asp resented above in the rejection of claim 1. Ciochina-Kar further teaches the second electronic device as follows:
A second electronic device (interpreted as the AP 10 in figure 5) comprising: a second transceiver; at least one second processor; and a second memory configured to store at least one instruction which, when executed by the at least one second processor (a computer program comprising program means for causing a computer to carry out the steps of the methods disclosed herein, when said computer program is carried out on a computer, as well as a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium that stores therein a computer program product, which, when executed by a processor, causes the methods disclosed herein to be performed are provided, see, ¶ [0013])(each of the communication devices 10, 20, 30 comprises circuitry 11, 21, 31 that is configured to perform particular operations. The circuitries may be implemented by a respective processor or computer, i.e., as hardware and/or software, or by dedicated units or components, see, ¶ [0047] and figure 5).
Claims 2, 11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciochina-Kar et al. (hereinafter Ciochina-Kar)(US 2024/0188129) in view of Ajami et al. (hereinafter Ajami)(US 2024/0292456).
Regarding claims 2, 11, and 20, Ciochina-Kar teaches all limitations as presented above except for being used in the well-known wireless local area network (WLAN).
Ajami teaches as follows:
FIG. 1 shows a pictorial diagram of an example wireless communication network 100. According to some aspects, the wireless communication network 100 can be an example of a WLAN such as a Wi-Fi network. For example, the WLAN 100 can be a network implementing at least one of the IEEE 802.11 family of wireless communication protocol standards. The WLAN 100 may include numerous wireless communication devices such as a wireless AP 102 (equivalent to applicant’s second electronic device) and multiple wireless STAs 104 (equivalent to applicant’s first electronic device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ciochina-Kar in view of Ajami to include the well-known wireless local area network (WLAN) as taught by Ajami in order to efficiently adjust TXOP duration in the WLAN environment.
Claims 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciochina-Kar et al. (hereinafter Ciochina-Kar)(US 2024/0188129) in view of Schelstraete (US 2021/0185154).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Ciochina-Kar teaches as follows:
STA1 is in “On Pause” state when the AP starts the restricted SP 81 (see, ¶ [0062] and figure 10).
Ciochina-Kar does not explicitly teach the on pause state as the power save mode or not.
Schelstraete teaches as follows:
If a wireless device receives a PPDU that is not intended for the wireless device and the wireless device extracts the TXOP from the PPDU, the wireless device may enter a sleep state or power save mode for the duration of the TXOP (see, ¶ [0055]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ciochina-Kar in view of Schelstraete to include entering power save mode for the duration of the TXOP as taught by Schelstraete in order to efficiently save power consumption.
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciochina-Kar et al. (hereinafter Ciochina-Kar)(US 2024/0188129) in view of Meng et al. (hereinafter Meng)(US 2022/0322473).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Ciochina-Kar teaches as follows:
A PPDU or A-PPDU carrying an acknowledgement or block acknowledgment (BA) for the data contained inside the PPDU carrying the RTT is depicted as BA (see, ¶ [0038]).
Ciochina-Kar does not teach the BA indicating a number of subframe errors corresponding to the A-MPDU.
Meng teaches as follows:
At the completion of the transmission of the data frames; receive a block acknowledgment (BA) in response to the transmitted BAR; determine a packet error rate at least based on the received BA; determine an updated state based in part on the packet error rate determined from a number of the data frames that contained an error; and retransmit the data frames that contain the error. Aspects of the above wireless device include wherein the data frames are an Aggregate-Media Access Control Protocol Data Unit (A-MPDU)(see, ¶ [0068]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ciochina-Kar in view of Meng to include determining a packet error rate based on the BA as taught by Meng in order to efficiently detect the packet error rate on Aggregate-Media Access Control Protocol Data Unit (A-MPDU).
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciochina-Kar et al. (hereinafter Ciochina-Kar)(US 2024/0188129) in view of Meng et al. (hereinafter Meng)(US 2022/0322473), and further in view of Takeuchi et al. (hereinafter Takeuchi)(US 6,526,261).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Ciochina-Kar in view of Meng teaches all limitations as presented above except for the frame error count (FEC).
Takeuchi teaches as follows:
The frame error detection unit 11 detects possible frame error in the received signal provided from the transmitting power control system 10 for every frame. Thus, the information about whether a frame error is detected or not is inputted into the frame error count unit 12 for every frame. The unit 12 always counts the number of frame errors in N last frames based on the information inputted for every frame, and outputs the counted value every M frames (see, col. 14, lines 3-11 and figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ciochina-Kar in view of Meng with Takeuchi to include the frame error count unit as taught by Takeuchi in order to efficiently detect number of frame errors.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeong S Park whose telephone number is (571)270-1597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00-4:30 ET.
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, Rebecca E Song can be reached at 571-270-3667. 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.
/JEONG S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2417
August 24, 2026
Prosecution Insights