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 .
Examiner Initiated Interview Summary: Examiner called Applicant representative Caroline Do on 8/18/2026, and indicated that currently pending claims are not in condition of allowance and also suggested that possible amendments would place application in condition of allowance. Applicant representative Caroline Do suggested that another office action should be issued at this point. No agreement was reached.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 5/01/2026, with respect to claim(s) 1-8, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 4, and 5, are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, of US Patent 12,184,359 B2 in view of Chu (US Patent 9,826,532 B1), as being described below.
Instant Application 18/957,455.
US Patent 12,184,359, B2
Claim 1. A master access point (AP) which constitutes a wireless network by cooperating with a slave AP, the master AP comprising:
at least one memory that stores a set of instructions; and
at least one processing circuit, wherein the master AP is caused, by the at least one processing circuit executing the instructions and/or the at least one processing circuit itself operating, to perform operations comprising:
generating a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field, in a case of transmitting the synchronization frame for performing a coordinated communication with the slave AP, is more than four; and
transmitting, to said slave AP, the generated synchronization frame to cooperate with said slave AP.
4. A method for controlling a master access point (AP) which constitutes a wireless network by cooperating with a slave AP, the method comprising:
generating a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field, in a case of transmitting the synchronization frame for performing a coordinated communication with the slave AP, is more than four; and
transmitting, to said slave AP, the generated synchronization frame to cooperate with said slave AP.
5. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program that is read and executed by a processor in a master access point (AP) that constitutes a wireless network by cooperating with a slave AP, wherein the program causes the master AP to execute:
generating a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field, in a case of transmitting the synchronization frame for performing a coordinated communication with the slave AP, is more than four; and
transmitting, to said slave AP, the generated synchronization frame to cooperate with said slave AP.
Claim 1. A master access point (AP) which constitutes a wireless network by cooperating with a slave AP, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories that store computer-readable instructions for causing, when executed by the one or more processors, the master AP to perform: a generation of a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field, in a case of transmitting the synchronization frame for performing communication by Distributed multiple input and multiple output (MIMO), is larger than a repetition number for a Long Training Field in a case of transmitting a frame other than the synchronization frame for performing communication by Distributed MIMO; and a transmission of the generated synchronization frame to said slave AP to cooperate with said slave AP.
2.A method for controlling a master access point (AP) which constitutes a wireless network by cooperating with a slave AP, the method comprising: generating a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field in a case of transmitting the synchronization frame for performing communication by Distributed multiple input and multiple output (MIMO), is larger than a repetition number for a Long Training Field in a case of transmitting a frame other than the synchronization frame for performing communication by Distributed MIMO; and transmitting the generated synchronization frame to said slave AP to cooperate with said slave AP.
3.A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program that is read and executed by a processor in a master access point (AP) that constitutes a wireless network by cooperating with a slave AP, wherein the program causes the master AP to execute: a generation of a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field, in a case of transmitting the synchronization frame for performing communication by Distributed multiple input and multiple output (MIMO), is larger than a repetition number for a Long Training Field in a case of transmitting a frame other than the synchronization frame for performing communication by Distributed MIMO; and a transmission of the generated synchronization frame to said slave AP to cooperate with said slave AP.
As can be seen from the above comparison, claims 1-3, of patent 359, discloses all the claim limitations of instant application claims 1, 4, and 5, except (a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field) is more than four,
Chu discloses (a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field) is more than four (Chu discloses in Column 8, lines 7-9, a number M of LTF configured by the device and indicated in the field SIG of the frame 300 of Fig. 3. Hence, choosing M>4, would be obvious variation);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chu teachings by setting M greater than four to arrive at the claimed invention.
The motivation would be to provide a communication system with improved accuracy of resource requests (Chu, Column 4, line 56), as taught by Chu.
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) 1-2, and 4-5, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US Patent 9,826,532 B1).
As per claim 1, Chu discloses a master access point (AP) which constitutes a wireless network by cooperating with a slave AP (Chu, Fig. 1:10:14:25-4), the master AP comprising:
at least one memory that stores a set of instructions (Chu, Column 22, lines 60-67); and
at least one processing circuit (Chu, Fig. 1:15), wherein the master AP is caused, by the at least one processing circuit executing the instructions and/or the at least one processing circuit itself operating, to perform operations (Chu, Fig. 1:14:15) comprising:
generating a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field, in a case of transmitting the synchronization frame for performing a coordinated communication with the slave AP, is (more than) four (Chu, Fig. 3:300, and Column 7, line 62-Column 8, line 9, discloses The data unit 300 includes a preamble having an L-STF 302, an L-LTF 304, an L-SIG 306, a high throughput signal field (HT-SIG) 308, a high throughput short training field (HT-STF) 310, and M data high throughput long training fields (HT-LTFs) 312, where M is an integer generally based on the number of spatial streams used to transmit the data unit 300 in a multiple input multiple output (MIMO) channel configuration. In particular, according to the IEEE 802.11n Standard, the data unit 300 includes two HT-LTFs 312 if the data unit 300 is transmitted using two spatial streams, and four HT-LTFs 312 is the data unit 300 is transmitted using three or four spatial streams. An indication of the particular number of spatial streams being utilized is included in the HT-SIG field 308); and
transmitting, to said slave AP, the generated synchronization frame to cooperate with said slave AP (Chu, Column 7, lines 53-55).
Although Chu does not explicitly utilizes claim language, for instance Chu does not explicitly shows (a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field) is more than four, however Chu discloses in Column 8, lines 7-9, a number M of LTF configured by the device and indicated in the field SIG of the frame 300 of Fig. 3. Hence, choosing M>4, would be obvious variation in view of Chu teachings. 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 Chu teachings by setting M greater than four to arrive at the claimed invention.
The motivation would be to provide a communication system with improved accuracy of resource requests (Chu, Column 4, line 56), as taught by Chu.
As per claim 2, Chu further discloses the master AP according to claim 1, wherein the Long Training Field is arranged after a Legacy Signal Field (L-SIG) in the synchronization frame (Chu, Fig. 3:300) and a value indicating the repetition number for the Long Training Field is set in a signal field arranged between the L-SIG and the Long Training Field (Chu, Fig. 3, and Column 7, line 62-Column 8, line 9).
As per claim 4, please see the analysis of claim 1.
As per claim 5, Chu discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program that is read and executed by a processor in a master access point (AP) that constitutes a wireless network by cooperating with a slave AP (Chu, Fig. 1:10:14:25-4, and Column 22, lines 60-67), wherein the program causes the master AP to execute:
For rest of claim limitations please see the analysis of claim 1.
Claim(s) 3, and 6-8, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US Patent 9,826,532 B1) and further in view of Vermani (US PGPUB 2019/0081664 A1).
As per claim 3, Chu further discloses the master AP according to claim 1, wherein the synchronization frame (Chu, Fig. 3:300) is Chu does not explicitly disclose a frame used by the slave AP to correct a frequency to synchronize with the master AP.
Vermani discloses a frame used by the slave AP to correct a frequency to synchronize with the master AP (Vermani, paragraphs 102, 104, 110 and 137).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chu teachings by performing frequency correction, as taught by Vermani.
The motivation would be to provide an improved communication system with reduced interference (paragraph 70), as taught by Vermani.
As per claim 6, Chu discloses a slave access point (AP) which performs a wireless communication by cooperating with a master AP (Chu, Fig. 1:25-4:14), the slave AP comprising:
at least one memory that stores a set of instructions (Chu, Column 22, lines 60-67); and
at least one processing circuit (Chu, Fig. 1:25-4), wherein the slave AP is caused, by the at least one processing circuit executing the instructions and/or the at least one processing circuit itself operating (Chu, Column 22, lines 60-67), to perform operations comprising:
receiving a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field, in a case of receiving the synchronization frame for performing a coordinated communication with the master AP, is (more than) four (Chu, Fig. 3:300, and Column 7, line 54-Column 8, line 9, discloses The data unit 300 includes a preamble having an L-STF 302, an L-LTF 304, an L-SIG 306, a high throughput signal field (HT-SIG) 308, a high throughput short training field (HT-STF) 310, and M data high throughput long training fields (HT-LTFs) 312, where M is an integer generally based on the number of spatial streams used to transmit the data unit 300 in a multiple input multiple output (MIMO) channel configuration. In particular, according to the IEEE 802.11n Standard, the data unit 300 includes two HT-LTFs 312 if the data unit 300 is transmitted using two spatial streams, and four HT-LTFs 312 is the data unit 300 is transmitted using three or four spatial streams. An indication of the particular number of spatial streams being utilized is included in the HT-SIG field 308)); and
Although Chu does not explicitly utilizes claim language for instance Chu does not explicitly shows (a synchronization frame whose repetition number for a Long Training Field) is more than four, however Chu discloses in Column 8, lines 7-9, a number M of LTF configured by the device and indicated in the field SIG of the frame 300 of Fig. 3. Hence, choosing M>4, would be obvious variation in view of Chu teachings. 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 Chu teachings by setting M greater than four to arrive at the claimed invention.
The motivation would be to provide a communication system with improved accuracy of resource requests (Chu, Column 4, line 56), as taught by Chu.
Chu does not explicitly disclose correcting a frequency to perform the coordinated communication with the master AP.
Vermani discloses correcting a frequency to perform the coordinated communication with the master AP (Vermani, paragraphs 102, 104, 110 and 137).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chu teachings by performing frequency correction, as taught by Vermani.
The motivation would be to provide an improved communication system with reduced interference (paragraph 70), as taught by Vermani.
As per claim 7, please see the analysis of claim 6.
As per claim 8, Chu discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program that is read and executed by a processor in a slave access point (AP) that constitutes a wireless network by cooperating with a master AP (Chu, Fig. 1:25-4:14, and Column 22, lines 60-67), wherein the program causes the slave AP to execute: For rest of claim limitations please see the analysis of claim 6.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED Z HAIDER whose telephone number is (571)270-5169. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY-FRIDAY 9-5:30 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, SAM K Ahn can be reached at 571-272-3044. 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.
/SYED HAIDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights