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 obviousness-type 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); 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 conflicting 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.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
2. Claims 13-32 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. patent 12,155,489 (hereinafter ‘489). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following:
Regarding claims 13, 20 and 27, ‘489 discloses:
A non-access point (AP)-station (STA) operating in a wireless
local area network (WLAN), the non-AP STA comprising (claim 1; col. 31; lines 46-48):
a transceiver, coupled to a processor, the transceiver and the processor configured to communicate, in an operation mode, with devices in the WLAN including another STA
(claim 1; col. 31; lines 50-53);
the transceiver configured to transmit, to the another STA, one or more of a
data frame or a management frame including a medium access control (MAC)
header, the MAC header including an operation mode field indicating a change in one
or more parameters of the operation mode, the one or more parameters including:
a single-user (SU) or multi-user (MU) transmission/reception mode switch;
and at least one of: a number of spatial streams supported by the STA, or
an operating bandwidth supported by the STA (claim 1; col. 31; lines 54-63);
and the transceiver configured to transmit or receive, based on a
determination that the indicated change in the one or more parameters of the
operation mode has taken effect, a frame to or from the another STA in accordance
with the indicated change in the one or more parameters of the operation mode
(claim 1; col. 31; lines 64… col. 32; line 2).
Regarding claim 14, 21, and 28, ‘489 discloses: The STA of claim 13, the transceiver and the processor configured to transmit, in accordance with the indicated SU or MU capability of the STA, a SU or MU transmission to the another STA (claim 2; col. 32; lines 3-6).
Regarding claim 15, 22 and 29,‘489 discloses: The STA of claim 13, wherein the received frame is a second frame, wherein the transceiver configured to receive, from the another STA, a first frame before transmitting the one or more of the data frame or the management frame, and wherein the one or more of the data frame or the management frame are transmitted in response to the received at least one frame (claim 3; col. 32; lines 7-14).
Regarding claim 16, 23 and 30, ‘489 discloses: The STA of claim 15, wherein the frame transmitted to the another STA is a management frame, and wherein the management frame is an acknowledgment of the frame received from the another STA (claim 4; col. 32; lines 15-18).
Regarding claim 17, 24 and 31, ‘489 discloses: The STA of claim 13, wherein the determination that the indicated change in the one or more parameters of the operation mode has taken effect is based on a determination that a time or delay indicated by the operation mode field has elapsed (claim 5; col. 32; lines 19-23).
Regarding claim 18, and 25, ‘489 discloses: The STA of claim 13, wherein the another STA is an AP-STA (claim 6; col. 32; lines 24-25).
Regarding claim 19, and 26, ‘489 discloses The STA of claim 13, wherein the one or more parameters further include the number of spatial streams supported by the STA, and the operating bandwidth supported by the STA (claim 1; col. 31; lines 59-62).
Regarding claim 32, ‘489 discloses: The STA of claim 13, wherein the another STA is an AP-STA (claim 18; col. 34; lines 21-22).
There is no prior art rejection for claims 13-32.
Closest prior art Seok et al. (US 2016/0105836) discloses “a method for resource switching in a WLAN may be provided. The method may include receiving, by a station (STA) from an access point (AP), a downlink multiple user (DL MU) frame on a resource indicated by first resource allocation information, the DL MU frame including the first resource allocation information and second resource allocation information for a next MU frame following the DL MU frame, and processing, by the STA, the next MU frame based on a resource indicated by the second resource allocation information” (para 0012).
Another prior art Kim et al. (US 2017/0245306) discloses “receiving a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) including a Medium Access Control (MAC) frame; decoding the MAC frame; and checking information included in the MAC frame based on a MAC header of the MAC frame, the MAC header including a first address field and a second address field, wherein the MAC header includes only one of the first address field and the second address field when an Identifier (ID) of the STA is included in the PPDU” (para 0008).
Prior art of record do not disclose or render obvious the claims limitations including “the transceiver configured to transmit, to the another STA, one or more of a data frame or a management frame including a medium access control (MAC) header, the MAC header including an operation mode field indicating a change in one or more parameters of the operation mode, the one or more parameters including: a single-user (SU) or multi-user (MU) transmission/reception mode switch; and at least one of: a number of spatial streams supported by the STA, or an operating bandwidth supported by the STA; and the transceiver configured to transmit or receive, based on a determination that the indicated change in the one or more parameters of the operation mode has taken effect, a frame to or from the another STA in accordance with the indicated change in the one or more parameters of the operation mode.” when considered as a whole along with other claimed limitations.
Conclusion
3. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMINA CHOUDHRY whose telephone number is (571)270-7102. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Thursday (7:30 a.m. to 5.00p.m.).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Yemane Mesfin can be reached on (571)272-3927. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAMINA F CHOUDHRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights