DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to an application filed on 02/10/2025, in which claims 1-18 are pending and ready for examination.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Terminal disclaimer
Examiner left a voice mail to applicant’s attorney on record, Mr. Baile Xie (Reg. No. 78,380) in to solve the following double patenting issue but has not received any response for the attorney.
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 1-6 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 7-12 of U.S. Patent No.12200791B2 (Gan et al.; hereinafter, “Gan”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
In response to claim 1,
Gan teaches a station multi-link device (STA MLD) comprising a plurality of stations (STAs), wherein the plurality of STAs comprises a first STA, wherein the first STA is configured to: send a request frame to an access point multi-link device (AP MLD), wherein the request frame requests to establish single-link communication, and an address 2 field in the request frame is set to a media access control (MAC) address of the STA MLD (claim 7, paragraph 1 teaches this limitation);
receive a response frame from the AP MLD, wherein the response frame indicates that the single-link communication is successfully established, wherein an address 1 field in the response frame is set to the MAC address of the STA MLD (claim 7, paragraph 2 teaches this limitation); and
perform air interface transmission with the AP MLD according to a single-link communication (claim 7, paragraph 3 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 2,
Gan teaches wherein the request frame and the response frame do not carry a multi-link element (claim 8 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 3,
Gan teaches wherein performing air interface transmission with the AP MLD according to a single-link communication comprises: sending, to the AP MLD, a first frame over the air, wherein an address 2 field in the first frame over the air is set to the MAC address of the STA MLD (claim 9 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 4,
Gan teaches wherein an address 1 field in the first frame over the air is set to a MAC address of a first AP, the first AP belongs to the AP MLD, and a single link is a communication link between the first AP and the first STA (claim 10 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 5,
Gan teaches wherein performing air interface transmission with the AP MLD according to a single-link communication comprises: receiving, from the AP MLD, a second frame over the air, wherein an address 1 field in the second frame over the air is set to the MAC address of the STA MLD (claim 11 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 6,
Gan teaches wherein an address 2 field in the second frame over the air is set to the MAC address of a first AP, the first AP belongs to the AP MLD, and a single link is a communication link between the first AP and the first STA (claim 12 teaches this limitation).
Claims 7-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No.12200791B2 (Gan et al.; hereinafter, “Gan”) in view of Xin et al. (hereinafter, “Xin”; 20220167406).
In response to claim 7,
Gan teaches receiving a request frame from a first station (STA) of a station multi-link device (STA MLD), wherein the request frame requests to establish single-link communication, and an address 2 field in the request frame is set to a media access control (MAC) address of the STA MLD (claim 13, paragraph 1 teaches this limitation);
sending a response frame to the first STA, wherein the response frame indicates that the single-link communication is successfully established, wherein an address 1 field in the response frame is set to the MAC address of the STA MLD (claim 13, paragraph 2 teaches this limitation); and
performing air interface transmission with the first STA according to the single-link communication (claim 13, paragraph 3 teaches this limitation).
Gan does not teach explicitly using an access point multi-link device (AP MLD) comprising at least one processor and at least one computer-readable storage medium coupled to the at least one processor and configured to store programming instructions for execution by the at least one processor; when executing the programming instructions, instructing the AP MLD to perform operations.
Xin in view of Gan teaches an access point multi-link device (AP MLD) comprising at least one processor and at least one computer-readable storage medium coupled to the at least one processor and configured to store programming instructions for execution by the at least one processor; when executing the programming instructions, instructing the AP MLD to perform operations comprising (paragraph 242, using an access point (AP) as part of a multi-link device with a processor and instruction teaches this limitation):
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gan for using an access point multi-link device (AP MLD) comprising at least one processor and at least one computer-readable storage medium coupled to the at least one processor and configured to store programming instructions for execution by the at least one processor; when executing the programming instructions, instructing the AP MLD to perform operations as taught by Xin because it would allow using a protocol that improves link access for a MLD operation for communication involving a mixture of STR and non-simultaneous transmit and receive (NSTR) MLDs.
In response to claim 8,
Gan teaches wherein the request frame and the response frame do not carry a multi-link element (claim 14 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 9,
Gan teaches wherein performing air interface transmission with the first STA according to the single-link communication comprises: receiving, by the AP MLD from the first STA, a first frame over the air, wherein an address 2 field in the first frame over the air is set to the MAC address of the STA MLD (claim 15 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 10,
Gan teaches wherein an address 1 field in the first frame over the air is set to a MAC address of a first AP, the first AP belongs to the AP MLD, and a single link is a communication link between the first AP and the first STA (claim 16 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 11,
Gan teaches wherein performing air interface transmission with the first STA according to the single-link communication comprises: sending, by the AP MLD to the first STA, a second frame over the air, wherein an address 1 field in the second frame over the air is set to the MAC address of the STA MLD (claim 17 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 12,
Gan teaches wherein an address 2 field in the second frame over the air is set to the MAC address of a first AP, the first AP belongs to the AP MLD, and a single link is a communication link between the first AP and the first STA (claim 12 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 13,
Gan teaches receiving a request frame from a first station (STA) of a station multi-link device (STA MLD), wherein the request frame requests to establish single-link communication, and an address 2 field in the request frame is set to a media access control (MAC) address of the STA MLD (claim 13, paragraph 1 teaches this limitation);
sending a response frame to the first STA, wherein the response frame indicates that the single-link communication is successfully established, wherein an address 1 field in the response frame is set to the MAC address of the STA MLD (claim 13, paragraph 2 teaches this limitation); and
performing air interface transmission with the first STA according to the single-link communication (claim 13, paragraph 3 teaches this limitation).
Gan does not teach explicitly using a communication apparatus, used in and access point multi-link device (AP MLD), and comprising at least one processor and at least one communication interface, wherein the at least one communication interface is used by the communication apparatus to perform information exchange with another communication device, and when program instructions are executed by the at least one processor, the communication apparatus is enabled to perform operations comprising.
Xin in view of Gan teaches a communication apparatus, used in and access point multi-link device (AP MLD), and comprising at least one processor and at least one communication interface, wherein the at least one communication interface is used by the communication apparatus to perform information exchange with another communication device, and when program instructions are executed by the at least one processor, the communication apparatus is enabled to perform operations comprising (paragraph 242, using an access point (AP) as part of a multi-link device with a processor and instruction teaches this limitation):
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gan for using a communication apparatus, used in and access point multi-link device (AP MLD), and comprising at least one processor and at least one communication interface, wherein the at least one communication interface is used by the communication apparatus to perform information exchange with another communication device, and when program instructions are executed by the at least one processor, the communication apparatus is enabled to perform operations comprising as taught by Xin because it would allow using a protocol that improves link access for a MLD operation for communication involving a mixture of STR and non-simultaneous transmit and receive (NSTR) MLDs.
In response to claim 14,
Gan teaches wherein the request frame and the response frame do not carry a multi-link element (claim 14 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 15,
Gan teaches wherein performing air interface transmission with the first STA according to the single-link communication comprises: receiving, by the AP MLD from the first STA, a first frame over the air, wherein an address 2 field in the first frame over the air is set to the MAC address of the STA MLD (claim 15 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 16,
Gan teaches wherein an address 1 field in the first frame over the air is set to a MAC address of a first AP, the first AP belongs to the AP MLD, and a single link is a communication link between the first AP and the first STA (claim 16 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 17,
Gan teaches wherein performing air interface transmission with the first STA according to the single-link communication comprises: sending, by the AP MLD to the first STA, a second frame over the air, wherein an address 1 field in the second frame over the air is set to the MAC address of the STA MLD (claim 17 teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 18,
Gan teaches wherein an address 2 field in the second frame over the air is set to the MAC address of a first AP, the first AP belongs to the AP MLD, and a single link is a communication link between the first AP and the first STA (claim 12 teaches this limitation).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US patent 12707512B2...........column 9, line 50-column 10, line 64.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABUSAYEED HAQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-7252. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am -7:30 pm.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/ABUSAYEED M HAQUE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2466
/CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights