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 .
This Office Action is in response to communications filed on 1/10/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending and presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 1/10/2025 & 5/1/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
Several of the claims in the present application recite Markush groups in the format of “wherein one of A, B or C” (see MPEP §2117). For the purpose of this review, the examiner is interpreting these Markush claims as a single element selection from a closed group of elements consisting of alternatives A, B or C.
Several of the claims recite “wherein A and/or B”. For the purpose of this review, the examiner is interpreting these claims as a single element selection from a closed group of elements consisting of alternatives A, B or A&B.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 7-10, 14 & 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcev et al. (US 2014/0112325)(herein after “Calcev”) in view of Huang et al. (US 2023/0403753)(herein after “Huang”).
Regarding claim 1, Calcev discloses a method for discovering neighboring candidate access points, the method comprising:
receiving, at a serving AP (access point), a neighbor-probe request from a station requesting probe-response information (Figs 5 & 7 and [0042] & [0044] disclose a responding STA 520, that may be a Wi-Fi AP (i.e. a serving AP), receiving an Access Network Query Protocol (ANQP) query request message from a requesting STA 540, that may be a mobile station, requesting discovery information for multiple neighboring APs.), wherein the neighbor-probe request is a management frame that includes one or more elements indicating what information is to be included in the probe-response information that is requested for one or more neighboring APs or AP MLDs (multi-link devices) of the serving AP (Figs 8 & 9 and [0045]-[0046] disclose that the ANQP query request message includes Query AP List ANQP elements indicating descriptions of the information for which the requesting STA is querying, each ANQP element may be returned in an ANQP query response with the requested information, and the ANQP query request message may include an indication of the set of neighboring APs to be include as part of the ANQP query response. [0050]-[0052] disclose that the ANQP query request message may be an extension of the GAS protocol using Public Action management frames such as a GAS Initial Request frame (i.e. a Probe Request frame).);
collecting, at the serving AP, the probe-response information for the one or more neighboring APs of the serving AP (Fig 7 & [0044] discloses that the Wi-Fi AP retrieves discovery information for the neighboring APs per the ANQP query request message, for sending an ANQP query response.), wherein the serving AP collects the probe-response information in accordance with the one or more elements (Figs 9-11 & [0046]-[0047] discloses that the information retrieved by the Wi-Fi AP for the ANQP query response message corresponds to the Query AP list request elements.); and
sending, from the serving AP to the station, a neighbor-probe response that includes the probe-response information (Figs 5 & 7 and [0042] & [0044] disclose that the Wi-Fi AP sends the ANQP query response carrying the discovery information for the neighboring APs to the STA 520.).
Calcev fails to disclose but Huang teaches wherein the elements are multi-link elements (Fig 17A & [0147] disclose that the elements of the probe request may be multi-link elements.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev such that the elements are multi-link elements, as taught by Huang.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA, that is a multi-link device, to request discovery information about neighboring APs that may be multi-link APs, through an ANQP query request message that is a GAS Public Action management Probe Request frame in order to identify requested discovery information for neighboring multi-link capable APs so that the STA can take advantage of multi-link transmission to improve throughput.
Regarding claim 2, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1.
Calcev fails to disclose but Huang teaches wherein:
the station is a non-AP MLD (Fig 1 & Fig 9 and [0051] & [0095] disclose that a wireless station (STA) may be a non-AP MLD.),
the serving AP is an AP MLD (Fig 1 & Fig 9 and [0051] & [0095] disclose that the AP 112 (i.e. a serving AP) may be an AP MLD 910.), and
the one or more neighboring APs includes at least one AP MLD that is a neighboring AP MLD of the serving AP (Fig 10 & [0101]-[0102] disclose that peer MLDs may be AP MLDs (i.e. neighboring AP MLDs) such that one or more peer devices (e.g. peer devices associated with BSS3, BSS4, BSS5 and/or BSS6) may be a neighboring AP MLD to peer device associated with BSS1 (e.g. a serving AP).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang such that the station is a non-AP MLD, the serving AP is an AP MLD, and the one or more neighboring APs includes at least one AP MLD that is a neighboring AP MLD of the serving AP, as taught by Huang.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA, that is a multi-link device, to request discovery information about neighboring APs, of which at least one is a neighboring AP MLD, through an ANQP query request message that is a WLAN management frame in order take advantage of multi-link transmission to improve throughput by requesting multi-link operation including the neighboring AP MLD.
Regarding claims 3 & 19, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1 and the apparatus of claim 18.
Calcev discloses wherein: the neighbor-probe request includes the one or more elements, (Figs 8 & 9 and [0045]-[0046] disclose that the ANQP query request message includes Query AP List ANQP elements indicating descriptions of the information for which the requesting STA is querying.),
the one or more elements includes one or more identifiers for one or more target APs for which the probe-response information is requested (Figs 8 & 9 and [0045]-[0046] disclose that the Query AP List contains a list of AP IDs that identify which discovery information is sought and indicate the BSSID of neighbor APs in a ”white” list (i.e. target APs) for which discovery information is sought.), and
each element of the one or more elements is a neighbor probe request element (Figs 8 & 9 and [0045]-[0046] disclose that each Query List ANQP element is part of the ANQP query request message for requesting a neighbor report.).
Calcev fails to disclose but Huang teaches wherein: at least one of the one or more neighboring APs is an AP multi-link device (MLD) (Fig 1 & Fig 9 and [0051] & [0095] disclose that a wireless station (STA) may be a non-AP MLD and that the AP 112 (i.e. a serving AP) may be an AP MLD. Fig 10 & [0101]-[0102] disclose that peer MLDs may be AP MLDs (i.e. neighboring AP MLDs) such that one or more peer devices (e.g. peer devices associated with BSS3, BSS4, BSS5 and/or BSS6) may be a neighboring AP MLD to peer device associated with BSS1 (e.g. a serving AP).),
the one or more target APs is a target AP MLD (Fig 10 & [0101]-[0102] disclose that peer MLDs may be AP MLDs (i.e. neighboring AP MLDs) such that one or more peer devices (e.g. peer devices associated with BSS3, BSS4, BSS5 and/or BSS6) may be a target AP MLD to peer device associated with BSS1 (e.g. a serving AP).), and
the elements are multi-link elements (Fig 17A & [0147] disclose that the elements of the probe request may be multi-link elements.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang such that at least one of the one or more neighboring APs is an AP multi-link device (MLD), the one or more target APs is a target AP MLD, and the elements are multi-link elements, as taught by Huang.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA, that is a multi-link device, to request discovery information about neighboring APs, that may be multi-link APs targeted for inclusion in a multi-link transmission, through an ANQP query request message including IDs of elements for identifying requested discovery information for neighboring multi-link capable APs targeted for inclusion in a multi-link transmission, so that the STA can identify neighboring APs that are MLD capable in order to take advantage of multi-link transmission to improve throughput.
Regarding claim 4, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 3.
Calcev discloses wherein: the neighbor probe request element is an element with a new type ([0049] discloses that ANQP elements have a type (i.e. a new type) which may be vendor specific.), or a probe request element (Figs 8 & 9 and [0045]-[0046] disclose that each Query List ANQP element is part of the ANQP query request message.),
the one or more identifiers are MLD media access control (MAC) Address (optional), AP identifiers (IDs) (Figs 9 & 10 and [0046] disclose that the IDs in the Query AP List ANQP element may include a list of AP IDs.), or another identifier for a target AP ([0046] discloses that the list of AP IDs may identify the IDs for which discovery information is sought (i.e. target APs).), and
the neighbor-probe request is a probe request frame or another management frame ([0050]-[0052] disclose that the ANQP query request message may be and extension of the GAS protocol using Public Action management frames such as a GAS Initial Request frame (i.e. a Probe Response frame).) and the neighbor-probe response is a probe response frame or another management frame ([0050]-[0052] disclose that the ANQP query response message may be and extension of the GAS protocol using Public Action management frames such as a GAS Initial Response frame (i.e. a Probe Response frame).).
Calcev fails to disclose but Huang teaches wherein the elements are multi-link elements (Fig 17A & [0147] disclose that the elements of the probe request may be multi-link elements.), and
wherein APs are AP MLDs (Fig 1 & Fig 9 and [0051] & [0095] disclose that AP 112 may be an AP MLD 910.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang such that the elements are multi-link elements, and wherein APs are AP MLDs, as taught by Huang.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA, that is a multi-link device, to request discovery information about neighboring APs, that may be multi-link APs targeted for inclusion in a multi-link transmission, through a GAS extended Initial Request frame including an ANQP query request message type with IDs of elements for identifying requested discovery information for neighboring multi-link capable APs targeted for inclusion in a multi-link transmission, and receive a GAS extended Initial Response frame including an ANQP query response message providing the requested discovery information, so that the STA can identify neighboring APs that are MLD capable in order to take advantage of multi-link transmission to improve throughput.
Regarding claim 7, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1.
Calcev discloses wherein the neighbor-probe request includes a basic service set identifier (BSSID) element indicating a list of BSSIDs (basic service set identifiers) of the one or more neighboring APs for which the probe-response information is requested (Fig 9 and [0037] & [0046] discloses that the ANQP query request message may include a query AP list ANQP element with an AP list field including a plurality of neighboring AP identifiers such as BSSIDs for which information is sought.).
Regarding claim 8, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1.
Calcev discloses wherein:
the neighbor-probe request includes an SSID (service set identifier) element that indicates one or more SSIDs of neighboring APs or AP MLDs for which the probe-response information is requested ([0060] discloses an SSID element in a neighbor report request frame that contains neighbor APs identified by the SSID element (i.e. SSIDs of neighboring APs), and
an absence of SSID information in the SSID element signals the receiving AP to use all SSIDs for providing probe responses for the one or more neighboring APs or AP MLDs ([0060] discloses that if the SSID element is omitted, and a wildcard SSID element is specified, then the neighbor report requested shall be for all neighboring APs (i.e. APs belonging to all SSIDs).).
Regarding claim 9, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1.
Calcev discloses wherein:
collecting the probe-response information that is requested in the neighbor-probe request includes sending, by the serving AP and over a wired distribution system network, information of the neighbor-probe request to selected neighboring APs and/or AP MLDs (Fig 3 & [0040] disclose that AP 320 may retrieve discovery information directly from neighboring APs 310 & 330 via a backhaul network. Fig 25 & [0091] disclose that the backhaul network interface 2514 or a supplemental interface 2512 allow communications of data or control information between devices, and may be a wireline interface (i.e. a wired distribution system network).), and
collecting the probe-response information further includes receiving, in response to sending the information of the neighbor-probe request, probe-response frames from the selected neighboring APs and/or AP MLDs (Fig 3 & [0040] disclose an STA 340, in response to sending an ANQP request message requesting discovery information from selected neighboring APs 310 & 330, receiving ANQP response messages from neighboring APs 310 & 330. [0060] disclose that the ANQP response messages may be in the form of neighbor report response frames.).
Regarding claim 10, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1.
Calcev discloses wherein:
collecting the probe-response information that is requested in the neighbor-probe request includes retrieving, by the serving AP and over a wired distribution system network, the probe-response information from a neighbor AP database (Fig 3 & [0040] disclose AP 320 (i.e. a serving AP) receiving an ANQP request message from STA 340 requesting discovery information for neighboring APs 310 & 330 and AP 320 retrieves the discovery information from an ANQP server (i.e. a neighbor AP database). Fig 25 & [0091] disclose that the backhaul network interface 2514 or a supplemental interface 2512 allow communications of data or control information between devices (i.e. between AP 320 and the ANQP server), and may be a wireline interface (i.e. a wired distribution system network).),
the neighbor AP database is updated periodically with latest neighbor AP information ([0075] discloses that a serving AP retrieves periodically updated ANQP information related to its neighbors from the ANQP server (i.e. ANQP server periodically updates the neighbor AP information), and the latest neighbor AP information comprises a latest basic service set (BSS) load (optional), a BPCC (optional), and/or other static and dynamic information for the one or more neighboring APs ([0052} & [0055] disclose that neighbor AP information contains information from table dot11RMNeighborReport Table in Section 4.3.8.10 of 802.11 REVmb-D12. Someone have ordinary skill in the art would know that the information in table dot11RMNeighborReport Table in Section 4.3.8.10 of 802.11 REVmb-D12 includes static and dynamic neighbor AP information such as PHY Type (physical layer technology utilized by the neighbor APs), Channel Number (radio frequency channel used by the neighboring APs) and Regulatory/Operating Class (channel set and frequency band used by the neighboring APs).).
Regarding claim 14, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1.
Calcev discloses further comprising:
sending, as part of the neighbor-probe response from the serving AP, multiple probe response frames for the one or more neighboring APs as part of an aggregated MAC protocol data unit (A-MPDU) that is sent to the station (optional);
sending, as part of the neighbor-probe response from the serving AP, the multiple probe response frames for the one or more neighboring APs or neighboring AP MLDs as part of separate probe response frames that are sent to the station (optional); or
sending, as part of the neighbor-probe response from the serving AP, a neighbor-probe-response frame that is configured to embed frame bodies for multiple probe responses from the one or more neighboring APs or neighboring AP MLDs in a single neighbor probe response frame (Fig 3 & [0040] disclose AP 320 (i.e. a serving AP) sending a single ANQP response message including requested discovery information for APs 310 & 330. [0060] discloses that the ANQP response message may be in the form of a response frame containing more than zero neighbor report elements (i.e. frame bodies for the ANQP responses from APs 310 & 330).).
Regarding claims 18 & 20, Calcev discloses:
a computing apparatus comprising:
a processor (Fig 25 & [0091] discloses a processor 2504.); and
a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, configure the computing apparatus (Fig 25 & [0091] discloses a memory 2506 that may store instructions for the processor 2504 to perform computations.), and
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium including instructions that when executed by a computer (Fig 25 & [0091] and claim 11 disclose a memory 2506 or computer readable storage medium storing programming instructions for execution by a processor.), cause the computer to, and wherein the computing apparatus is configured to:
receive, at a serving AP (access point), a neighbor-probe request from a station requesting probe-response information (Figs 5 & 7 and [0042] & [0044] disclose a responding STA 520, that may be a Wi-Fi AP (i.e. a serving AP), receiving an Access Network Query Protocol (ANQP) query request message from a requesting STA 540, that may be a mobile station, requesting discovery information for multiple neighboring APs.), wherein the neighbor-probe request is a management frame that includes one or more elements indicating what information is to be included in the probe-response information that is requested for one or more neighboring APs of the serving AP (Figs 8 & 9 and [0045]-[0046] disclose that the ANQP query request message includes Query AP List ANQP elements indicating descriptions of the information for which the requesting STA is querying, each ANQP element may be returned in an ANQP query response with the requested information, and the ANQP query request message may include an indication of the set of neighboring APs to be include as part of the ANQP query response. [0050]-[0052] disclose that the ANQP query request message may be an extension of the GAS protocol using Public Action management frames such as a GAS Initial Request frame (i.e. a Probe Request frame).);
collect, at the serving AP, the probe-response information for the one or more neighboring APs of the serving AP (Fig 7 & [0044] discloses that the Wi-Fi AP retrieves discovery information for the neighboring APs per the ANQP query request message, for sending an ANQP query response.), wherein the serving AP collects the probe-response information in accordance with the one or more elements (Figs 9-11 & [0046]-[0047] discloses that the information retrieved by the Wi-Fi AP for the ANQP query response message corresponds to the Query AP list request elements.); and
send, from the serving AP to the station, a neighbor-probe response that includes the probe-response information (Figs 5 & 7 and [0042] & [0044] disclose that the Wi-Fi AP sends the ANQP query response carrying the discovery information for the neighboring APs to the STA 520.).
Calcev fails to disclose but Huang teaches wherein the elements are multi-link elements (Fig 17A & [0147] disclose that the elements of the probe request may be multi-link elements.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev such that the elements are multi-link elements, as taught by Huang.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA, that is a multi-link device, to request discovery information about neighboring APs that may be multi-link APs, through an ANQP query request message that is a GAS Public Action management Probe Request frame in order to identify requested discovery information for neighboring multi-link capable APs so that the STA can take advantage of multi-link transmission to improve throughput.
Claims 5 & 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcev et al. (US 2014/0112325)(herein after “Calcev”) in view of Huang et al. (US 2023/0403753)(herein after “Huang”), as applied to claims 3 & 1 respectively, and further in view of Naik et al. (US 2025/0150806)(herein after “Naik”).
Regarding claim 5, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 3.
Calcev discloses wherein:
each of the one or more elements indicates IDs of a subset of APs of a target AP (Figs 8 & 9 and [0045]-[0046] disclose that ANQP elements of an ANQP query request message may indicate AP IDs for a set of APs for which discovery information is sought (i.e. a subset of target APs).), and
the IDs indicate that the probe-response information is requested for the subset of APs indicated by the IDs ([0046] discloses that the ANQP element in the ANQP query request message may indicate that the requested discovery information for the indicated set of AP IDs be returned in the ANQP response.),
Calcev fails to disclose but Huang teaches wherein:
the elements are multi-link elements that include one or more sub-elements (Fig 17A & [0147] disclose that the elements of the probe request may be multi-link elements. [0112] discloses that the multi-link elements may include subfields of a per-STA Profile subelement.),
the IDs are link IDs, in the one or more sub-elements, for affiliated APs of a target AP MLD ([0112] & [0173] disclose that the per-STA Profile subelement include a Link ID subfield indicating a link identifier of APs within an AP MLD (i.e. a target AP MLD) for which the APs are affiliated.), and
the one or more sub-elements are one or more Per-STA Profile sub-elements ([0112] discloses that the multi-link element carries per-STA Profile subelements.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang such that the elements are multi-link elements that include one or more sub-elements, the IDs are link IDs, in the one or more sub-elements, for affiliated APs of a target AP MLD, and the one or more sub-elements are one or more Per-STA Profile sub-elements, as taught by Huang.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA, that is a multi-link device, to request discovery information about neighboring APs affiliated with a serving AP MLD, for inclusion in a multi-link transmission, through a multi-link element in a probe request including link IDs identified in Per-STA Profile sub-elements of the multi-link element for the affiliated APs, and receive a response message providing the requested discovery information for the affiliated APs, so that the STA can take advantage of multi-link transmission through the APs affiliated with the serving AP MLD to improve throughput.
Calcev fails to disclose but Naik further teaches wherein an absence of the one or more sub-elements indicates that the probe-response information is requested for all affiliated APs of the target AP MLD ([0011] discloses that the absence of a per-STA profile subelement may indicate a request for STA-specific profile information associated with all APs affiliated with an AP MLD (i.e. a target AP MLD).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang such that an absence of the one or more sub-elements indicates that the probe-response information is requested for all affiliated APs of the target AP MLD, as further taught by Naik.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce signaling overhead by indicating, through an absence of per-STA profile subelements in a multi-link element, that discovery information for all APs affiliated with a serving AP MLD is sought.
Regarding claim 13, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1.
Calcev fails to disclose but Naik further teaches further comprising:
sending, in response to the neighbor-probe request and as part of the neighbor-probe response from the serving AP to the station, a complete profile for a neighboring AP or a partial profile for a neighboring AP providing only elements that are requested in one or more request elements or in one or more extended request element in the neighbor-probe request ([0084] discloses that a request from wireless communication device (i.e. a station) may include any quantity of per-STA profile subelements for affiliated APs of an AP MLD that include a subfield in an STA control field indicating whether partial or complete profile information is requested. Fig 4 & [0070]-[0071] discloses that wireless communication device 402 may transmit a probe response, in response to a request from wireless communication device 404, that includes the requested partial or complete profile information of affiliated APs.).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang to comprise sending, in response to the neighbor-probe request and as part of the neighbor-probe response from the serving AP to the station, a complete profile for a neighboring AP or a partial profile for a neighboring AP providing only elements that are requested in one or more request elements or in one or more extended request element in the neighbor-probe request, as further taught by Naik.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA to send a probe request message including an MLD profile field within a control field of a per-MLD profile subelement that includes partial profile information and an indication of whether partial or complete profile information of the affiliated APs of the AP MLD is requested, so that an AP MLD receiving the probe request message can reduce overhead in sending a probe response message by only sending requested discovery information associated with the partial profile information when partial profile information is requested.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcev et al. (US 2014/0112325)(herein after “Calcev”) in view of Huang et al. (US 2023/0403753)(herein after “Huang”) and Naik et al. (US 2025/0150806)(herein after “Naik”), as applied to claim 5, and further in view of Baron et al. (US 2024/0284305)(herein after “Baron”).
Regarding claim 6, Calcev in view of Huang and Naik disclose the method of claim 5.
Calcev fails to disclose but Baron further teaches wherein each sub-element in the one or more sub-elements includes a station control field indicating a value of a last known basic service set (BSS) parameters change count (BPCC) for respective affiliated AP of the target AP MLD indicated by the link IDs ([0032]-[0033] discloses a probe request frame including a requested BSS Parameter Change Count (BPCC) field for affiliated APs of an AP MLD (i.e. a target AP MLD). Fig 5 & [0147] discloses that the BPCC field 523 may be a subfield (i.e. sub-element) of a Common Info field 320 in multi-link element 300. [0117] discloses that Link Info field 330 comprises the per-STA profile subelements carrying profiles (i.e. link IDs) of the affiliated APs.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Naik such that each sub-element in the one or more sub-elements includes a station control field indicating a value of a last known basic service set (BSS) parameters change count (BPCC) for respective affiliated AP of the target AP MLD indicated by the link IDs, as further taught by Baron.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA to send a probe request message including PBCC parameters for affiliated APs of a serving AP MLD indicated by a link info field of the probe request message so that an AP MLD receiving the probe request message can reduce overhead in sending a probe response message by only sending requested discovery information for affiliated APs, indicated by the BPCC parameters, as have BSS parameter changes.
Calcev fails to disclose but Naik further teaches wherein the station control field includes a complete profile subfield that signals whether a complete profile or a partial profile is requested for an affiliated AP of the target AP MLD ([0084] discloses that a wireless communication device (i.e. a station) may include any quantity of per-STA profile subelements for affiliated APs of an AP MLD that include a subfield in an STA control field indicating whether partial or complete profile information is requested.), and
when a value signaled by the complete profile subfield indicates that the partial profile of the affiliated AP is requested, values of a station profile field include one or more request elements and/or one or more extended request element that indicate specific elements for which affiliated AP information is requested for the affiliated AP ([0071] discloses that the per-STA profile subelements may include an MLD profile field with the partial profile information of the affiliated APs, depending on the requested information (i.e. when the subfield in the STA control field requests partial profile information.).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Naik and Baron such that the station control field includes a complete profile subfield that signals whether a complete profile or a partial profile is requested for an affiliated AP of the target AP MLD, and when a value signaled by the complete profile subfield indicates that the partial profile of the affiliated AP is requested, values of a station profile field include one or more request elements and/or one or more extended request element that indicate specific elements for which affiliated AP information is requested for the affiliated AP, as further taught by Naik.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA to send a probe request message including an MLD profile field within a control field of a per-MLD profile subelement that includes partial profile information and an indication of whether partial or complete profile information of the affiliated APs of the AP MLD is requested, so that an AP MLD receiving the probe request message can reduce overhead in sending a probe response message by only sending requested discovery information associated with the partial profile information when partial profile information is requested.
Calcev fails to disclose but Naik further teaches wherein an absence of the one or more request elements and/or an absence of the one or more extended request elements signals indicating that the one or more neighboring APs for which elements are returned are determined by other elements included in the neighbor-probe request ([0148]-[0149] disclose that in the absence of per-MLD profile subelements indicates a request for profile information associated with AP MLDs in a candidate AP set determined by a list of the set of multiple AP MLDs in a common info field.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Naik such that an absence of the one or more request elements and/or an absence of the one or more extended request elements signals indicating that the one or more neighboring APs for which elements are returned are determined by other elements included in the neighbor-probe request, as further taught by Naik.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce overhead in sending a probe request message by indicating a set of candidate APs in a common information field in an multi-link element of a probe request, and the absence of sending per-MLD profile subelements in the multi-link element of the probe request indicates that the APs for which the requested discovery information is sought is determined by those listed in the common information field.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcev et al. (US 2014/0112325)(herein after “Calcev”) in view of Huang et al. (US 2023/0403753)(herein after “Huang”), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2025/0184762)(herein after “Kim”).
Regarding claim 11, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1.
Calcev fails to disclose but Kim further teaches further comprising:
filtering, at the serving AP, the probe-response information after the serving AP collects the probe-response information for the one or more neighboring APs ([0008] discloses a reporting AP providing a probe response with critical update information of another (i.e. neighboring) AP with an AP MLD. [0016] discloses that the probe response excludes (i.e. filters out) a second element.), wherein
filtering the probe-response information is based on BPCC information received from the station ([0016] discloses that the exclusion of the second element is according to a second BPCC value.), and
sending the neighbor-probe response includes sending profile information for an affiliated AP when the BPCC information indicates that BSS parameters have changed since a last acquired BPCC by the station for that affiliated AP ([0008]-[0010] disclose that the probe response is sent including critical update information of an AP within an AP MLD (i.e. an affiliated AP). [0016]-[0018] discloses that the probe response is transmitted when a second BPCC value differs from a first BPCC value to prevent sending redundant information.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang to comprise filtering, at the serving AP, the probe-response information after the serving AP collects the probe-response information for the one or more neighboring APs, wherein filtering the probe-response information is based on BPCC information received from the station, and sending the neighbor-probe response includes sending profile information for an affiliated AP when the BPCC information indicates that BSS parameters have changed since a last acquired BPCC by the station for that affiliated AP, as further taught by Kim.
The motivation to do so would have been to avoid wasting resources that would result from sending redundant information in an ANQP query response from a responding AP, in response to an ANQP query request from a requesting STA, by only sending requested information in the ANQP query request associated with neighboring affiliated APs that have been indicated, through BPCC information, to have changed their BSS information.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcev et al. (US 2014/0112325)(herein after “Calcev”) in view of Huang et al. (US 2023/0403753)(herein after “Huang”), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2025/0184762)(herein after “Kim”) and Cisco et al. (Cisco, “802.11r, 802.11k, and 802.11w Deployment Guide, Cisco IOS-XE Release 3.3”, Chapter: 802.11k Assisted Roaming, July 15, 2015.)(herein after “Cisco”).
Regarding claim 12, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1.
Calcev fails to disclose but Kim further teaches further comprising:
filtering, at the serving AP, the probe-response information after the serving AP collects the probe-response information for the one or more neighboring APs ([0008] discloses a reporting AP providing a probe response with critical update information of another (i.e. neighboring) AP with an AP MLD. [0016] discloses that the probe response excludes (i.e. filters out) a second element.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang to comprise filtering, at the serving AP, the probe-response information after the serving AP collects the probe-response information for the one or more neighboring APs, as further taught by Kim.
The motivation to do so would have been to prevent sending of redundant information in a probe response from a responding AP to a requesting STA by filtering discovery information obtained from neighboring APs to only include discovery information requested by the requesting STA in the sending of the probe response, in order to reduce channel bandwidth required to send the probe response to free up channel bandwidth for other traffic.
Calcev fails to disclose but Cisco further teaches wherein the filtering is according to a predefined policy (Second page, Assembling and Optimizing the Neighbor List section discloses a Cisco Prime Infrastructure 802.11k roaming policy for optimizing (i.e. filtering) a neighbor list, requested by a client to an AP, to APs on the same floor.), wherein
the predefined policy limits the probe-response information to APs on a same floor as the serving AP (Second page, Assembling and Optimizing the Neighbor List section discloses that the Cisco Prime Infrastructure 802.11k roaming policy optimizes (i.e. filters) a neighbor list, requested by a client to an AP, to APs on the same floor.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Kim such that the filtering is according to a predefined policy, wherein the predefined policy limits the probe-response information to APs on a same floor as the serving AP, as further taught by Cisco.
The motivation to do so would have been to have a policy for a responding AP to only send neighbor AP discovery information in a probe response to a requesting STA for neighboring APs on the same floor as the responding AP, so that the receiving STA does not receive discovery information from APs on a different floor that may be associated with a different enterprise entity than which the receiving STA is employed by or associated with.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcev et al. (US 2014/0112325)(herein after “Calcev”) in view of Huang et al. (US 2023/0403753)(herein after “Huang”), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Ruuska et al. (US 2007/0064655)(herein after “Ruuska”) and Yacovitch et al. (US 2015/0245364)(herein after “Yacovitch”).
Regarding claim 15, Calcev in view of Huang disclose the method of claim 1.
Calcev discloses wherein:
the neighbor-probe request includes indicia whether the probe-response information is requested for the one or more neighboring APs ([0037] discloses that the ANQP request may include an AP list field and ANQP query subfields indicated that the AP should send a ANQP response for the indicated neighboring APs in the AP list field. When the AP list field is empty, this would indicate no ANQP response is requested while when the AP list field is not empty, this would indicate an ANQP response is requested.), and
when the neighbor-probe request includes a request for discovery information for the one or more neighboring APs, the serving AP collects discovery information from each of the one or more neighboring APs for which the discovery information is requested (Fig 7 & [0044] discloses that the Wi-Fi AP retrieves discovery information for the neighboring APs per the ANQP query request message.).
Calcev fails to disclose but Ruuska further teaches wherein:
beacon information is requested for the one or more neighboring APs ([0012] discloses that a neighbor report request specifying one or more beacon information to be provided for one or more neighbor APs.), and
wherein discovery information is beacon information ([0007] & [0012] discloses that the neighbor report, that provides beacon information, may be provided in response to a mobile station transmitting a probe request for active scanning (i.e. discovery) to obtain information about neighboring APs (i.e. the beacon information is discovery information).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang such that beacon information is requested for the one or more neighboring APs, and wherein discovery information is substituted with beacon information, as further taught by Ruuska.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA, that is a multi-link device, to request beacon information about neighboring APs that may be multi-link APs, through an ANQP query request message to a serving AP so that the serving AP can collect beacon information from the neighboring APs and provide the beacon information from the neighboring APs to the STA, in order for the STA to identify neighboring multi-link capable APs so that the STA can take advantage of multi-link transmission to improve throughput.
Calcev fails to disclose but Yacovitch further teaches wherein the collection of beacon information is collection of a beacon frame body ([0053] discloses that each AP of an AP network may collect and maintain neighbor beacon frames (beacon frame body).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Ruuska such that the collection of beacon information is collection of a beacon frame body, as further taught by Yacovitch.
The motivation to do so would have been to enable an STA, that is a multi-link device, to request beacon information about neighboring APs that may be multi-link APs, through an ANQP query request message to a serving AP so that the serving AP can collect beacon frame body information from the neighboring APs and provide the beacon frame body information from the neighboring APs to the STA, in order for the STA to identify neighboring multi-link capable APs along with their network identity capability and timing parameters, so that the STA can take advantage of multi-link transmission to improve throughput.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcev et al. (US 2014/0112325)(herein after “Calcev”) in view of Huang et al. (US 2023/0403753)(herein after “Huang”) and Ruuska et al. (US 2007/0064655)(herein after “Ruuska”) and Yacovitch et al. (US 2015/0245364)(herein after “Yacovitch”), as applied to claim 15, and further in view of Naik et al. (US 2025/0150806)(herein after “Naik”).
Regarding claim 16, Calcev in view of Huang and Ruuska and Yacovitch disclose the method of claim 15,
Calcev discloses wherein:
the neighbor-probe request includes a request element or extended request element that provides a list of elements indicating which elements to be returned (Figs 7 & 8 and [0044]-[0045] disclose a ANQP request message including ANQP elements that are being queried and are to be returned in and ANQP query response.),
when one or more request elements or extended request elements, are included in the neighbor-probe request from the station, the serving AP filters the information to restrict information returned in the neighbor-probe response to information that corresponds to the one or more request elements or extended request element (Figs 7-10 and [[0044]-[0047] disclose that an ANQP query request may include Info IDs in a Query List to request that an ANQP element corresponding to the Ifo ID be returned in an ANQP query response, and a Wi-Fi AP (i.e. serving AP) sends an ANQP query response according to the Info IDs in the Query List (i.e. Wi-Fi AP restricts the information returned in the ANQP response to the information requestion through the Info IDs in the Query List).).
Calcev fails to disclose but Naik further teaches when the request element or extended request element is absent from the neighbor-probe request, the serving AP returns all elements for a neighboring AP ([0011] discloses that the absence of a per-STA profile subelement may indicate a request for STA-specific profile information associated with all APs affiliated with an AP MLD (i.e. all elements of all APs).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Ruuska and Yacovitch such that when the request element or extended request element is absent from the neighbor-probe request, the serving AP returns all elements for a neighboring AP, as further taught by Naik.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce signaling overhead by indicating, through an absence of per-STA profile subelements in a multi-link element, that discovery information for all elements for a neighboring AP is sought to be returned.
Calcev fails to disclose but Ruuska further teaches wherein:
elements are to be returned in respective beacons ([0006] discloses that a beacon response may be transmitted by each responding AP including an AP timestamp, BSSID, TIM, beacon interval and other information (i.e. request elements).),
the information is from the respective beacons ([0006] discloses that the beacon responses may be from each AP.),
information returned is in a beacon ([0006] discloses that responses returned from each AP may be in a beacon.), and
the one or more request elements or extended request elements are in the beacon ([0006] discloses that a beacon response may include an AP timestamp, BSSID, TIM, beacon interval and other information (i.e. request elements).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Ruuska and Yacovitch and Naik such that elements are to be returned in respective beacons, the information is from the respective beacons, information returned is in a beacon, and the one or more request elements or extended request elements are in the beacon, as further taught by Ruuska.
The motivation to do so would have been to use beacons to provide requested element information, based on an ANQP query request from an STA, to serving APs of requesting STAs in order for multiple serving APs to be able to passively receive requested element information from a neighbor AP simultaneously, rather than each serving AP individually requesting and receiving the requested element information from the neighbor AP, in order to more efficiently provide requested element information to serving APs.
Calcev fails to disclose but Yacovitch further teaches wherein all elements that are returned are from the beacon frame body ([0053] discloses that each AP of an AP network may collect and maintain neighbor beacon frames (beacon frame body). Thus, the serving AP would have all elements of the beacon frame body collected and maintained for when the request element is absent from the ANQP query request.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Ruuska and Yacovitch and Naik such that all elements that are returned are from the beacon frame body, as further taught by Yacovitch.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce overhead in sending an ANQP query request message by indicating to send all elements in a beacon frame body through the absence of sending a request element in the ANQP query request message.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcev et al. (US 2014/0112325)(herein after “Calcev”) in view of Huang et al. (US 2023/0403753)(herein after “Huang”) and Ruuska et al. (US 2007/0064655)(herein after “Ruuska”) and Yacovitch et al. (US 2015/0245364)(herein after “Yacovitch”) and Naik et al. (US 2025/0150806)(herein after “Naik”), as applied to claim 16, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2025/0184762)(herein after “Kim”) and Baron et al. (US 2024/0284305)(herein after “Baron”).
Regarding claim 17, Calcev in view of Huang and Ruuska and Yacovitch and Naik disclose the method of claim 16.
Calcev fails to disclose but Baron further teaches wherein:
the neighbor-probe request includes BPCC values for one or more affiliated APs of neighboring AP MLDs ([0032]-[0033] discloses a probe request frame including a requested BSS Parameter Change Count (BPCC) field for affiliated APs of an AP MLD (i.e. neighboring AP MLDs).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Ruuska and Yacovitch and Naik such that the neighbor-probe request includes BPCC values for one or more affiliated APs of neighboring AP, as further taught by Baron.
The motivation to do so would have been enable an STA to send BPCC information in an ANQP query request to inform a serving AP of the occurrences of BSS operational parameter changes by neighboring affiliated APs so that the serving AP can avoid wasting channel resources by not sending ANQP query responses for neighboring affiliated APs whose BSS operation parameters have not changed.
Calcev fails to disclose but Kim further teaches when the BPCC values are included for the one or more affiliated APs of neighboring AP MLDs in the neighbor-probe request, the serving AP returns the information in the neighbor-probe response only for those affiliated APs for which the BPCC information indicates that BSS parameters have changed since a last acquired BPCC by the station for that affiliated AP ([0008] discloses a reporting AP providing a probe response with critical update information of another (i.e. neighboring) AP with an AP MLD. [0016] discloses that the probe response excludes (i.e. filters out) a second element. [0016] discloses that the exclusion of the second element is according to a second BPCC value. [0008]-[0010] disclose that the probe response is sent including critical update information of an AP within an AP MLD (i.e. an affiliated AP). [0016]-[0018] discloses that the probe response is transmitted when a second BPCC value differs from a first BPCC value to prevent sending redundant information.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Ruuska and Yacovitch and Naik and Baron such that when the BPCC values are included for the one or more affiliated APs of neighboring AP MLDs in the neighbor-probe request, the serving AP returns the information in the neighbor-probe response only for those affiliated APs for which the BPCC information indicates that BSS parameters have changed since a last acquired BPCC by the station for that affiliated AP, as further taught by Kim.
The motivation to do so would have been to avoid wasting resources that would result from sending redundant information in an ANQP query response from a responding AP, in response to an ANQP query request from a requesting STA, by only sending requested information in the ANQP query request associated with neighboring affiliated APs that have been indicated, through BPCC information, to have changed their BSS information.
Calcev fails to disclose but Ruuska further teaches wherein the information returned is beacon information ([0006] discloses that a beacon response may include an AP timestamp, BSSID, TIM, beacon interval and other information (i.e. beacon information).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Calcev and Huang and Ruuska and Yacovitch and Naik and Baron and Kim such that the information returned is beacon information, as further taught by Ruuska.
The motivation to do so would have been to use beacons to provide requested element information, based on an ANQP query request from an STA, to serving APs of requesting STAs in order for multiple serving APs to be able to passively receive requested element information from a neighbor AP simultaneously, rather than each serving AP individually requesting and receiving the requested element information from the neighbor AP, in order to more efficiently provide requested element information to serving APs.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ahn et al. (US 2019/0319738) discloses an Aggregated-MPDU, Method for Transmission Response Frame Thereto, and Wireless Communication Terminal Using Same. (related to optional features of claim 14)
Patil et al. (US 2015/0350974) discloses an Enhancement for BSS Transition, Load Balancing and AP Selection. (related to optional features of claim 10)
Ghosh et al. (US 2021/0274574) discloses a Reduced Neighbor Report (RNR) Element for Multi-Link Devices (MLD) and Multiple BSSIDs for Cohosted and Collocated Access Points. (related to optional features of claim 4)
Patil et al. (US 2025/0113264) discloses Discovery Signaling for Seamless Roaming.
Wang et al. (US 2024/0381465) discloses Methods and Apparatuses for Coordinated Operations in a Multiple Access Point Multi-link Device set in a Wireless Local Area Network.
Park et al. (US 2016/0007274) discloses a Scanning Method and Apparatus.
Guop et al. (US 12003399) discloses a Request and Response Method for Probing MLD, Station, and Access Point.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES P SEYMOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7654. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at 571-270-3125. 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.
/JAMES P SEYMOUR/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
