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 .
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7 and 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Erkucuk et al (United States Patent Application Publication 2024/0107508), hereinafter Erkucuk.
Regarding Claim 1, Erkucuk discloses a wireless communication device for facilitating wireless communication (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device), comprising processing circuitry configured to cause:
receiving, from a sharing access point (AP) station, a transmission opportunity (TXOP) allocation frame including information indicating a first shared duration of a TXOP and one or more first shared channels which the sharing AP station allocates to the wireless communication device (Figure 6 and paragraph 0100 – teaches a Multi-User Request-to-Send (MU-RTS) trigger frame which may be used in a triggered Transmit Opportunity (TXOP) sharing procedure, wherein the MU-RTS trigger frame comprises a duration field and a user information list field),
wherein the first shared duration of the TXOP is within a duration of the TXOP acquired by the sharing AP station and the one or more first shared channels are a subset of a plurality of channels for which the sharing AP station acquired the TXOP (Figure 9 step 0900 and paragraph 0113 – teaches MRTT frame 920 allocates a portion of the obtained TXOP to the STAs, and assigns a first channel (CH1) and a second channel (CH2), respectively, for transmission),
performing wireless communication using the one or more first shared channels in the first shared duration of the TXOP (Figure 9 and paragraph 0114 – teaches a STA such as STA 911 may transmit a PPDU on the first channel (CH1) assigned to it by the MRTT frame).
Regarding Claim 2, Erkucuk discloses the wireless communication device of claim 1 (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device),
wherein the TXOP allocation frame further includes information indicating a second shared duration of the TXOP and one or more second shared channels which the sharing AP station allocates to another wireless communication device (Figure 9 step S900 and paragraphs 0112-0113 – teaches MRTT frame 920 also allocates a portion of the TXOP and assigns a second channel (CH2) to another STA, such as STA 913),
wherein the second shared duration of the TXOP is the same as the first shared duration of the TXOP and the one or more second shared channels are not overlapped with the one or more first shared channels (Figure 9 and paragraphs 0112-0113 – teaches the MRTT frame enables multiple STAs to communicate “simultaneously in different channels” during the allocated time [0112], for example by assigning a first channel (CH1) and a second channel (CH2) to respective STAs [0113].
Regarding Claim 3, Erkucuk discloses the wireless communication device of claim 2 (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device),
wherein the wireless communication device is a non-AP station which is associated with the sharing AP station, and the another wireless communication device is an AP station (Figure 1 and paragraph 0038 and Figure 9 and paragraph 0112 – teaches that the first device is a non-AP station, paragraph [0038] further defines an access point as a station (“AP STA”)).
Regarding Claim 4, Erkucuk discloses the wireless communication device of claim 2 (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device),
wherein the wireless communication device is an AP station, and the another wireless communication device is a non-AP station which is associated with the sharing AP station (Figure 1 steps S102, S112-1, S112-2 and paragraphs 0038, 0045 and Figure 9 and paragraph 0112 – teaches the another wireless communication device is a non-AP station associated with the sharing AP [0038, 0112]. While Erkucuk’s Figure 9 embodiment shows allocating resources to a first non-AP station, paragraph [0038] further defines an access point as a station (“AP STA”).
Regarding Claim 5, Erkucuk discloses the wireless communication device of claim 2 (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device),
wherein the wireless communication device is a first non-AP station which is associated with the sharing AP station, and the another wireless communication device is a second non-AP station which is associated with the sharing AP station (Figure 1 and paragraph 0038 and Figure 9 and paragraph 0112 – teaches the allocated devices are STAs, explicitly defined as non-AP stations [0038], which are associated with the AP [0112]).
Regarding Claim 6, Erkucuk discloses the wireless communication device of claim 2 (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device),
wherein the wireless communication device is a first AP station, and the another wireless communication device is a second AP station (Figure 1 and paragraph 0038 and Figure 9 and paragraph 0112 – teaches that the devices receiving the resource allocation are stations [0038, 0112]. While Erkucuk’s Figure 9 embodiment shows allocating resources to non-AP stations, paragraph [0038] further defines an access point as a station (“AP STA”).
Regarding Claim 7, Erkucuk discloses the wireless communication device of claim 1 (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device),
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to cause (Figure 2 steps S210 and S220 and paragraph 0046 – teaches the communication device 210 may comprise at least one processor 220): transmitting a response frame in response to the TXOP allocation frame using the one or more first shared channels (Figure 9 and paragraph 0114 – teaches a STA such as STA 911 may transmit a CTS frame 921 based on (e.g., in the response to) MRTT frame 920).
Regarding Claim 12, Erkucuk discloses the wireless communication device of Claim 1 (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device),
wherein the wireless communication device is a non-AP station and wherein performing the wireless communication comprises: performing wireless communication with the sharing AP station using the one or more first shared channels in the first shared duration of the TXOP. (Figure 1 and paragraph 0038 – teaches the first device is a station, explicitly defined as a “non-AP station (STA or non-AP STA)” [0038]; Figure 9 and paragraphs 0112-0113 – teaches that STAs 911, 912, 913, and 914 may be associated with AP 910, and are configured to communicate with the sharing AP station [0112]).
Regarding Claim 13, Erkucuk discloses the wireless communication device of claim 1 (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device),
wherein the wireless communication device is an AP station, and wherein performing the wireless communication comprises: performing wireless communication with one or more associated non-AP stations using the one or more first shared channels in the first shared duration of the TXOP (Figure 1 and paragraph 0038 – explicitly defined as a “station (STA or non-AP STA)” [0038]; Figure 9 and paragraphs 0112-0113 – teaches a first AP station (AP or AP STA) may be configured to communicate with non-AP STAs (STA or non-AP STA) [0113]. Erkucuk further teaches that STAS 911, 912, 913, and 914 may be associated with AP 910 [0112].
Regarding Claim 14, Erkucuk discloses the wireless communication device of claim 1 (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device),
wherein the wireless communication device is a non-AP station, and wherein performing the wireless communication comprises: performing peer-to-peer wireless communication with one or more non-AP stations using the one or more first shared channels in the first shared duration of the TXOP (Figure 1 and paragraph 0038 – explicitly defined as a “station (STA or non-AP STA)” [0038]; Figure 9 and paragraphs 0015 and 0114 – teaches an FDMA based TXS procedure for supporting multiple users with dedicated peer-to-peer (P2P) links [0015], specifically showing STA 911 transmitting a PPDU 922 to STA 912 [0114]).
Regarding Claim 15, Erkucuk discloses an access point (AP) station for facilitating wireless communication (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device) comprising processing circuitry configured to cause:
acquiring a transmission opportunity (TXOP) for a plurality of channels; (Figure 9 and paragraph 0112 – teaches AP 910 obtains a TXOP), and
transmitting a TXOP allocation frame including information indicating a first shared duration of the TXOP and one or more first shared channels which the AP station allocates to a first wireless communication device (Figure 9 and paragraphs 0112-0113 – teaches AP 910 may transmit a MRTT frame 920 to allocate a portion of an obtained TXOP [0112] and assigning a first channel (CH1) to STA 911 [0113]),
wherein the first shared duration of the TXOP is within a duration of the TXOP acquired by the AP station and the one or more first shared channels are a subset of the plurality of channels for which the AP station acquired the TXOP (Figure 9 and paragraphs 0112-0113 – teaches the MRTT frame 920 allocates a portion of the obtained TXOP to STAs [0112], and assigns specific individual channels, such as CH1, out of the available channels for transmission [0113]),
wherein the TXOP allocation frame enables the first wireless communication device to perform wireless communication using the one or more first shared channels in the first shared duration of the TXOP (Figure 9 and paragraph 0113 – teaches the MRTT frame 920 assigns the channel for transmission of a respective PPDU by the STA).
Regarding Claim 16, Erkucuk discloses the AP station of claim 15,
wherein the TXOP allocation frame further includes information indicating a second shared duration of the TXOP and one or more second shared channels which the AP station allocates to a second wireless communication device (Figure 9 step S900 and paragraphs 0112-0113 – teaches MRTT frame 920 also allocates a portion of the TXOP and assigns a second channel (CH2) to a second STA, such as STA 913),
wherein the second shared duration of the TXOP is the same as the first shared duration of the TXOP and the one or more second shared channels are not overlapped with the one or more first shared channels (Figure 9 and paragraph 0112 – teaches the MRTT frame enables multiple STAs to communicate “simultaneously in different channels” during the time allocated by MRTT frame 920).
Regarding Claim 17, Erkucuk discloses the AP station of Claim 15,
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to cause (Figure 2 steps S210 and S220 and paragraph 0046 – teaches the communication device 210 may comprise at least one processor 220):
receiving, from the first wireless communications device, a response frame in response to the TXOP allocation frame using the one or more first shared channels (Figure 9 and paragraph 0114 – teaches AP 910 receives a CTS frame 921 from a STA such as STA911 based (e.g., in response to) MRTT frame 920).
Regarding Claim 18, Erkucuk discloses the AP station of claim 15, further comprising: transmitting a control frame through the plurality of channels by the AP station after the
AP station acquires the TXOP; and receiving a response frame from the first wireless communication device through one or more idle channels of the first wireless communication device in response to the control frame, wherein the one or more first shared channels is all or a subset of the one or more idle channels (Figure 9 and paragraphs 0109 and 0111 – teaches using a control frame such as an “MU-RTS TXS trigger frame,” and receiving a response frame such as a “CTS frame 821,” preceding data transmission).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 8-10 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. as being unpatentable over Erkucuk et al (United States Patent Application Publication 2024/0107508), hereinafter Erkucuk in view of IEEE (IEEE 802.11ax-2021), hereinafter IEEE.
Regarding Claim 8, Erkucuk discloses the wireless communication device of claim 1 (Figure 12 step S1200 and paragraph 0126 – shows an example of a computing device),
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to cause (Figure 2 steps S210 and S220 and paragraph 0046 – teaches the communication device 210 may comprise at least one processor 220).
Erkucuk does not teach receiving a control frame, wherein the control frame is transmitted through the plurality of channels by the sharing AP station after the sharing AP station acquires the TXOP; determining one or more idle channels among the plurality of channels; and transmitting a response frame through the one or more idle channels in response to the control frame, wherein the one or more first shared channels is all or a subset of the one or more idle channels.
However, IEEE teaches:
receiving a control frame, wherein the control frame is transmitted through the plurality of channels by the sharing AP station after the sharing AP station acquires the TXOP; determining one or more idle channels among the plurality of channels; and transmitting a response frame through the one or more idle channels in response to the control frame (IEEE 802.11ax-2021, Clause 26.2.6.3 – teaches that if a non-AP STA receives an MU-RTS Trigger frame (control frame), it shall commence transmission of a CTS frame response through channels where the UL MU CS condition indicates that the medium is idle);
wherein the one or more first shared channels is all or a subset of the one or more idle channels (IEEE Std 802.11ax-2021 at Clause 26.2.6.2 – teaches the receipt of a CTS frame permits the frame exchange sequence to continue on those channels). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the idle channel determination and CTS transmission protocols of IEEE Std 802.11ax-2021 into the triggered TXOP sharing procedure of Erkucuk. The rationale for this combination is to ensure that the assigned channels are actually clear and available before the stations begin transmitting their responses, thereby improving overall network reliability and throughput.
Regarding Claim 9, the combined references disclose the wireless communication device of claim 8,
wherein the response frame includes buffer status information of the wireless communication device.
As mapped in Claim 8, the response frame comprises a clear to send (CTS) frame. While the primary embodiment does not explicitly state that the CTS frame includes the buffer information, the primary reference (Erkucuk) explicitly teaches elsewhere that a STA transmits buffer status information to the AP to facilitate uplink operations by appending an HT control field containing a buffer status report (BSR) to a MAC frame (Figure 4 and paragraphs 0010, 0061, and 0081 – regarding QoS null frames).
Because a CTS frame is a type of MAC frame, and because Erkucuk is the primary reference, it would have been an obvious modification to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the CTS frame to include the HT control field containing the buffer status information, as taught by Erkucuk’s own disclosure. This arrangement allows the system to combine channel-clearing and buffer reporting into a single transmission, thereby reducing MAC-layer overhead.
Regarding Claim 10, the combined references disclose the wireless communication device of Claim 8,
wherein multi-user request to send (MU- RTS) frames are transmitted on duplicate mode through the plurality of channels as the control frame, and the clear to send (CTS) frame is transmitted on duplicate mode through the one or more idle channels as the response frame (IEEE Std 802.11ax-2021 at Clauses 26.2.6.2, 26.2.6.3, and Figure 26.3 – teaches that both the MU-RTS trigger frame and the resulting CTS frame response are carried in a non-HT duplicate PPDU across the respective channels).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transmit the MU-RTS and CTS frames in duplicate mode, as taught by IEEE. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to increase the reliability of the MU-RTS/CTS control frame exchange, because transmitting in duplicate mode ensures these critical frames are reliably decoded by all stations across the various channels, which minimizes collisions and ensures standard compliance.
Regarding Claim 19, the combined references disclose the AP station of claim 18,
as mapped in Claim 18, the response frame comprises a clear to send (CTS) frame sent in response to the MU-RTS control frame. While Erkucuk does not explicitly state in the primary sharing embodiment that the CTS frame includes the buffer status information, Erkucuk explicitly teaches elsewhere that a STA transmits buffer status information to the AP to facilitate uplink operations. Specifically, the reference teaches that an HT control field appended to a MAC frame may comprise a buffer status report (BSR) control subfield containing this buffer information (Figure 4 and paragraphs 0010, 0061, and 0081 – regarding QoS null frames).
Because a CTS frame is a type of MAC frame, it would have been an obvious modification to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the CTS frame of Erkucuk to additionally include the HT control field containing the buffer status information, as taught by Erkucuk’s own disclosure. This arrangement optimizes network efficiency and reduces MAC-layer overhead by combining channel-clearing and buffer reporting into a single transmission, thereby allowing the AP to immediately and accurately allocate uplink resources on the cleared channels without requiring the STA to send a separate buffer-reporting frame.
Regarding Claim 20, the combined references disclose the AP station of claim 18,
wherein multi-user request to send (MU-RTS) frames are transmitted on duplicate mode through the plurality of channels as the control frame, and the clear to send (CTS) frame is transmitted on duplicate mode through the one or more idle channels as the response frame.
Erkucuk explicitly teaches that the control frame comprises a multi-user request to send (MU-RTS) frame and the response frame comprises a clear to send (CTS) frame (Paragraphs 0109 and 0111 – teaches a MU-RTS TXS trigger frame and a CTS frame 821 used preceding data transmission).
While Erkucuk does not explicitly state that the MU-RTS and CTS frames are transmitted in “duplicate mode” across the respective plurality of channels and idle channels, it is well known in the art of IEEE 802.11 wireless communications that when operating across a wideband channel (a plurality of bonded channels), control frames are transmitted in duplicate mode (e.g., non-HT duplicate format). In standard duplicate mode operation, the identical 20 MHz control or response frame is replicated and transmitted simultaneously across each of the individual 20 MHz subchannels that make up the operating bandwidth.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the AP station of Erkucuk to transmit the MU-RTS and CTS frames in duplicate mode, as taught by the IEEE standard. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to ensure that all stations operating on any of the constituent sub-channels (including legacy devices unable to decode wideband transmission) can successfully receive and decode the channel-clearing frames, allowing them to properly read the duration information and set their Network Allocation Vectors (NAVs) to prevent collisions.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Erkucuk et al (United States Patent Application Publication 2024/0107508), hereinafter Erkucuk in view of Xin et al (United States Patent Application Publication 2022/0174732), hereinafter Xin.
The combined references disclose the wireless communication device of Claim 1,
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to cause: transmitting, to the sharing AP station, a frame to return the first shared duration of the TXOP and the one or more first shared channels.
Erkucuk does not teach the device transmitting a frame to return the unused duration of the shared TXOP to the AP. However, in an analogous art, Xin discloses this. Specifically, Xin discloses, at paragraph 0086 and Figure 6, it is determined if the AP has finished before the shared TXOP ends. If the condition is not met, then processing ends. Otherwise, with the condition met, is shares 218 the TXOP with, or returns the TXOP back to, the non-AP STA, before processing ends.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the station of Erkucuk to transmit to CF-End frame to the AP to return the unused TXOP duration, as taught by Xin. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to maximize network efficiency by allowing the AP to immediately reallocate the unused channel resources to other stations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Serhat Erkucuk et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2024/0107508) discloses an access point (AP) may communicate with one or more computing devices (e.g., wireless devices and/or stations (STAs) (paragraph 0114).
Liangxiao Xin et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2022/0053560) discloses a device transmitting a frame to return the unused duration of the shared TXOP to the AP (Paragraph 0086 and Figure 6).
Xiandong Dong et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2023/0388981) discloses a method for coordinating Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) sensing resources is performed by a wireless access point (AP) (paragraph 0083).
Shin Horgng Wong et al (United States Patent 11,778,648) discloses a method of communicating data in a telecommunications system comprising a base station and a plurality of terminals operable to communicate data to and from the base station (Col. 4, ll. 20-50).
IEEE 802.11ax-2021 (Amendment to IEEE Std 802.11‐2020) discloses an AP may transmit an MU-RTS Trigger frame to solicit simultaneous CTS frame responses from one or more non-AP STAs (see section 26.2.6.1).
Nunez et al ("TXOP sharing with Coordinated Spatial Reuse in Multi-AP Cooperative IEEE 802.11be WLANs") discloses transmit opportunity (TXOP) sharing between coordinated access points (APs) may contribute to alleviating inter-AP contention, hence increasing the overall network throughput (see page 1).
Authors et. al.: Disclosed Without Attribution ("Coordination of Mixed APs and STAs") discloses the coordination of mixed APs and STAs (see page 4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DENNIS ALBERT WESTBROOKS II whose telephone number is (571)270-7711. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m..
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, Nicholas Jensen can be reached at 571-270-7711. 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.
/DENNIS ALBERT WESTBROOKS II/Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/NICHOLAS A JENSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights