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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment, filed August 07, 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims have been fully considered. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented below by introducing the new reference of Zhu et al (US 2019/0132762).
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, “a null data packet (NDP) announcement frame to a subset of the wireless stations that are able to communicate with a wireless participator access point (PAP) and to the wireless PAP, wherein…” in lines 4 – 6 could be corrected to “a null data packet (NDP) announcement frame to a subset of the wireless stations that are able to communicate with a wireless participator access point (PAP) wherein…”. Appropriate correction is required. The same objection applies to claims 8 and 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4, 11, 18 and 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites “wherein the NDP announcement frame comprises first information indicating whether the wireless initiator access point sends the NDP frame to the wireless stations or second information indicating whether the wireless PAP sends the NDP frame to the wireless stations”. It is not clear whether the NDP announcement frame is configured to trigger the wireless PAP rather than the wireless initiator access point to send an NDP frame to the wireless stations as recited in claim 1 or whether the NDP announcement frame can also trigger or indicate the wireless initiator access point to send the NDP frame to the wireless stations as recited in claim 4? The claim is vague and indefinite. The same rejection applies to claims 11 and 18.
Claim 23 recites of “wherein the communication interface is further configured to send a triggering signal to the wireless PAP via an IP backbone network to trigger the wireless PAP to send the NDP frame to the wireless stations.” It is not clear whether the triggering signal as recited in claim 23 or the NDPA frame as recited in claim 1 would trigger the wireless PAP to send the NDP frame to the wireless stations? Therefore, the claim is indefinite.
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.
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, 3 – 6, 8, 10 – 13, 15, 17 – 20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al (US 2023/0141486) in view of Zhu et al (US 2019/0132762) and further in view of Oteri et al (US 2021/0385779).
Re claims 1 and 8, Huang teaches of a wireless initiator access point (sharing AP, Fig.10 and Fig.3A), comprising: a communication interface (Fig.3A) configured to: send a null data packet (NDP) announcement frame (NDPA, #1010, Fig.10) to wireless stations (STA 1, STA 2, Fig.10) and a wireless participator access point (PAP) (Shared AP, Fig.10) (a sharing AP 1002 transmits an EHT NDP Announcement frame 1010 to shared AP(s) that participate into the sounding procedure 1000 and intended STAs such as STA1 1006 and STA2 1008., Paragraph 0146), wherein the wireless stations are associated with the wireless initiator access point (all intended STAs such as STA1 1006 and STA2 1008, Paragraphs 0146 – 0147, where the intended STAs in the initial NDPA are associated with the sharing AP), and wherein the NDP announcement frame is configured to trigger the wireless PAP to send an NDP frame to the wireless stations (#1016, Fig.10, Upon transmission of the EHT NDP Announcement frame 1010, a SIFS 1011 may take effect, and at 1012, all APs engaged in the sounding procedure 1000 such as sharing AP 1002 and shared AP 1004 may simultaneously transmit respective EHT Sounding NDPs 1014, 1016 to all intended STAs such as STA1 1006 and STA2 1008, Paragraph 0147); receive a plurality of compressed beamforming frames from the wireless stations (#1024, #1026, Fig.10 in response to the NDP announcement frame (The EHT NDP Announcement frame 1010 may indicate requested sounding feedback parameters for each pair of STA and AP among sharing AP 1002, shared AP 1004 and intended STAs 1006, 1008. The requested sounding feedback parameters for each AP-STA pair may comprise AP dependent sounding feedback parameters such as feedback bandwidth and the number of columns of compressed beamforming feedback matrix, Paragraph 0146). However, Huang does not specifically teach of wireless initiator access point to request access point (AP) beacon information from wireless stations; sending, based on the AP beacon information, the NDP announcement frame to a subset of the wireless stations. Huang does not specifically teach of wherein the NDP announcement frame is configured to trigger the wireless PAP rather than the wireless initiator access point to send an NDP frame to the wireless stations.
Zhu teaches of a wireless initiator access point (Master AP, #502, Fig.5), comprising: a communication interface configured to: send a null data packet (NDP) announcement frame (NDPA, Fig.5) to a wireless station (STA1, #508, Fig.5) that are able to communicate with a wireless participator access point (PAP) (Slave AP1, #504, Fig.5), wherein the wireless station is associated with the wireless initiator access point (Fig.5), and wherein the NDP announcement frame is configured to trigger the wireless PAP rather than the wireless initiator access point to send an NDP frame to the wireless station (NDP only by Slave AP1, Fig.5) (Paragraphs 0127 – 0128); receive a CSI feedback from the wireless station in response to the NDP announcement frame (Fig.5).
Oteri teaches of a communication interface configured to send the NDP announcement frame to the wireless stations by: requesting access point (AP) beacon information from the wireless stations (beacon, #1305, Fig.13); and sending, based on the AP beacon information (beacon, #1305, Fig.13), the NDP announcement frame to the wireless stations (NDPA, Fig.13).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the NDP announcement frame configured to trigger the wireless PAP rather than the wireless initiator access point to send an NDP frame to the wireless stations to reduce channel overhead. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have sent, based on the AP beacon information the NDP announcement frame to the wireless stations for efficient multiple AP transmission.
Re claim 15, Huang, Zhu and Oteri teach of a chip (chip, Paragraph 0171 of Huang) applied to a wireless initiator access point and comprising: a communication interface configured to: request access point (AP) beacon information from wireless stations; send, based on the AP beacon information, a null data packet (NDP) announcement frame to a subset of the wireless stations that are able to communicate with a wireless participator access point (PAP) and to the wireless PAP, wherein the wireless stations are associated with the wireless initiator access point, and wherein the NDP announcement frame is for triggering the wireless PAP rather than the wireless initiator access point to send an NDP frame to the wireless stations; receive a plurality of compressed beamforming frames from the subset of the wireless stations in response to the NDP announcement frame. (see claim 1).
Re claims 3, 10 and 17, Huang, Zhu and Oteri teach all the limitations of claims 1, 8 and 15 as well as Oteri teaches of forwarding frames to the wireless PAP via an Internet Protocol (IP) backbone network (Paragraphs 0165, #110, Fig.1A).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have forwarded the compressed beamforming frames to the wireless PAP via an Internet Protocol (IP) backbone network for reliable communication with efficient coordination.
Re claims 4, 11 and 18, Huang, Zhu and Oteri teach all the limitations of claims 1, 8 and 15 as well as Zhu teaches of the NDP announcement frame comprises first information indicating whether the wireless initiator access point sends the NDP frame to the wireless stations or second information indicating whether the wireless PAP sends the NDP frame to the wireless stations (NDP by Slave AP1, Fig.5) (Paragraphs 0127 – 0128).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the NDP announcement frame comprise information indicating the wireless PAP sending the NDP frame to the wireless stations to reduce channel overhead.
Re claims 5, 12 and 19, Huang teaches of wherein the communication interface is further configured to operate in accordance with an 802.11 wireless local area network (WLAN) standard or an evolution of the 802.11 WLAN standard (Paragraphs 0002 – 0003 and 0048 – 0049).
Re claims 6, 13 and 20, Huang teaches of wherein the communication interface is further configured to determine a precoding configuration based on the compressed beamforming frames (Paragraph 0067).
Re claim 23, Huang, Zhu and Oteri teach all the limitations of claim 1 as well as Zhu teaches of wherein the communication interface is further configured to send a triggering signal to the wireless PAP to trigger the wireless PAP to send the NDP frame to the wireless stations (Paragraphs 0127 – 0128). Oteri further teaches of the access points communicating via an IP backbone (Paragraphs 0165, #110, Fig.1A).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have sent the trigger signal to the wireless PAP via an Internet Protocol (IP) backbone network to provide high-speed and reliable communication.
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang, Zhu and Oteri in view of Park et al (US 2022/0140987).
Re claims 7 and 14, Huang, Zhu and Oteri teach all the limitations of claims 6 and 13 as well as Huang teaches of wherein the precoding configuration comprises a steering matrix (steering matrix, Paragraph 0067). However, Huang, Zhu and Oteri do not specifically teach of wherein the communication interface is further configured to null one or more of the wireless stations based on the steering matrix.
Park teaches of a communication interface is further configured to null one or more of the wireless stations based on the steering matrix (Paragraphs 0219 – 0226, Fig.22).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have nulled one or more of the wireless stations based on the steering matrix for interference avoidance.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang, Zhu and Oteri in view of Park et al (US 2023/0328622) (Park(2)).
Re claim 21, Huang, Zhu and Oteri teach all the limitations of claim 1, except of wherein the communication interface is further configured to request an AP Beacon measurement from the wireless stations to determine which of the wireless stations hear the wireless PAP.
Park teaches of wherein the communication interface is further configured to request an AP Beacon measurement from the wireless stations to determine which of the wireless stations hear the wireless PAP (Paragraphs 0324, 0334 and 0376 – 0377).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have requested an AP Beacon measurement from the wireless stations to determine which of the wireless stations hear the wireless PAP so as to perform efficient communication.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang, Zhu and Oteri in view of Li et al (US 2020/0403680).
Re claim 22, Huang, Zhu and Oteri teach all the limitations of claim 1, except of wherein the NDP announcement frame includes an identifier of the wireless PAP to indicate that the wireless PAP is to send the NDP frame.
Li teaches of wherein the NDP announcement frame includes an identifier of the wireless PAP to indicate that the wireless PAP is to send the NDP frame (Paragraph 0122).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the NDP announcement frame include an identifier of the wireless PAP to indicate that the wireless PAP is to send the NDP frame by allocating a frequency/time for efficient NDP transmission.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARISTOCRATIS FOTAKIS whose telephone number is (571)270-1206. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sam K Ahn can be reached at (571) 272-3044. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ARISTOCRATIS FOTAKIS/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
