DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to amendment filed on September 8th, 2026.
Claims 1~28 are examined.
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 arguments with respect to claim(s) 1~28 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 6, 9, 13, 15, 17, 18, 21, and 25~28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron et al. hereinafter Baron (WO 2025099056) in view of Nezou et al. hereinafter Nezou (WO 2025061600).
Regarding Claim 1,
Baron taught a method of generating a synthetic network, the method comprising:
providing, by an access point (AP), a first communication indicating that the AP supports a randomized Media Access Control (MAC) address rotation management protocol (Pg. 14: 15~21, AP station 105 manages a set of stations that together organize their accesses to the wireless medium for communication purposes; Pg. 2:25~Pg.3: 1~3, when the RCM mechanism is operated in the non-AP station, the MAC address of the non-AP station is randomly changed);
establishing a wireless communications link between the AP and a wireless station, wherein establishing the wireless communications link comprises assigning the wireless station to an Enhanced Data Privacy (EDP) group, the EDP group associated with timing information for rotating wireless frame anonymization parameters at epoch transitions (Pg. 5: 3~24, group EDP Epoch is a time window in which each non-AP MLD of a set of non- AP MLDs applies a set of EDP parameters that is valid for the duration of that Group EDP Epoch;
generating, by the AP, a list of N association identifiers (AIDs) for the wireless station, each of the N AIDs to be used in a corresponding epoch of N epochs associated with the EDP group (Pg. 5: 19~24, EDP aka Frame Anonymization parameters (CPE) are used to enhance the data privacy by anonymizing the frame exchanges; Pg. 19: 5~7, the AP station computes the next values of the CPE parameters for the non-AP station associated with this Individual Epoch start Time; Pg. 8: 22~25, the at least one CPE parameter may comprise a MAC address or an Association Identifier, AID; Pg. 12: 19~24, instants of change of CPE parameters define successive usage periods (indexed 0, 1 , ... , n, n+1 , etc.), referred to as ‘Epoch’, during each of which given values of the CPE parameters (e.g., a MAC address) are to be used); and
maintaining, by the AP, the wireless communications link with the wireless station based at least in part on the timing information for randomized MAC address rotation for the EDP group, and including using each AID in the list of N AIDs during corresponding epochs (Pg. 9: 33~35, both AP and non-AP STA can compute at any time, CPE parameters. This includes CPE parameters currently in use, previous CPE parameters or even future CPE parameters and associated usage time; Fig. 2A, associated description).
Baron did not specifically teach transmitting, by the AP, a protected wireless frame to the wireless station, the protected wireless frame including information indicating the list of N AIDs generated by the AP for the wireless station.
Nezou taught transmitting, by the AP, a protected wireless frame to the wireless station, the protected wireless frame including information indicating the list of N AIDs generated by the AP for the wireless station (Pg. 9:19~23, privacy parameters or PE parameters including: the AID or AID12 which is an identifier provided by the AP to the non-AF station registering to it; Pg. 21, 13~38, Fig. 9b, during transition period of the EPOCH event EPOCH_G1 (n) 920, the obfuscation procedure is performed only on the group G1 of non-AP stations, hence having enough AID values available for them. Indeed, in this example of 600 stations per group, 1800 AID12 values are used (600 x 2 for group G1 and 600 for group G2) and 207 AID12 values remain available. Next, during transition period of the EPOCH event EPOCH_G2(n) 930, the obfuscation procedure is performed only on the group G2 of non-AP stations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made, to combine, Nezou’s teaching of limitations with the teachings of Baron, because the combination would overcome the synchronization issue while reducing the constraints on the available values required to perform the obfuscation procedure for the non-AP stations (Pg. 11:22~24).
Regarding Claim 3,
Baron taught wherein each AID in the list of N AIDs is to be used in a corresponding epoch of a set of future, consecutive epochs (Pg. 9:33~35, the non-AP STA and AP compute at once both future Epoch start time, and associated CPE params for the non- AP STA).
Regarding Claim 5,
Baron taught further comprising transmitting one or more wireless frames between the AP and the wireless station to negotiate the EDP group the EDP group assigned to the wireless station (Pg. 37:29~34, if the requester station wants to join an already created Group EDP Sequence, the Starting Time is set to 0. In response to the EDP Epoch Request frame 950, the requester station may receive from the requester station an EDP Epoch Response frame 960 that may comprise an agreement or an alternative proposal for the EDP Epoch sequence creation, as described above. For EDP Epoch negotiation, the usage of dedicated protected Action frames during an EDP Epoch negotiation process allows to negotiate the EDP Epoch parameter set between a non-AP MLD and its associated AP MLD).
Regarding Claim 6,
Baron taught wherein the transmitting one or more wireless frames between the AP and the wireless station to negotiate the EDP group comprises: receiving, by the AP, one or more wireless frames including time scheduling information for randomized MAC address information requested by the wireless station; and transmitting, by the AP, a response to the one or more wireless frames indicating acceptance of the time scheduling information requested by the wireless station (Pg. 37:29~34, if the requester station wants to join an already created Group EDP Sequence, the Starting Time is set to 0. In response to the EDP Epoch Request frame 950, the requester station may receive from the requester station an EDP Epoch Response frame 960 that may comprise an agreement or an alternative proposal for the EDP Epoch sequence creation, as described above. For EDP Epoch negotiation, the usage of dedicated protected Action frames during an EDP Epoch negotiation process allows to negotiate the EDP Epoch parameter set between a non-AP MLD and its associated AP MLD).
Regarding Claim 9,
Baron taught wherein the protected wireless frame indicating the list of N AIDs is an encrypted wireless action frame (Pg. 15:16~17, epoch parameters can be sent in an encrypted IE, or encrypted frame as described with reference to Figures 7b to 7g).
Regarding Claim 26,
Baron-Nezou taught wherein N is greater than or equal to 2 (Pg. 5:31~33). The rationale to combine as discussed in claim 4, applies here as well.
Regarding Claims 13, 15, 17, 18, 21, 27 and 28, the claims are similar in scope to claims 1, 3, 5, 6, and 9 and therefore, rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 2 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron and Nezou in view of Dong (US 2023/0164806).
Regarding Claims 2 and 14,
Baron-Nezou-Dong taught wherein the AIDs in the list of N AIDs is assigned from a preexisting range of AIDs [¶34, in the access point device, an AID table is stored. Each AID is bound with a MAC address of its corresponding terminal. A range of AID is 0-2007, such that one AP may be associated with 2007 nodes at most in the protocol].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made, to combine, Dong’s teaching of limitations with the teachings of Baron and Nezou, because the combination would improve a transmission efficiency [¶3].
Claims 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 16, 19, 20, 23, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron and Nezou in view of Kneckt et al. hereinafter Kneckt (US 2024/0406906).
Regarding Claim 4,
Baron-Nezou-Kneckt taught wherein each AID in the list of N AIDs is unique to the wireless station during an epoch corresponding to the AID [¶23, adjacent AIDs in the predefined set of AIDs may be unique relative to corresponding AIDs in another predefined set of AIDs provided by the electronic device].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made, to combine, Kneckt’s teaching of limitations with the teachings of Baron and Nezou, because the combination protects the privacy of the associated station(s) from eavesdroppers [¶99].
Regarding Claim 7,
Baron taught further comprising, before an end of the N epochs: generating, by the AP, a second list of N association identifiers (AIDs) for the wireless station, each of the N AIDs to be used in a corresponding second epoch of N second epochs associated with the EDP group; and transmitting, to the wireless station in a second protected wireless frame, information indicating the second list of N AIDs for the wireless station [claim 19]. The rationale to combine as discussed in claim 4, applies here as well.
Regarding Claim 8,
Baron-Nezou-Kneckt taught wherein the list of N AIDs comprises a first AID as a first entry in the list, and a delta value for a second entry in the list of N AIDs, the delta value expressing a difference between the first entry in the list and the second entry [¶150, the associated stations change their AID values at different times from each other. Moreover, as noted previously, the access point may track the AID values to avoid collisions. In some embodiments, adjacent AID values in a set or group of AID values may be unique among associated stations, so that a new AID value or the previous AID value do not have collisions with the AID value(s) of other stations]. The rationale to combine as discussed in claim 4, applies here as well.
Regarding Claim 11,
Baron-Nezou-Kneckt taught further comprising receiving, by the AP, a wireless frame indicating a request for a new list of AIDs [¶98, access point may provide a new AID, e.g., every 10 min., or may provide a set of AIDs for subsequent use]. The rationale to combine as discussed in claim 4, applies here as well.
Regarding Claim 12,
Baron-Nezou-Kneckt taught wherein the wireless frame indicating the request for a new list of AIDs further identifies one or more epochs corresponding to the new list of AIDs [Kneckt: ¶98, access point may provide a new AID, e.g., every 10 min., or may provide a set of AIDs for subsequent use]; [Baron: (Pg. 5: 19~24)]. The rationale to combine as discussed in claim 11, applies here as well.
Regarding Claims 16, 19, 20, 23, and 24, the claims are similar in scope to claims 4, 7, 8, 11, and 12 and therefore, rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 10 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron and Nezou in view of Kandagadla et al. hereinafter Kandagadla (US 2017/0064760).
Regarding Claims 10 and 22,
Baron-Nezou-Kandagadla taught further comprising protected wireless frame indicating the list of N AIDs is an Extensible Authentication Protocol over LAN (EAPoL) M4 message [¶49, intercept EAPoL frames transmitted by the AP (e.g., which may include the MAC address and/or AID for the STA); ¶6].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made, to combine, Kandagadla’s teaching of limitations with the teachings of Baron and Nezou, because the combination would establish a wireless connection and/or initiate secure communications with the AP [¶43].
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 HEE SOO KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3229. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicholas Taylor can be reached on (571) 272-3889. 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.
/HEE SOO KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
