UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/790,875
`
`10/23/2017
`
`LEI HUANG
`
`731156.659C1
`
`7955
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panason1e
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`MERED' HABTE
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2474
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`03/21/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`US PTOeACtion @ SeedIP .Com
`
`pairlinkdktg @ seedip .eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`0/7709 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/790,875
`Examiner
`HABTE MERED
`
`Applicant(s)
`HUANG et al.
`Art Unit
`2474
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 10/23/2017.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`1—19 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabie. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 10/23/2017 is/are: a)[:] accepted or b). objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a). All
`
`b)D Some**
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190317
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
`
`under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`The preliminary amendment filed on 06/04/2018 has been entered.
`
`Claims 1-19 are pending of which claims 1, 10 and 19 are independent and
`
`amended.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`The IDS submitted on 10/23/2017 is being considered.
`
`Applicant has claimed foreign priority and the earliest priority of 07/01/2015 fully
`
`supports the independent claims but does not support some of the embodiments
`
`discussed in the specification as some figures and corresponding discussions are
`
`missing.
`
`Internet Communications
`
`6.
`
`Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet
`
`communications (PTO/SB/439,
`
` sit) in the instant patent
`
`application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The
`
`authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written
`
`authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods o_nly: (1) Central Fax
`
`which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal
`
`mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is
`
`the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into
`
`the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 3
`
`submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be
`
`accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
`
`Drawings
`
`Figures 1-6 are prior art per applicant’s specification as detailed in paragraph 11
`
`and should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is
`
`old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37
`
`CFR 1.121 (d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the
`
`application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the
`
`page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing
`
`figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified
`
`and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to
`
`the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
`
`Examiner’s Note
`
`7.
`
`Each of the independent claims recites a start tone index of one RU (Resource
`
`Units) and compares to an end tone of another RU (Resource Units) and per applicant’s
`
`disclosure applicant is trying to equate “start index tone” and “end index tone” to the
`
`disclosed assignment index of the RUs in the claimed invention. However looking at
`
`Figs. 1-6 disclosed as prior art show the RUs lined up on a tone index in an increasing
`
`manner and the starting tone index of a first RU is definitely less than the ending tone
`
`index of the adjacent RU and all independent claims can be anticipated using the
`
`admitted prior art and based on the above interpretation. However the examiner has
`
`provided below a rejection based on the applicant indicated novelty of using assignment
`
`index for each RU in an increasing order.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 4
`
`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 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.
`
`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.
`
`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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
`
`USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 5
`
`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.
`
`Claim 1, 2, , 4-8, 10, 11, 13-17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as
`
`being unpatentable over Ghosh et al (US 2016/0143005 A1) in view of Choi et al (US
`
`2017/0201357 A1 ).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Ghosh discloses a transmission apparatus (Fig.1 Master
`
`Station /AP 102) comprising:
`
`a signal generator (See paragraphs 18 and 66 a processor or circuitry to
`
`generate and transmit Resource Unit (RU) allocation message sent by AP 102)
`
`which, in operation, generates a transmission signal (i.e. AP 102 in Fig. 3 step 315
`
`Resource Allocation Message is sent as detailed in paragraph 37) that includes a
`
`legacy preamble (See paragraph 16 where every HEW packet includes a legacy
`
`signal field (L-SIG)), and a non-legacy preamble (i.e. See Paragraph 16 for the non-
`
`legacy devices like High Efficiency devices like Applicant’s invention has HE-
`
`preamble containing two signal fields) , wherein the non-legacy preamble comprises
`
`a first signal field(i.e. Paragraph 16 HE-SIG) and a second signal field(i.e. Paragraph
`
`16 HE-LTF or HE-SIG B )
`
`, the second signal field (i.e. HE-SIG B paragraphs 37-38
`
`and Fig. 4) including a resource assignment subfield that indicates a plurality of
`
`resource unit (RU) assignments (See Fig. 4 sub-channel allocation for each HEW
`
`station as detailed in paragraph 46 - see Fig. 4 where resource unit allocation for
`
`HEW station 104 shown as 435 and 445) in a frequency domain (i.e. frequency
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 6
`
`channel see paragraphs 45 and 51 in particular but also paragraphs 74-78) and a
`
`plurality of user-specific subfields (See Fig. 4 and paragraph 46), each carrying per-
`
`user allocation information (Fig.4 different HEW station allocations 425, 435, 445
`
`etc...) and wherein an equal number of one or more RUs are respectively allocated to
`
`the plurality of RU assignments (See paragraph 53 where the frequency resource
`
`units are equally allocated among 9 HEW stations meeting claimed requirement);
`
`and a transmitter which in operation transmits the generated transmission signal (Fig. 3
`
`step 315 resource allocation message is transmitted)
`
`Ghosh does not explicitly disclose data field is included in the generated signal
`
`and that the plurality of RU assignments are in an ordered series and a start tone index
`
`of one RU assignment of the plurality of RU assignments is larger than an end tone
`
`index of another RU assignment of the plurality of RU assignments that precedes said
`
`one RU assignment in the ordered series.
`
`(Ghosh indicates for data can be included in
`
`paragraph 32 and in paragraph 75 the indication the channels are contiguous suggests
`
`ordered series and the tone index for each resource assignment indicated as a channel
`
`index in Fig. 4)
`
`Choi discloses data field (i.e. Fig. 3 data) is included in the generated signal
`
`(See Fig. 3 the generated signal has a legacy preamble (i.e. at least L-SIG) and
`
`non-legacy preamble (HE- LTF, HE-STF, HE-SG A HE-SIG B - see paragraphs 94-
`
`95) and that the plurality of RU assignments are in an ordered series (See Fig. 5 - to
`
`stations 1 - 4 the sub bands 0-7 are assigned in an increasing order from Station
`
`1 to Station 4 - see paragraphs 119-122) and a start tone index of one RU assignment
`
`(Fig. 5 highest sub band corresponding to high frequency is indexed with highest
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 7
`
`index channel max-1 per paragraph 122 and is higher than the index channel of
`
`sub band 0 or another sub channel belonging to a lower frequency) of the plurality
`
`of RU assignments is larger than an end tone index of another RU assignment (Fig. 5
`
`lowest sub band corresponding to lowest frequency is indexed with lowest index
`
`channel and is less than max-1 per paragraph 122) of the plurality of RU
`
`assignments that precedes said one RU in the ordered series (said one RU is the
`
`highest bandwidth corresponding to any sub channels 1 to 7 per Fig. 5 and has a
`
`higher tone index/assignment index/ channel index than sub band 0 which is the
`
`lowest frequency per paragraph 122 and the logic can be extended sub band 7
`
`will have a higher index over the index for sub band 6 and son on and so forth.
`
`The examiner cautions Applicant that the disclosure in paragraph 122 is
`
`independent and applies when all sub channels have equal resources. However
`
`Choi also indicates the index also can give additional info on number of
`
`resources and is not teaching away from the principles disclosed in paragraph
`
`122)
`
`In view of the above, having the apparatus of Ghosh and then given the well-
`
`established teaching of Choi, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in
`
`the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the
`
`apparatus of Ghosh as taught by Choi, since Choi states in paragraphs 11 and 47 that
`
`the modification results in making data transmission efficient in wireless LAN-system in
`
`both an indoor/outdoor environment.
`
`Regarding claim 10, Ghosh discloses a transmission method (Figs.1-6)
`
`comprising:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 8
`
`generating a transmission signal (i.e. AP 102 in Fig. 3 step 315 Resource
`
`Allocation Message is sent as detailed in paragraph 37) that includes a legacy
`
`preamble (See paragraph 16 where every HEW packet includes a legacy signal
`
`field (L-SIG)), and a non-legacy preamble (i.e. See Paragraph 16 for the non-legacy
`
`devices like High Efficiency devices like Applicant’s invention has HE-preamble
`
`containing two signal fields) , wherein the non-legacy preamble comprises a first
`
`signal field(i.e. Paragraph 16 HE-SIG) and a second signal field(i.e. Paragraph 16
`
`HE-LTF or HE-SIG B )
`
`, the second signal field (i.e. HE-SIG B paragraphs 37-38 and
`
`Fig. 4) including a resource assignment subfield that indicates a plurality of resource
`
`unit (RU) assignments (See Fig. 4 sub-channel allocation for each HEW station as
`
`detailed in paragraph 46 - see Fig. 4 where resource unit allocation for HEW
`
`station 104 shown as 435 and 445) in a frequency domain (i.e. frequency channel
`
`see paragraphs 45 and 51 in particular but also paragraphs 74-78) and a plurality of
`
`user-specific subfields (See Fig. 4 and paragraph 46), each carrying per-user
`
`allocation information (Fig.4 different HEW station allocations 425, 435, 445 etc...)
`
`and wherein an equal number of one or more RUs are respectively allocated to
`
`the plurality of RU assignments (See paragraph 53 where the frequency resource
`
`units are equally allocated among 9 HEW stations meeting claimed requirement.)
`
`and transmitting the generated transmission signal (Fig. 3 step 315 resource
`
`allocation message is transmitted)
`
`Ghosh does not explicitly disclose data field is included in the generated signal
`
`and that the plurality of RU assignments are in an ordered series and a start tone index
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 9
`
`of one RU assignment of the plurality of RU assignments is larger than an end tone
`
`index of another RU assignment of the plurality of RU assignments that precedes said
`
`one RU in the ordered series.
`
`(Ghosh indicates for data can be included in paragraph
`
`32 and in paragraph 75 the indication the channels are contiguous suggests ordered
`
`series and the tone index for each resource assignment indicated as a channel index in
`
`Fig. 4)
`
`Choi discloses data field (i.e. Fig. 3 data) is included in the generated signal
`
`(See Fig. 3 the generated signal has a legacy preamble (i.e. at least L-SIG) and
`
`non-legacy preamble (HE- LTF, HE-STF, HE-SG A HE-SIG B - see paragraphs 94-
`
`95) and that the plurality of RU assignments are in an ordered series (See Fig. 5 - to
`
`stations 1 - 4 the sub bands 0-7 are assigned in an increasing order from Station
`
`1 to Station 4 - see paragraphs 119-122) and a start tone index of one RU assignment
`
`(Fig. 5 highest sub band corresponding to high frequency is indexed with highest
`
`index channel max-1 per paragraph 122 and is higher than the index channel of
`
`sub band 0 or another sub channel belonging to a lower frequency) of the plurality
`
`of RU assignments is larger than an end tone index of another RU assignment (Fig. 5
`
`lowest sub band corresponding to lowest frequency is indexed with lowest index
`
`channel and is less than max-1 per paragraph 122) of the plurality of RU
`
`assignments that precedes said one RU in the ordered series. (said one RU is the
`
`highest bandwidth corresponding to any sub channels 1 to 7 per Fig. 5 and has a
`
`higher tone index/assignment index/ channel index than sub band 0 which is the
`
`lowest frequency per paragraph 122 and the logic can be extended sub band 7
`
`will have a higher index over the index for sub band 6 and son on and so forth.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 10
`
`The examiner cautions Applicant that the disclosure in paragraph 122 is
`
`independent and applies when all sub channels have equal resources. However
`
`Choi also indicates the index also can give additional info on number of
`
`resources and is not teaching away from the principles disclosed in paragraph
`
`122)
`
`In view of the above, having the method of Ghosh and then given the well-
`
`established teaching of Choi, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in
`
`the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the
`
`method of Ghosh as taught by Choi, since Choi states in paragraphs 11 and 47 that the
`
`modification results in making data transmission efficient in wireless LAN-system in both
`
`an indoor/outdoor environment.
`
`Regarding claim 19, Ghosh discloses n integrated circuit comprising: control
`
`circuitry, which in operation, controls (Figs.1-6)::
`
`generating a transmission signal (i.e. AP 102 in Fig. 3 step 315 Resource
`
`Allocation Message is sent as detailed in paragraph 37) that includes a legacy
`
`preamble (See paragraph 16 where every HEW packet includes a legacy signal
`
`field (L-SIG)), and a non-legacy preamble (i.e. See Paragraph 16 for the non-legacy
`
`devices like High Efficiency devices like Applicant’s invention has HE-preamble
`
`containing two signal fields) , wherein the non-legacy preamble comprises a first
`
`signal field(i.e. Paragraph 16 HE-SIG) and a second signal field(i.e. Paragraph 16
`
`HE-LTF or HE-SIG B )
`
`, the second signal field (i.e. HE-SIG B paragraphs 37-38 and
`
`Fig. 4) including a resource assignment subfield that indicates a plurality of resource
`
`unit (RU) assignments (See Fig. 4 sub-channel allocation for each HEW station as
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 11
`
`detailed in paragraph 46 - see Fig. 4 where resource unit allocation for HEW
`
`station 104 shown as 435 and 445)
`
`in a frequency domain (i.e. frequency channel
`
`see paragraphs 45 and 51 in particular but also paragraphs 74-78) and a plurality of
`
`user-specific subfields (See Fig. 4 and paragraph 46), each carrying per-user
`
`allocation information (Fig.4 different HEW station allocations 425, 435, 445 etc...)
`
`and wherein an equal number of one or more RUs are respectively allocated to
`
`the plurality of RU assignments (See paragraph 53 where the frequency resource
`
`units are equally allocated among 9 HEW stations meeting claimed requirement.)
`
`and transmitting the generated transmission signal (Fig. 3 step 315 resource
`
`allocation message is transmitted)
`
`Ghosh does not explicitly disclose data field is included in the generated signal
`
`and that the plurality of RU assignments are in an ordered series and a start tone index
`
`of one RU assignment of the plurality of RU assignments is larger than an end tone
`
`index of another RU assignment of the plurality of RU assignments that precedes said
`
`one RU in the ordered series.
`
`(Ghosh indicates for data can be included in paragraph
`
`32 and in paragraph 75 the indication the channels are contiguous suggests ordered
`
`series and the tone index for each resource assignment indicated as a channel index in
`
`Fig. 4)
`
`Choi discloses data field (i.e. Fig. 3 data) is included in the generated signal
`
`(See Fig. 3 the generated signal has a legacy preamble (i.e. at least L-SIG) and
`
`non-legacy preamble (HE- LTF, HE-STF, HE-SG A HE-SIG B - see paragraphs 94-
`
`95) and that the plurality of RU assignments are in an ordered series (See Fig. 5 - to
`
`stations 1 - 4 the sub bands 0-7 are assigned in an increasing order from Station
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 12
`
`1 to Station 4 - see paragraphs 119-122) and a start tone index of one RU assignment
`
`(Fig. 5 highest sub band corresponding to high frequency is indexed with highest
`
`index channel max-1 per paragraph 122 and is higher than the index channel of
`
`sub band 0 or another sub channel belonging to a lower frequency) of the plurality
`
`of RU assignments is larger than an end tone index of another RU assignment (Fig. 5
`
`lowest sub band corresponding to lowest frequency is indexed with lowest index
`
`channel and is less than max-1 per paragraph 122) of the plurality of RU
`
`assignments that precedes said one RU in the ordered series. ( said one RU is the
`
`highest bandwidth corresponding to any sub channels 1 to 7 per Fig. 5 and has a
`
`higher tone index/assignment index/ channel index than sub band 0 which is the
`
`lowest frequency per paragraph 122 and the logic can be extended sub band 7
`
`will have a higher index over the index for sub band 6 and son on and so forth.
`
`The examiner cautions Applicant that the disclosure in paragraph 122 is
`
`independent and applies when all sub channels have equal resources. However
`
`Choi also indicates the index also can give additional info on number of
`
`resources and is not teaching away from the principles disclosed in paragraph
`
`122)
`
`In view of the above, having the IC of Ghosh and then given the well- established
`
`teaching of Choi, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art
`
`before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the IC of
`
`Ghosh as taught by Choi, since Choi states in paragraphs 11 and 47 that the
`
`modification results in making data transmission efficient in wireless LAN-system in both
`
`an indoor/outdoor environment.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 13
`
`Regarding claim 2, the combination of Ghosh and Choi discloses wherein a first
`
`RU assignment of the plurality of RU assignments has a predetermined start position
`
`and a subsequent RU assignment has a start tone index that is next to an end tone
`
`index of its preceding assignment. (Choi per paragraph 115 indicates RU
`
`assignment has a predetermined position by reciting “ information on the
`
`position (allocated sub band boundary)” and per paragraph 122 all sub band
`
`allocation have a channel index and is equivalent to a tone index and if the
`
`assignments are contiguous the end boundary of the earlier resource also
`
`identified an end (tone/channel) is next the start of the next channel/tone
`
`boundary per paragraph 121. Ghosh also discloses predetermined bandwidth in
`
`paragraphs 27 and 67 has a known start and end position and corresponding
`
`channel index)
`
`The motivation to combine Ghosh and Choi is set forth above in claim 1.
`
`Regarding claim 11, claim 11 is rejected in the same scope as claim 2.
`
`Regarding claim 4, the combination of Ghosh and Choi disclose the transmission
`
`apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the second signal field (i.e. HE-SIG B is
`
`disclosed in both Ghosh and Choi - See Choi Fig. 3)comprises a first channel field
`
`for a first sub band channel (i.e. Ghosh 40 MHz band in Fig. 5) and, when
`
`the transmission signal occupies more than one sub band channel, the second signal
`
`field further comprises a second channel field for a second sub band channel (i.e.
`
`Ghosh 80 MHz band in Fi. 5) different from the first sub band channel. (see Ghosh
`
`paragraphs 55-56 describing 20 MHz, 40 MHz and 80 MHz channels.)
`
`The motivation to combine Ghosh and Choi is set forth above in claim 1.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 14
`
`Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is rejected in the same scope as claim 4.
`
`Regarding claim 5, the combination of Ghosh and Choi disclose the transmission
`
`apparatus according to Claim 4, wherein each of the first channel field and the second
`
`channel field comprises a common field that includes the resource assignment subfield
`
`(i.e. Ghosh Fig. 4 Sub-Channel Allocation 415 ) and a user-specific field that includes
`
`the plurality of user-specific subfields(i.e. Ghosh Fig. 4 Sub-Channel Allocation 415
`
`contains channel index 427 and sub-channel index 428 and sub-channel location
`
`429 ). (See Ghosh at least Fig . 4)
`
`The motivation to combine Ghosh and Choi is set forth above in claim 1.
`
`Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is rejected in the same scope as claim 5.
`
`Regarding claim 6, the combination of Ghosh and Choi disclose , wherein
`
`the common field in each of the first channel field and the second channel fie|d includes
`
`a center RU subfield indicating whether a center Type | RU is allocated when channel
`
`bandwidth is equal to 80 MHz .(Ghosh in paragraphs 15, 34, and 35 indicates the
`
`sub-channel location can indicate the position of being centered where the
`
`channel is 80 MHz. See Fig. 4)
`
`The motivation to combine Ghosh and Choi is set forth above in claim 1.
`
`Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is rejected in the same scope as claim 6.
`
`Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ghosh and Choi disclose ,the
`
`transmission apparatus according to Claim 6, wherein if the center Type | RU is
`
`allocated when channel bandwidth is equal to 80 MHz, a user-specific subfield for the
`
`center Type | RU is the last user-specific subfield in the plurality of user-specific fields.
`
`(Ghosh in paragraphs 15, 34, and 35 indicates the sub-channel location can
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 15
`
`indicate the position of being last user specific subfield for a specific user where
`
`the channel is 80 MHz). See Fig. 4 Final Allocation field shows the last user
`
`allocation)
`
`The motivation to combine Ghosh and Choi is set forth above in claim 1.
`
`Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is rejected in the same scope as claim 7.
`
`Regarding claim 8, the combination of Ghosh and Choi disclose, the
`
`transmission apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the resource assignment subfield
`
`and a position of a user-specific subfield together identify the RU used to transmit data
`
`to a specific user. (See Choi Fig. 5 the resources allocated using HE-SIG B field is for
`
`downlink data transmission for the receiving stations per paragraph 120)
`
`The motivation to combine Ghosh and Choi is set forth above in claim 1.
`
`Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is rejected in the same scope as claim 8.
`
`Claims 3 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Ghosh et al (US 2016/0143005 A1) in view of Choi et al (US 2017/0201357 A1) and
`
`further in view of Li et al (US 20160255610 A1 ).
`
`Regarding claim 3, Ghosh as modified by Choi fails to disclose wherein when
`
`there is at least one unused RU that is not allocated in any of the plurality of
`
`RU assignments, the at least one unused RU is indicated by inserting a dummy
`
`assignment.
`
`Li discloses wherein when there is at least one unused RU that is not allocated in
`
`any of the plurality of RU assignments, the at least one unused RU is indicated by
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 16
`
`inserting a dummy assignment.
`
`(See paragraph 55 where a dummy assignment is
`
`made to a dummy station to indicate a frequency band resource is unallocated).
`
`In view of the above, having the apparatus of Ghosh and Choi and then given the
`
`well- established teaching of Li,
`
`it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill
`
`in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the
`
`apparatus of Ghosh and Choi as taught by Li, since Li states in paragraphs 27, 33, 34
`
`and 55 that the modification results in the overhead in transmitting the data being
`
`reduced and the reliability being increased.
`
`Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is rejected in the same scope as claim 3.
`
`Claims 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Ghosh et al (US 2016/0143005 A1) in view of Choi et al (US 2017/0201357 A1) and
`
`further in view of Kenney et al (US 20160143010 A1).
`
`Regarding claim 9, Ghosh fails to disclose wherein the transmitter which, in
`
`operation, selects a RU assignment according to quality information of RUs reported by
`
`at least one user.
`
`Kenney discloses wherein the transmitter which, in operation, selects a RU
`
`assignment according to quality information of RUs reported by at least one user. (See
`
`paragraph 40 where the AP based on received quality info in the form of SNR,
`
`amount data and throughput assigns appropriate resource units)
`
`In view of the above, having the apparatus of Ghosh and Choi and then given the
`
`well- established teaching of Kenney, it would have been obvious to one having
`
`ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made
`
`to modify the apparatus of Ghosh and Choi as taught by Kenney, since Kenny states in
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 17
`
`paragraphs 4 and 47 that the modification improves overall system efficiency in
`
`wireless networks.
`
`Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is rejected in the same scope as claim 9.
`
`CLAIM INTERPRETA TION
`
`The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation
`
`using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be
`
`understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of
`
`a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the
`
`description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth
`
`paragraph, is invoked.
`
`As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the
`
`following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35
`
`U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
`
`(A)
`
`the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute
`
`for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-
`
`structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed
`
`function;
`
`(B)
`
`the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional
`
`language, typically, but not always linked by the trans