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
`
`03/12/2020
`
`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)
`
`

`

`017/09 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 07/09/2019.
`CI A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a). This action is FINAL.
`
`2b) D 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 Expade Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s)
`
`1—18 and 20—23 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`
`
`[:1 Claim(ss)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(ss) 1— 18 and 20—23 is/are rejected.
`
`D Claim(ss_) is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`S)
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[:1 Claim(s
`* If any claims have been determined aflowable. 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)|:l 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)C] Some**
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2C] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`SD 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)
`
`2) C] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/OBa and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) E] 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 20200228
`
`

`

`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 amendment filed on 07/09/2019 has been entered.
`
`Claims 1-18 and 20-23 are pending of which claims 1 and 10 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,
`
` 35) 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.
`
`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.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`8.
`
`Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 10 have been considered but
`
`are moot because the arguments do not apply to any combination of the references
`
`being used in the current rejection. Suh et al (US 20150365203 A1) is introduced to
`
`address the amendments to the independent claims. The disclosure in Suh clearly
`
`makes it clear ordering RUs simply is not novel. Suo et al (US 2010011100 A1) makes it
`
`abundantly clear ordering RUs in the frequency domain in an increasing or decreasing
`
`order is known in the prior art. Chen et al (US 20160330715 A1) discloses the HE-SIG-
`
`B field in the manner claimed in the newly added dependent claims.
`
`

`

`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.
`
`9.
`
`Claim 1, 2, , 4-8, 10, 11, and 13-17 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 Suh et al (US 20150365203 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 includes a
`
`first signal field(i.e. Paragraph 16 the first of the one or more HE-SIG fields) 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)
`
`indicates a plurality of resource units
`
`(RUs) (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 AID
`
`#1 is shown as 425 and resource unit allocation for HEW station 104 AID #2 are
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 6
`
`shown as 435 and 445 in Fig. 4)
`
`in a frequency domain (i.e. frequency channel see
`
`paragraphs 45 and 51 in particular but also paragraphs 74-78) and includes an
`
`ordered series of user-specific subfields including a first user-specific subfield and a
`
`second user-specific subfield (i.e. for instance resource units for a first user AID #1
`
`is block 425 and is an ordered sequence of one or more sub-channel per
`
`paragraphs 45 and 67 and further the ordered sequencing proceeds to AID #2
`
`station with two consecutively ordered blocks 435 and 445 with 445 being the
`
`final block resource unit per paragraph 46. See paragraphs 45-47, 67, and 74 and
`
`78); 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
`
`(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 and
`
`more (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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 7
`
`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 using resource allocation for high efficiency stations with Choi’s
`
`method of data transmission with variable guard intervals for high efficiency stations,
`
`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.
`
`Ghosh also fails to explicitly disclose the RUs are formed of a plurality of tones
`
`that are identified by tone indices ordered in the frequency domain, the RUs are
`
`respectively formed of subsets of the tones, and each RU is determined from a start
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 8
`
`tone index of the corresponding subset of the tones, and a start tone index of one RU
`
`corresponding to the second user-specific subfield is larger than an end tone index of
`
`another RU corresponding to the first user-specific subfield that precedes s the second
`
`user-specific subfield. (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)
`
`Suh discloses the RUs(See Fig. 7 RUs ordered in frequency and time
`
`domain) are formed of a plurality of tones (See paragraph 28 where the RUs are
`
`formed from multiple tones/frequencies/sub-carriers) that are identified by tone
`
`indices ordered in the freguency domain (i.e. per paragraph 32 the RUs are ordered
`
`both in the frequency domain and time domain - and hence in frequency domain
`
`with respect to Fig. 7 it starts from RUj and sequentially ordered to RU4j - per
`
`paragraph 32 ), the RUs are respectively formed of subsets of the tones (See
`
`paragraph 28 and see Fig. 7 showing RU2j formed from subsets of n tones/sub-
`
`carriers) , and each RU is determined from a start tone index of the corresponding
`
`subset of the tones (See Fig. 9 and per paragraph 34 in the signaling field an id of
`
`the specific station AID is given along with the start index and end index of each
`
`RU where a given RU can be a set of RUs or set of tones/sub-carriers as detailed
`
`in paragraph 28 and Fig. 7), and a start tone index of one RU corresponding to the
`
`second user-specific subfield is larger than an end tone index of another RU
`
`corresponding to the first user-specific subfield that precedes the second user-specific
`
`
`subfield (See Fig. 8 and take into consideration user 1 and user 3 assigned RUs
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 9
`
`defined by different time and frequency/tone/sub-carriers values as described in
`
`paragraph 33 and based on the sequencing described in Fig. 7 and paragraph 32
`
`then it is clear that the starting index of RUs of user 3 is greater than the ending
`
`index of User 1 RUs and user 1 precedes user 3 wherein user 3 corresponds to
`
`the claimed second user and user 1 corresponds to the claimed user 1).
`
`In view of the above, having the apparatus of Ghosh and then given the well-
`
`established teaching of Suh, 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 using resource allocation for high efficiency stations with Suh’s
`
`method of OFDMA resource allocations, since Suh states in paragraph 6 that the
`
`modification results in ability to communicate scheduling information in a wireless
`
`network.
`
`Regarding claim 10, Ghosh discloses a transmission method (Figs.1-6)
`
`comprising:
`
`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 includes 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)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 10
`
`indicates a plurality of resource units (RUs) (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 AID #1 is shown as 425 and resource unit
`
`allocation for HEW station 104 AID #2 are shown as 435 and 445 in Fig. 4)
`
`in
`
`a frequency domain (i.e. frequency channel see paragraphs 45 and 51 in particular
`
`but also paragraphs 74-78) and includes an ordered series of user-specific subfields
`
`including a first user-specific subfield and a second user-specific subfield (i.e. for
`
`instance resource units for a first user AID #1 is block 425 and is an ordered
`
`sequence of one or more sub-channel per paragraphs 45 and 67 and further the
`
`ordered sequencing proceeds to AID #2 station with two consecutively ordered
`
`blocks 435 and 445 with 445 being the final block resource unit per paragraph 46.
`
`See paragraphs 45-47, 67, and 74 and 78); 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
`
`(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 and
`
`more (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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 11
`
`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 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 using resource allocation for high efficiency stations with Choi’s
`
`method of data transmission with variable guard intervals for high efficiency stations,
`
`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 12
`
`Ghosh also fails to explicitly disclose the RUs are formed of a plurality of tones
`
`that are identified by tone indices ordered in the freguency domain, the RUs are
`
`respectively formed of subsets of the tones, and each RU is determined from a start
`
`tone index of the corresponding subset of the tones, and a start tone index of one RU
`
`corresponding to the second user-specific subfield is larger than an end tone index of
`
`another RU corresponding to the first user-specific subfield that precedes s the second
`
`user-specific subfield. (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)
`
`Suh discloses the RUs(See Fig. 7 RUs ordered in frequency and time
`
`domain) are formed of a plurality of tones (See paragraph 28 where the RUs are
`
`formed from multiple tones/frequencies/sub-carriers) that are identified by tone
`
`indices ordered in the freguency domain (i.e. per paragraph 32 the RUs are ordered
`
`both in the frequency domain and time domain - and hence in frequency domain
`
`with respect to Fig. 7 it starts from RUj and sequentially ordered to RU4j - per
`
`paragraph 32 ), the RUs are respectively formed of subsets of the tones (See
`
`paragraph 28 and see Fig. 7 showing RU2j formed from subsets of n tones/sub-
`
`carriers) , and each RU is determined from a start tone index of the corresponding
`
`subset of the tones (See Fig. 9 and per paragraph 34 in the signaling field an id of
`
`the specific station AID is given along with the start index and end index of each
`
`RU where a given RU can be a set of RUs or set of tones/sub-carriers as detailed
`
`in paragraph 28 and Fig. 7), and a start tone index of one RU corresponding to the
`
`second user-specific subfield is larger than an end tone index of another RU
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 13
`
`corresponding to the first user-specific subfield that precedes the second user-specific
`
`
`subfield (See Fig. 8 and take into consideration user 1 and user 3 assigned RUs
`
`defined by different time and frequency/tone/sub-carriers values as described in
`
`paragraph 33 and based on the sequencing described in Fig. 7 and paragraph 32
`
`then it is clear that the starting index of RUs of user 3 is greater than the ending
`
`index of User 1 RUs and user 1 precedes user 3 wherein user 3 corresponds to
`
`the claimed second user and user 1 corresponds to the claimed user 1).
`
`In view of the above, having the method of Ghosh and then given the well-
`
`established teaching of Suh, 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 using resource allocation for high efficiency stations with Suh’s
`
`method of OFDMA resource allocations, since Suh states in paragraph 6 that the
`
`modification results in ability to communicate scheduling information in a wireless
`
`network.
`
`Regarding claim 2, the combination of Ghosh and Choi and Suh discloses the
`
`transmission apparatus according to claim 1.
`
`Ghosh fails to further discloses wherein the RU corresponding to the first user-
`
`specific subfield has a predetermined start tone index and the RU corresponding to the
`
`second user-specific subfield has a start tone index that is next to an end tone index of
`
`the RU corresponding to the first user-specific subfield.
`
`Suh discloses wherein the RU corresponding to the first user-specific subfield
`
`has a predetermined start tone index and the RU corresponding to the second user-
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 14
`
`specific subfield has a start tone index that is next to an end tone index of the RU
`
`corresponding to the first user-specific subfield.
`
`(Note given Fig. 9 for each user the
`
`RUs assigned to a specific user has a start index and an end index. In Figs. 7 &8
`
`RUs are sequenced in order as described in paragraphs 32-33. Given that the
`
`RUs for user 3 in Fig. 8 has a start and end indices that are pre-
`
`assigned/determined and is next to User 4 wherein the start index of RUs for user
`
`4 is next to the end index of RUs for user 3 and the starting index for user 4 is
`
`greater than the end index of RUs for user 3 per index algorithm discussed with
`
`respect to Fig. 7 in paragraph 32)
`
`In view of the above, having the apparatus of Ghosh and then given the well-
`
`established teaching of Suh, 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 using resource allocation for high efficiency stations with Suh’s
`
`method of OFDMA resource allocations, since Suh states in paragraph 6 that the
`
`modification results in ability to communicate scheduling information in a wireless
`
`network.
`
`Regarding claim 11, claim 11 is rejected in the same scope as claim 2.
`
`Regarding claim 4, the combination of Ghosh and Choi and Suh discloses the
`
`transmission apparatus according to Claim 1, Ghosh further discloses wherein
`
`the second signal field (i.e. HE-SIG B is disclosed in Ghosh’s in paragraphs 37-38
`
`and Fig. 4) includes 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 includes a second channel field for a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 15
`
`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.)
`
`Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is rejected in the same scope as claim 4.
`
`Regarding claim 5, the combination of Ghosh and Cho and Suh discloses the
`
`transmission apparatus according to Claim 4, Ghosh further discloses wherein each of
`
`the first channel field and the second channel field includes a common field which
`
`includes a resource assignment subfield (i.e. Ghosh Fig. 4 Sub-Channel Allocation
`
`415 ) and a user-specific field which includes the ordered series 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)
`
`Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is rejected in the same scope as claim 5.
`
`Regarding claim 6, the combination of Ghosh and Choi and Suh discloses the
`
`transmission apparatus of claim 5, and Ghosh further discloses wherein the common
`
`field in each of the first channel field and the second channel field 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)
`
`Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is rejected in the same scope as claim 6.
`
`Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ghosh and Choi and Suh discloses the
`
`transmission apparatus of claim 6, Ghosh further the transmission apparatus according
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 16
`
`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 ordered of user-specific fields. (Ghosh in paragraphs 15, 34,
`
`and 35 indicates the sub-channel location can 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)
`
`Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is rejected in the same scope as claim 7.
`
`Regarding claim 8, the combination of Ghosh and Choi and Suh discloses, the
`
`transmission apparatus according to Claim 1.
`
`Ghosh fails to expressly disclose wherein the second signal field includes a
`
`resource assignment subfield and the resource assignment subfield and a position of a
`
`user-specific subfield together identify the RU used to transmit data to a specific user.
`
`Suh discloses wherein the second signal field includes a resource assignment
`
`subfield and 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 Fig. 9 and per
`
`paragraph 34 in the signaling field an id of the specific station AID is given along
`
`with the start index and end index of each RU where a given RU can be a set of
`
`RUs or set of tones/sub-carriers as detailed in paragraph 28 and Fig. 7).
`
`In view of the above, having the apparatus of Ghosh and then given the well-
`
`established teaching of Suh, 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 using resource allocation for high efficiency stations with Suh’s
`
`method of OFDMA resource allocations, since Suh states in paragraph 6 that the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/790,875
`Art Unit: 2474
`
`Page 17
`
`modification results in ability to communicate scheduling information in a wireless
`
`network.
`
`Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is rejected in the same scope as claim 8.
`
`10.
`
`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
`
`Suh and further in view of Li et al (US 20160255610 A1).
`
`Regarding claim 3, Ghosh as modified by Choi and Suh fails to expressly
`
`disclose wherein when at least one RU of the plurality of RUs is unused, the at least
`
`one RU is indicated by inserting a dummy assignment. (i.e. Suh discloses null tones in
`
`paragraph 29)
`
`Li