In reference to the patent: US20160021679

down vote favorite In reference to the patent: WO2016010682A1

I just came across this patent which claims 1. A method of wireless communications, comprising: transmitting a clear-to-send (CTS) signal from a mobile device over a channel in an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band, the transmitting of the CTS signal being based at least in part on resource schedule information; and receiving data over the channel during a period of time set by the CTS signal.

This idea has already been discussed and experimented by researchers in Hou, James, et al. "Minimizing 802.11 interference on ZigBee medical sensors." Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Body Area Networks. ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering), 2009.

In this paper on page 7 they discuss their experiment as " The next experiment sought to show that it might be possible for a CTS inducing device to temporarily lock out 802.11 devices and allow ZigBee devices to transmit. What happened was that in the presence of heavy 802.11 traffic, the CTS interferer was able to temporaril y lock out 802.11 transmissions for a short period of time. In doing so, by chance , some of the ZigBee transmissions were able to arrive at their destinations as intended.

This paper was published in 2009. It is completely bogus to file patent on others ideas.

Also this work was extended by S. Ishida, S. Tagashira and A. Fukuda, "AP-assisted CTS-blocking for WiFi-ZigBee Coexistence," 2015 Third International Symposium on Computing and Networking (CANDAR), Sapporo, 2015, pp. 110-114. doi: 10.1109/CANDAR.2015.16 in which he covers many claims made by this patent. This is prior art for sure. No patent should be granted.

That application has since been granted as: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9526111B2/en

The claims have changed, and now read: 1. A method of wireless communications, comprising: transmitting a clear-to-send (CTS) signal from a mobile device over a channel in an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band, the transmitting of the CTS signal being based at least in part on resource schedule information transmitted in the unlicensed frequency spectrum band, the CTS signal being transmitted after transmitting an information portion comprising a shortened frame; transmitting, after transmitting the CTS signal, a full frame comprising information different from the information portion; and receiving data over the channel during a period of time set by the CTS signal.

It would take some analysis to see if the HOU paper can still be used to challenge that claim.

Regarding the second paper (Ishida), keep in mind the patent was filed in 2014 and therefore predates the publication of that paper.

Your Answer

 
discard

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.