US 11159210

Here's a concise summary of US Patent 11159210:

• Title: Wireless communication method and wireless communication terminal for signaling multi-user packet
• Assignee: Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc
• Inventors: Juhyung Son, Jinsam Kwak, Geonjung KO, Woojin AHN
• Filing Date: 2019-12-31
• Issue Date: 2021-10-26
• Abstract: The patent describes a wireless communication method and terminal for signaling multi-user packets. Specifically, it provides a wireless communication terminal with a communication unit and a processor. The processor receives a high efficiency multi-user PHY protocol data unit (HE MU PPDU). The HE MU PPDU's preamble includes a high efficiency signal A field (HE-SIG-A) and a high efficiency signal B field (HE-SIG-B). The processor decodes the received HE MU PPDU based on information from the HE-SIG-A, where the configuration of the HE-SIG-B is identified using information from at least one subfield of the HE-SIG-A.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Independent Claim 1 (Wireless Communication Terminal): This claim describes a wireless communication terminal designed to receive and process a specific type of wireless data packet called a High Efficiency Multi-User PHY Protocol Data Unit (HE MU PPDU). The terminal's processor decodes this packet using information from the "HE-SIG-A" field within the packet's preamble. A key aspect is that the way the "HE-SIG-B" field is structured within the packet is determined by information found in at least one subfield of the "HE-SIG-A".

• Independent Claim 12 (Wireless Communication Method): This claim describes a wireless communication method for a terminal, mirroring the functionality of Claim 1. It involves receiving an HE MU PPDU, which has an HE-SIG-A and HE-SIG-B in its preamble. The method then decodes the HE MU PPDU based on information from the HE-SIG-A, where the configuration of the HE-SIG-B is identified using information from at least one subfield of the HE-SIG-A.

CAFC 2026 Dockets:

The patent text itself indicates that "Family has litigation" and lists several cases:

• PTAB case IPR2025-00934 filed (Pending - Instituted)
• US case filed in Texas Eastern District Court (2:24-cv-00752)
• US case filed in Texas Eastern District Court (2:24-cv-00746)
• First worldwide family litigation filed

A search of CAFC 2026 dockets does not specifically list "11159210" directly in the provided snippets, but it does indicate that information relating to Federal Circuit cases can be found on their pages and lists scheduled cases for July 2026 and September 2026. While the provided search results do not explicitly confirm a CAFC case for US11159210 in 2026, the ongoing IPR (IPR2025-00934) and district court cases (2:24-cv-00752, 2:24-cv-00746) suggest that appeals to the CAFC in 2026 or beyond are possible. However, based on the current search results, I cannot authoritatively confirm a specific CAFC 2026 docket directly associated with patent 11159210.

Known litigation involving US patent 11159210 includes assertions against multiple companies.

Known Litigation Cases:

• Plaintiff(s): Likely Atlas Global (implied by references to "district court litigations by Atlas Global" in connection with assertions of this patent).
• Defendant(s):
  • Currently: HPE and Walmart.
  • In the past: Several companies whose products comply with the Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) standard.
• Jurisdiction: District courts (implied by "district court litigations").
• Case Number: Not specified in the provided information.
• Filing Date: Not specified in the provided information.
• Outcome or Current Status:
  • Currently being asserted against HPE and Walmart.
  • The outcome or current status for past assertions against other companies is not specified.

Specific case numbers, filing dates, and detailed outcomes for individual cases were not available in the provided search results.

Proceedings overview

There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US Patent 11159210, which was an Inter Partes Review (IPR) that has been Terminated-Settled. This means the patent's claims have not been adjudicated for patentability by the PTAB.

IPR2025-00934 — [[[Samsung Electronics Co.](/litigations/by-defendant/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.), Ltd.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.) et al.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.%20et%20al.) v. Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-05-01
• Status: Terminated-Settled
• Judge panel: Not publicly available in the provided information.
• Petition grounds: Not publicly available in the provided information.
• Institution decision: The status "Terminated-Settled" indicates that the proceeding settled before a final written decision, and potentially before institution, though the patent itself lists the status as "Instituted" on the Google Patents page.
• Final Written Decision: Not issued due to termination.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding was terminated due to settlement. The specific terms of the settlement are confidential. The last modification date was 2026-07-27.
• Appeal: No appeal to the Federal Circuit, as no Final Written Decision was issued.
• Defensive value: This IPR proceeding did not result in any claims being invalidated. The settlement means the patent's claims were not challenged to a final decision at the PTAB, leaving their patentability status unaddressed by an IPR FWD. A defendant would need to consider the grounds raised in the petition (if publicly discoverable) and whether those grounds could still be raised in a new IPR or district court litigation.

Strategic summary

Currently, no claims of US11159210 have been canceled or sustained by the PTAB. The single IPR filed, IPR2025-00934, was terminated due to a settlement between Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. and Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. This means the patent has not undergone a full PTAB trial where its claims would be evaluated for patentability against prior art. Consequently, all claims of the patent remain untested by the PTAB.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, since IPR2025-00934 was terminated via settlement and did not result in a Final Written Decision, the estoppel provisions of § 315(e)(1) for instituted and decided claims, and § 315(e)(2) which bars petitioners and their privies from raising any ground they raised or reasonably could have raised, would apply differently depending on the specifics of the settlement agreement and whether the IPR was instituted. The Google Patents page indicates "Pending - Instituted" for IPR2025-00934, suggesting institution did occur. If it was instituted, Samsung and its privies would be estopped from raising grounds that were raised or reasonably could have been raised in the IPR. However, other defendants not in privity with Samsung would likely not be estopped.

The current activity shows one IPR filed by a major electronics company, Samsung, which then settled. This suggests that the patent owner, Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc., is actively asserting the patent and that at least one significant entity found it worthwhile to challenge (and then settle).

Recommended next steps

Since IPR2025-00934 was terminated due to settlement and no Final Written Decision was issued, there is no public FWD to link to for claim invalidation. If you are a defendant facing assertion of this patent, it would be crucial to:

• Investigate the details of IPR2025-00934 further, particularly if the petition and institution decision are publicly available on the USPTO PTAB E2E system. Understanding the prior art and arguments presented by Samsung could inform your own invalidity analysis.
• Conduct your own thorough prior art search to identify potential grounds for invalidity, as the patent's claims have not been judicially reviewed for patentability at the PTAB.
• Consider the implications of the ongoing district court cases (2:24-cv-00752 and 2:24-cv-00746 in the Texas Eastern District Court) on the patent's validity and enforceability.

Inventors

• Juhyung Son: SK Telecom Co., Ltd. and Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. (at time of filing)
• Jinsam Kwak: SK Telecom Co., Ltd. and Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. (at time of filing)
• Geonjung KO: SK Telecom Co., Ltd. and Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. (at time of filing)
• Woojin AHN: SK Telecom Co., Ltd. and Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. (at time of filing)

Original assignee

The original assignee on the issued patent is SK Telecom Co Ltd and Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. SK Telecom is a South Korean wireless telecommunications operator and a leading AI and digital infrastructure company, providing mobile and fixed-line broadband, mobile telephony, and various digital services. Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. is a South Korea-based R&D company dedicated to developing next-generation standards in wireless communications and multimedia technology, and they participate in various patent pools for Wi-Fi and 5G SEPs. Both companies appear to be operating and actively involved in their respective industries. SK Telecom has continually evolved its mobile technologies from 2G to 5G and offers various telecommunication convergence services. Wilus is an active contributor to leading standards bodies like 3GPP, IEEE 802.11, and MPEG.

Assignment timeline

• 2020-01-27 (executed) / recorded 2020-01-27 — Reel 050417/0002

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: KWAK, JINSAM; AHN, WOOJIN; KO, GEONJUNG; SON, JUHYUNG
  • Assignee: WILUS INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY INC.; SK TELECOM CO., LTD.
  • Correspondent: YOON S. CHANG, 2400 Pleasant Grove Rd., STE 140-529, Pleasant Grove, UT 84062. This correspondent has not recurred in other tracked patents on this site.
  • Context: Transfer of inventor's rights to original co-assignees.

• 2022-12-18 (executed) / recorded 2022-12-28 — Reel 062152/0001

  • Conveyance: License
  • Assignor: SK TELECOM CO., LTD.
  • Assignee: WILUS INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY INC.
  • Correspondent: YOON S. CHANG, 2400 Pleasant Grove Rd., STE 140-529, Pleasant Grove, UT 84062. This correspondent has not recurred in other tracked patents on this site.
  • Context: Transfer of licensing rights from SK Telecom to Wilus.

• 2024-06-20 (executed) / recorded 2024-06-20 — Reel 066746/0001

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: SK TELECOM CO., LTD.
  • Assignee: WILUS INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY INC.
  • Correspondent: YOON S. CHANG, 2400 Pleasant Grove Rd., STE 140-529, Pleasant Grove, UT 84062. This correspondent has not recurred in other tracked patents on this site.
  • Context: Transfer of remaining assignor's interest from SK Telecom to Wilus.

• 2025-02-26 (executed) / recorded 2025-03-04 — Reel 067980/0001

  • Conveyance: Corrective Assignment
  • Assignor: SK TELECOM CO., LTD.
  • Assignee: WILUS INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY INC.
  • Correspondent: YOON S. CHANG, 2400 Pleasant Grove Rd., STE 140-529, Pleasant Grove, UT 84062. This correspondent has not recurred in other tracked patents on this site.
  • Context: Corrective assignment to correct the agreement date of the exclusive license recorded on Reel 62152 Frame 1.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 11159210
    2019 : Filed by SK Telecom and Wilus
    2020 : Inventors assign to SK Telecom and Wilus
    2021 : Issued
    2022 : SK Telecom licenses to Wilus
    2024 : SK Telecom assigns to Wilus
    2025 : Corrective assignment

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Not present. Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. describes itself as an R&D lab making technical contributions to standards bodies and commercializing solutions. They are actively involved in patent pools and bilateral licensing programs, indicating an operating entity in the intellectual property space rather than a pure shell company.

2. Known asserter in the chain — Not present. While Wilus is actively asserting its patents, including US11159210, in litigation against companies like Samsung, HP, and ASUS, they describe themselves as an R&D lab and standard essential patent (SEP) licensor, actively participating in patent pools and developing new technologies. This profile suggests a different model from traditional NPEs that acquire patents solely for assertion without engaging in R&D or product development. Atlas Global Technologies, LLC, an NPE and Acacia Research entity, is asserting other Wi-Fi patents against HPE and Walmart. However, the assignment chain for US11159210 does not show a transfer to Atlas Global Technologies, LLC.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Not present. The correspondent "YOON S. CHANG, 2400 Pleasant Grove Rd., STE 140-529, Pleasant Grove, UT 84062" appears on all recorded assignments for this patent (Reel 050417/0002, Reel 062152/0001, Reel 066746/0001, Reel 067980/0001). However, based on the current context, there is no information to suggest this correspondent is a known repeat player across other tracked NPE assertion lists or other patents on this site.

4. Cascading transfers — Not present. There are four assignments/licenses within a five-year period, but these appear to be primarily internal transfers or license grants between the original co-assignees, rather than rapid transfers through unrelated shell entities.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — Present. The original filing for US11159210 was on 2019-12-31, and it was issued on 2021-10-26. SK Telecom assigned its full interest to Wilus on 2024-06-20 (Reel 066746/0001). Wilus subsequently initiated its first US litigation, including US11159210, against Samsung and HP around September-October 2024. This places the full assignment to Wilus within 6 months prior to the first infringement suits where Wilus is the plaintiff.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. Neither SK Telecom nor Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. show any indication of bankruptcy proceedings.

7. Privateering — Unclear. While SK Telecom, a large operating company, transferred its interest to Wilus, an R&D and licensing company, there is no explicit evidence from the provided text to confirm if this transfer was specifically for assertion against SK Telecom's competitors on SK Telecom's behalf.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The chain ends with Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc., which is actively asserting the patent.

Verdict

NPE — moderate confidence

The pre-litigation transfer to Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. (Reel 066746/0001 on 2024-06-20), immediately preceding Wilus's first US litigation campaign where it asserted US11159210 around September-October 2024, is a strong signal of an assertion-focused strategy. While Wilus describes itself as an R&D entity and standards contributor, its active role as a plaintiff in patent infringement lawsuits against major technology companies and its participation in patent pools (which can be a mechanism for monetization) points towards a business model that heavily relies on patent licensing and enforcement. The full assignment from SK Telecom to Wilus also supports this, as an operating company divested its interest to a firm focused on IP.

USPTO Assignment Center search: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 11159210, I will search the USPTO database for the patent and then review its cited references.

USPTO Search for Patent 11159210:

The USPTO provides a Patent Public Search tool to access U.S. patents and published applications. I can use the basic search function by entering the patent number.

Identifying Prior Art and Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102):

Under 35 U.S.C. § 102, a patent claim is anticipated, and thus not novel, if every element of the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior art reference. It is not permissible to combine multiple references to show anticipation.

I will examine the "Cited by Examiner" and "Other References" sections of the patent on the USPTO website to identify the prior art. For each relevant prior art reference, I will provide the full citation, publication/filing date, a brief description, and discuss which claim(s) it potentially anticipates under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Since I don't have direct access to the USPTO's internal database search results or the specific "Cited by Examiner" and "Other References" sections for US11159210, I cannot provide the exact prior art from the USPTO website in this response. However, I can explain the process and the criteria for anticipation based on 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Prior Art Analysis Procedure:

1. Retrieve Patent 11159210 from USPTO: I would use the USPTO Patent Public Search (PPUBS) or Patent Center and search for patent number 11159210 to access its full text and associated documents, specifically looking for the "References Cited" section.
2. List All Cited References: I would extract all patent and non-patent literature cited as prior art by the examiner.
3. Analyze Each Reference for Anticipation: For each cited reference:
   • Full Citation: Record the complete patent number, publication number, or other identifying details.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Note the relevant date to establish its prior art status.
   • Brief Description: Summarize the core teachings of the prior art reference.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102):
     • Compare each independent claim of US11159210 (Claims 1 and 12, as per the Patent Summary) against the disclosure of that single prior art reference.
     • Determine if every single element of an independent claim is expressly or inherently disclosed in the reference.
     • If so, identify the specific claim(s) that are potentially anticipated.
     • If the prior art discloses a species within a claimed genus, the claim to the genus may be anticipated. Similarly, a single disclosed value within a claimed numerical range can anticipate the range.

Without the actual list of cited prior art from the USPTO record for US11159210, I cannot perform this detailed analysis.

Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103

To determine if the claims of US11159210 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103, we must consider whether the claimed subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA). A PHOSITA is a hypothetical person presumed to have known the relevant art at the relevant time and possesses ordinary creativity, not an automaton. This analysis involves identifying relevant prior art, determining the differences between the prior art and the claimed invention, and then assessing whether a PHOSITA would have been motivated to combine or modify the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success.

Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art (PHOSITA)

In the context of US11159210, which relates to wireless communication methods and terminals for signaling multi-user packets, particularly within the IEEE 802.11ax (Wi-Fi 6) standard, a PHOSITA would likely possess:

• Educational Level: A bachelor's or master's degree in electrical engineering, computer science, or a related field.
• Technical Experience: Several years of experience (e.g., 3-5+ years) working with wireless communication systems, particularly in the design, implementation, or standardization of Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) technologies (e.g., IEEE 802.11 standards).
• Knowledge Base: A thorough understanding of:
  • OFDM/OFDMA and MIMO/MU-MIMO technologies.
  • PHY (Physical Layer) and MAC (Medium Access Control) layer protocols in WLANs.
  • PPDU (PHY Protocol Data Unit) structures, including preambles and various fields like L-SIG, HE-SIG-A, HE-SIG-B, L-STF, L-LTF, HE-STF, and HE-LTF.
  • Concepts such as resource unit (RU) allocation, spatial streams, MCS (Modulation and Coding Scheme), and various types of PPDUs (SU, MU, ER SU, Trigger-based).
  • The challenges and ongoing developments in high-efficiency and high-performance wireless LAN communication in high-density environments, especially in the context of 802.11ax.
  • Preamble puncturing and non-contiguous channel allocation techniques.

Prior Art References

The patent itself lists several IEEE 802.11 standards as background art, which are inherently part of the knowledge of a PHOSITA in this field. Specifically, the patent discusses IEEE 802.11b, 802.11a, 802.11g, 802.11n, 802.11ac, and 802.11ad. The core of the invention lies in the context of "next-generation wireless LAN standards" after 802.11ac and 802.11ad, particularly focusing on "High Efficiency" (HE) PPDUs, which are characteristic of IEEE 802.11ax.

Relevant prior art references that may be considered for an obviousness analysis include:

• General knowledge of IEEE 802.11ax (Wi-Fi 6) standards: The patent explicitly discusses HE MU PPDU, HE-SIG-A, and HE-SIG-B, which are fundamental to 802.11ax. The concept of an HE MU PPDU with a preamble including HE-SIG-A and HE-SIG-B is well-established in 802.11ax. HE-SIG-A provides common information for PPDU reception, while HE-SIG-B provides necessary information for OFDMA and DL MU-MIMO resource allocation and only exists in multi-user transmission.
• Prior art related to preamble puncturing: Techniques for preamble puncturing, where the HE-SIG-A indicates pre-defined puncture patterns and the HE-SIG-B refines them, were known in the context of 802.11ax HE MU PPDUs. This includes scenarios where the common field of HE-SIG-B indicates RU sizes and allocation to users, and the per-user field identifies each user and provides information like MCS, NSTS, and coding.
• Prior art on UL MU PPDU formats and SIG-A fields: The idea that a SIG-A field in a UL MU PPDU could have a different format from downlink PPDUs or uplink single-user PPDUs, particularly when triggered by an AP, was also known.

Obviousness Combinations

The independent claims (Claim 1 and Claim 12) of US11159210 center on a wireless communication terminal/method that receives an HE MU PPDU, where the preamble includes HE-SIG-A and HE-SIG-B, and decodes the PPDU based on information from HE-SIG-A, with the configuration of HE-SIG-B being identified based on information from at least one subfield of HE-SIG-A.

Combination 1: General 802.11ax PPDU structure + Preamble Puncturing Signaling

• References:

  • General knowledge of IEEE 802.11ax (e.g., as described in the background of US11159210 and general 802.11ax documentation). This would teach the basic structure of an HE MU PPDU, including the presence of HE-SIG-A and HE-SIG-B in its preamble, and the general purpose of these fields for conveying common and user-specific information in multi-user transmissions.
  • Prior art detailing preamble puncturing techniques in 802.11ax (e.g., as discussed in "Techniques for preamble puncturing" and "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ENHANCED PREAMBLE PUNCTURED PPDU IN A WIRELESS NETWORK"). This prior art explicitly teaches using HE-SIG-A to indicate pre-defined puncture patterns and HE-SIG-B to further refine the puncture pattern. It also mentions that the common field of HE-SIG-B indicates RU sizes and allocation, while the per-user field identifies users and provides MCS, NSTS, etc.

• Motivation to Combine: A PHOSITA would be motivated to combine these references to efficiently signal multi-user packets, especially in environments with high interference or when transmitting in punctured bandwidths. The problem of efficiently conveying multi-user allocation and configuration information while maintaining backward compatibility and enabling flexible resource allocation is a well-known challenge in WLAN standards. The general 802.11ax framework provides the foundational PPDU structure, and the preamble puncturing techniques provide a specific mechanism for using HE-SIG-A and HE-SIG-B to signal configuration details. A PHOSITA would naturally combine the general understanding of HE-SIG-A and HE-SIG-B with the specific signaling mechanisms for preamble puncturing to enable robust and flexible multi-user communication. The goal would be to optimize resource utilization and allow for dynamic adaptation to channel conditions, which is a core objective of 802.11ax.

• Reasoning for Obviousness: The claims state that "a preamble of the HE MU PPDU includes high efficiency signal A field (HE-SIG-A) and high efficiency signal B field (HE-SIG-B)" and that the terminal "decodes the received HE MU PPDU based on information obtained from the HE-SIG-A, wherein a configuration of the HE-SIG-B is identified based on information obtained from at least one subfield of the HE-SIG-A." This is directly taught or strongly suggested by the combination. The prior art on preamble puncturing explicitly details how HE-SIG-A can indicate puncturing modes and how HE-SIG-B can further specify punctured RUs and assign remaining RUs. This demonstrates that a PHOSITA would have understood that the configuration of HE-SIG-B (e.g., its content or interpretation regarding RU allocation) would be contingent on, or identified by, information carried in HE-SIG-A. The "common field indicates RU sizes and allocation to a number of users, while the per user field identifies each user that is assigned an RU. The per user field provides info on MCS, NSTS, coding, etc." This shows how information in HE-SIG-A (e.g., indicating a puncture pattern that affects RU allocation) would dictate the subsequent interpretation and "configuration" of the HE-SIG-B.

Combination 2: Downlink HE MU PPDU + Uplink HE MU PPDU Signaling Differences

• References:

  • General knowledge of IEEE 802.11ax, particularly differentiating between downlink (DL) and uplink (UL) transmissions and the use of HE MU PPDUs for both. The patent itself highlights the UL/DL field in HE-SIG-A and how certain subfields may indicate different information based on its value.
  • Prior art discussing specific differences in SIG-A field formats for UL MU PPDUs compared to downlink or SU PPDUs. For example, EP3286857B1 mentions that a SIG-A field in a UL MU PPDU can have a format different from downlink PPDUs or uplink single-user (SU) PPDUs, especially when UL MU transmission is triggered by an AP.

• Motivation to Combine: A PHOSITA would be motivated to optimize the signaling within HE MU PPDUs for both uplink and downlink scenarios. It is well-known in wireless communication that uplink and downlink channels often have different characteristics and resource allocation strategies. Therefore, adapting the signaling within the preamble (specifically HE-SIG-A and HE-SIG-B) based on the transmission direction (UL/DL) would be a logical step for a PHOSITA seeking to improve efficiency and performance. The motivation is to streamline the signaling for each direction, potentially by omitting unnecessary fields or reinterpreting existing ones to convey more relevant information.

• Reasoning for Obviousness: The claims broadly cover identifying the HE-SIG-B configuration based on HE-SIG-A information. If prior art teaches that HE-SIG-A in UL MU PPDUs can have a different format (and thus convey different information) than DL PPDUs, it would be obvious to a PHOSITA to use a subfield within HE-SIG-A (such as a UL/DL indicator) to inform the interpretation or "configuration" of the subsequent HE-SIG-B field. For instance, if the UL/DL field indicates an uplink transmission, the PHOSITA would know that certain fields in HE-SIG-B might be compressed or interpreted differently (e.g., as discussed in the patent for SIG-B compression and the number of HE-SIG-B symbols field). This adaptation of signaling based on transmission direction is a common engineering approach in wireless standards. The patent itself describes how the UL/DL field can cause other HE-SIG-A subfields (like bandwidth or SIG-B compression) to indicate different information or be set differently, which in turn affects the HE-SIG-B configuration. This level of detail in the patent regarding how the UL/DL field affects other fields further emphasizes the obviousness of using HE-SIG-A information to define HE-SIG-B's configuration based on transmission direction.