DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Response to Non-Final Rejection filed August 29, 2025. Claims 1, 6-8, 11-12, 14-19, 21-22, and 24, are presently pending and presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority based on French Patent Application No. FR1902194, filed March 4, 2019.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 6-8, 11-12, 14-19, 21-22, and 24. have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
An updated and detailed rejection follows below.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 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.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 7-8, 11-12, 14-19, 21-22, and 24, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shubs, JR. et al. (US 20160297454; hereinafter Shubs, already of record), in view of DeSanzo et al. (US 20120316743; hereinafter DeSanzo, already of record), and further in view of Galula et al. (US 20170013005; hereinafter Galula).
Regarding Claim 1,
Shubs teaches
A data collection module for collecting data relating to at least one device of a vehicle, (Shubs: Abstract) the data collection module comprising
...
...the data retrieval means configured to emit commands for reading the data relating to the at least one device; (Shubs: Paragraph [0026]) and
...
in response to the checking means authenticating the commands, the data retrieval means is configured to collect, during the operation of the at least one device, the data relating to the at least one device via the communication path that is established, (Shubs: Paragraph [0015]-[0017])
...
Shubs does not teach,
...
connection means disposed onboard the vehicle and comprising a serial port, the connection means configured to be connected to a maintenance port a device controller that manages operation of the at least one device, the connection means configured to establish a communication path with the device controller through the maintenance port;
data retrieval means disposed onboard the vehicle and comprising a microprocessor,...
checking means disposed onboard the vehicle and comprising a programmable component, the checking means configured for checking authenticity of the commands emitted by the data retrieval means, and
...
wherein the checking means is further configured to monitor a frequency of exchanges in communication along the communication path, and to prevent additional communications between the data collection module and the device controller in response to determining that the monitored frequency of exchanges does not match a predefined frequency of exchanges.
However in the same field of endeavor, DeSanzo teaches
...
connection means disposed onboard the vehicle and comprising a serial port, (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0043]) the connection means configured to be connected to a maintenance port a device controller that manages operation of the at least one device, (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0021]-[0022]; The device controller obtains health/status information through ports (302) on the vehicle which act as maintenance ports.) the connection means configured to establish a communication path with the device controller through the maintenance port; (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0033])
data retrieval means disposed onboard the vehicle and comprising a microprocessor,... (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0039]; “The processor 200 can include a microprocessor, controller, or equivalent control circuitry.”)
checking means disposed onboard the vehicle and comprising a programmable component, , (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0033]; The system has a configurable (programmable) gateway device which checks communication protocols between the client device and the diagnostic modules.) the checking means configured for checking authenticity of the commands emitted by the data retrieval means, (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0033]; The gateway device checks the communication protocols being used by the client device and determines what data to send or what rules to follow based on the check. The gateway device may also be re-configured to allow communication with different communication protocols.) and
...
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the data collection modules disposed on a multi-vehicle system of Shubs with the connection and checking means of DeSanzo for the benefit of allowing for different systems, services, applications, and the like in a vehicle. (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0006])
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, does not teach
...
wherein the checking means is further configured to monitor a frequency of exchanges in communication along the communication path, and to prevent additional communications between the data collection module and the device controller in response to determining that the monitored frequency of exchanges does not match a predefined frequency of exchanges.
However in the same field of endeavor, Galula teaches
...
wherein the checking means is further configured to monitor a frequency of exchanges in communication along the communication path, and to prevent additional communications between the data collection module and the device controller in response to determining that the monitored frequency of exchanges does not match a predefined frequency of exchanges. (Galula: Paragraph [0068]-[0072], [0079], see also the combination of Shubs and DeSanzo as mapped above for the communication exchanges being particular to communications between the data collection module and the device controller )
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the checking means of Shubs and DeSanzo with the message frequency checking process of Galula for the benefit of making it easier to identify and/or detect faults or malfunctions of, or related to, components and networks included in a vehicle. (Galula: Paragraph [0009])
Regarding Claim 7,
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, further in view of Galula, teaches
The data collection module of claim 1, further comprising:
a data concentrator module disposed onboard the vehicle (Shubs: Paragraph [0017]; “Master Control Module” (26)) and configured to receive the data that is collected by the data retrieval means, (Shubs: Paragraph [0017]; “The communication module 34 is provided on-board the slave rolling stock 28 and is communicably coupled with the diagnostic module 32 of the corresponding slave rolling stock 28. The communication module 34 may be utilized to communicate directly with the remote control station 36 and/or with the master control modules 26 as the case may be. Accordingly, the communication module 34 is configured to receive the signal indicative of the operational data and/or the health data associated with the slave rolling stock 28 of the train 10.”) the data concentrator module configured to transmit the data that that is received from the data retrieval means to a server located off-board the vehicle. (Shubs: Paragraph [0006]; “The master control module is configured to forward the at least one of the operational data and the health data associated with the slave rolling stock to the remote control station. The master control module is configured to transmit the at least one of the operational data and the health data associated with the master control module to the remote control station.”)
Regarding Claim 8,
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, further in view of Galula, teaches
A data processing system, (Shubs: Abstract) comprising:
data collection modules disposed onboard a multi-vehicle system that includes multiple vehicles, (Shubs: Paragraph [0014]-[0015]) each of the data collection modules associated with a different corresponding device controller of multiple device controllers disposed onboard the multi-vehicle system Shubs: Paragraph [0015]; Each “wagon” is equipped with a diagnostic module which are configured to control various sensors (devices) that are equipped on the wagons and obtain health data of each wagon from said sensors.) and configured to connect to a respective maintenance port of the corresponding device controller, (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0021]-[0022]; The device controller obtains health/status information through ports (302) on the vehicle which act as maintenance ports.) each of the device controllers configured to manage operation of at least one device of a set of devices onboard the multi-vehicle system, (Shubs: Paragraph [0015]; Each “wagon” is equipped with a diagnostic module which are configured to control various sensors (devices) that are equipped on the wagons.) each of the data collection modules configured to collect data, via the respective maintenance port, relating to the at least one device that is managed by the corresponding device controller; (Shubs: Paragraph [0015]; Each “wagon” is equipped with a diagnostic module which are configured to control various sensors (devices) that are equipped on the wagons.) and
a data concentrator module disposed onboard the multi-vehicle system (Shubs: Paragraph [0017]; “Master Control Module” (26)) and configured to receive, from the data collection modules, the data that is collected by the data collection modules, (Shubs: Paragraph [0017]; “The communication module 34 is provided on-board the slave rolling stock 28 and is communicably coupled with the diagnostic module 32 of the corresponding slave rolling stock 28. The communication module 34 may be utilized to communicate directly with the remote control station 36 and/or with the master control modules 26 as the case may be. Accordingly, the communication module 34 is configured to receive the signal indicative of the operational data and/or the health data associated with the slave rolling stock 28 of the train 10.”) the data concentrator module configured to communicate the data that is received to one or more servers located off-board the multi-vehicle system, (Shubs: Paragraph [0006]; “The master control module is configured to forward the at least one of the operational data and the health data associated with the slave rolling stock to the remote control station. The master control module is configured to transmit the at least one of the operational data and the health data associated with the master control module to the remote control station.”)
wherein each of the data collection modules includes a microprocessor (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0039]; “The processor 200 can include a microprocessor, controller, or equivalent control circuitry.”) and a programmable checking component, (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0033]; The system has a configurable gateway device which checks communication protocols between the client device and the diagnostic modules.) the microprocessor configured to emit commands to the maintenance port of the corresponding device controller for reading the data relating to the at least one device, (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0022]) the programmable checking component configured to check whether the commands are authorized prior to communicating the commands to the maintenance port, (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0033]; The gateway device checks the communication protocols being used by the client device and determines what data to send or what rules to follow based on the check. The gateway device may also be re-configured to allow communication with different communication protocols.) and
wherein the programmable checking component is further configured to monitor a frequency of exchanges in communication along the maintenance port, (Galula: Paragraph [0268]) and to prevent additional communications with the maintenance port in response to determining that the monitored frequency of exchanges does not match a predefined frequency of exchanges. (Galula: Paragraph [0068]-[0072], [0079])
The motivation to combine Shubs, DeSanzo, and Galula, is the same as stated for Claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 11, the claim is analogous to Claim 8 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 8.
Regarding Claim 12, the claim is analogous to Claim 1 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 14,
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, further in view of Galula, teaches
The method of claim 12 further comprising:
transmitting the data that is collected from the data collection module to a data concentrator module disposed on the vehicle. (Shubs: Paragraph [0017]; “The communication module 34 is provided on-board the slave rolling stock 28 and is communicably coupled with the diagnostic module 32 of the corresponding slave rolling stock 28. The communication module 34 may be utilized to communicate directly with the remote control station 36 and/or with the master control modules 26 as the case may be. Accordingly, the communication module 34 is configured to receive the signal indicative of the operational data and/or the health data associated with the slave rolling stock 28 of the train 10.”)
Regarding Claim 15,
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, further in view of Galula, teaches
The method of claim 14, further comprising:
forwarding the data received by the data concentrator module, to one or more servers located off-board the vehicle. (Shubs: Paragraph [0006]; “The master control module is configured to forward the at least one of the operational data and the health data associated with the slave rolling stock to the remote control station. The master control module is configured to transmit the at least one of the operational data and the health data associated with the master control module to the remote control station.”)
Regarding Claim 16,
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, further in view of Galula, teaches
The method of claim 12, wherein the vehicle is a passenger transport vehicle. (Shubs: Paragraph [0013]; “The train 10 further includes the wagons 16 which are coupled to each other...In one embodiment, the master control module 26 may be the locomotive 12 of the train 10. The wagons 16 are utilized for carrying goods or services, or carrying passengers from one location to another.”)
Regarding Claim 17, the claim is analogous to Claim 16 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 16.
Regarding Claim 18, the claim is analogous to Claim 16 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 16.
Regarding Claim 19,
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, further in view of Galula, teaches
The data collection module of claim 1, wherein the checking means is configured to check the authenticity of the commands by (i) enabling the commands to be emitted to the maintenance port in response to determining that the commands belong to a set of authorized reading commands, (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0004]-[0005]) and (ii) blocking the commands from being emitted to the maintenance port in response to determining that the commands do not belong to the set of authorized reading commands. (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0005]; In order to allow a client device to communicate with the data collection module, the communication protocol must match the protocol of the gateway interface. Otherwise, the gateway must be re-configured in order to allow communication.)
The motivation to combine Shubs, DeSanzo, and Galula, is the same as stated for Claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 21,
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, further in view of Galula, teaches
The method of claim 14, wherein the data collection module is a first data collection module (Shubs: Paragraph [0015]; Each “wagon” is equipped with a diagnostic module which are configured to control various sensors (devices) that are equipped on the wagons.) and the data that is transmitted to the data concentrator module is first data, (Shubs: Paragraph [0017]; “The communication module 34 is provided on-board the slave rolling stock 28 and is communicably coupled with the diagnostic module 32 of the corresponding slave rolling stock 28. The communication module 34 may be utilized to communicate directly with the remote control station 36 and/or with the master control modules 26 as the case may be. Accordingly, the communication module 34 is configured to receive the signal indicative of the operational data and/or the health data associated with the slave rolling stock 28 of the train 10.”) the method further comprising:
communicating second data that relates to at least a second device and is collected at a second data collection module (Shubs: Paragraph [0015]; Each “wagon” is equipped with a diagnostic module which are configured to control various sensors (devices) that are equipped on the wagons.) to the data concentrator module; (Shubs: Paragraph [0017]; “The communication module 34 is provided on-board the slave rolling stock 28 and is communicably coupled with the diagnostic module 32 of the corresponding slave rolling stock 28. The communication module 34 may be utilized to communicate directly with the remote control station 36 and/or with the master control modules 26 as the case may be. Accordingly, the communication module 34 is configured to receive the signal indicative of the operational data and/or the health data associated with the slave rolling stock 28 of the train 10.”) and
transmitting the first data and the second data, via the data concentrator module, to a server located off-board the vehicle. (Shubs: Paragraph [0006]; “The master control module is configured to forward the at least one of the operational data and the health data associated with the slave rolling stock to the remote control station. The master control module is configured to transmit the at least one of the operational data and the health data associated with the master control module to the remote control station.”)
Regarding Claim 22,
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, further in view of Galula, teaches
The data processing system of claim 8, wherein a first data collection module of the data collection modules is configured to connect to the respective maintenance port of the corresponding device controller (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0021]-[0022]; The device controller obtains health/status information through ports (302) on the vehicle which act as maintenance ports.) via a serial port of the first data collection module. (DeSanzo: Paragraph [0043])
The motivation to combine Shubs, DeSanzo, and Galula, is the same as stated for Claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 24, the claim is analogous to Claim 22 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 22.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, and further in view of Galula, as applied to claims 1, 7-8, 11-12, 14-19, 21-22, and 24, above, and further in view of Gawlik et al. (US 20050216151; hereinafter Gawlik, already of record).
Regarding Claim 6,
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, further in view of Galula, teaches
The data collection module claim 1,...
Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, further in view of Galula, does not teach
...wherein the data relating to the at least one device comprises one or more of first parameters for input to the device controller, second parameters determined by the device controller, or fault statuses determined by the device controller.
However in the same field of endeavor, Gawlik teaches
...wherein the data relating to the at least one device comprises one or more of first parameters for input to the device controller, second parameters determined by the device controller, or fault statuses determined by the device controller. (Gawlik: Paragraph [0043]; The system is capable of detecting sensor errors and system faults.)
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the data collection module of Shubs, in view of DeSanzo, and further in view of Galula, with the fault status determination of Gawlik for the benefit of obtaining vehicle system performance information through a wireless communication network. (Gawlik: Paragraph [0001])
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAULO ROBERTO GONZALEZ LEITE whose telephone number is (571)272-5877. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abby Flynn can be reached on 571-272-9855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/P.R.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ABBY J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663