DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is with regard to the most recent papers filed 7/14/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/14/2025 have been fully considered but are deemed not persuasive.
With regard to Applicant’s arguments with regard to claims 6-8, Applicant argues that Davis fails to teach certain limitations. In support of this, Applicant argues that the gateway of Davis collects information from a plurality of slave devices. However, as provided in the rejection below, the gateways are taking the role of slave devices and the central control center is taking the role of master. Davis is applied to demonstrate that it was known in the art to have a device (slave) collect information on connections from it to other devices (corresponding electronic devices) and provide that to a central device (master), where the slave in the case of Davis is the gateway, itself. It is noted that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Accordingly, as Applicant’s arguments fail to address the rationale provided in the rejection, the arguments are found to be not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2003/0073495 (D’Amico) in view of US 8,800,868 (Davis), “Power over Ethernet” posted at <https://Caldernetwork.eu/pages/power-over-ethernet> on 7/15/2020 (Zhu), US 2015/0324386 (Calder), and 2013/0018765 (Fork).
With regard to claim 1, D’Amico discloses a telemetry system to audit electronic transactions from electronic devices, comprising
a data acquisition system (D’Amico: Figure 2) comprising:
at least one smart master device comprising means for electrically acquiring data from a plurality of electronic devices that are, a memory device, at least one processor and a communications device (D’Amico: Figure 2, 22. The central authority device acquires the information from the local databases of the different polling devices (slave devices).);
a plurality of slave devices, each slave device comprising means for connecting to an electronic device being audited; a secure memory device; a processor; and a communications device (D’Amico: Figure 2, 40 and 60. The term “secure memory device” does not provide for how it is secure, but in D’Amico, the device is at least secure by virtue of being able to store a certain amount of data during a pre-defined period of time before sending it to the central authority.);
wherein the smart master device coordinates the plurality of slave devices (D’Amico: Paragraph [0024]. Lacking detail of “coordinates,” the collection of data from each of the devices of D’Amico would serve to coordinate the slave devices in as much detail as recited by the instant claim.);
wherein the smart master device and the plurality of slave devices are connected in a network topology via the communications device of the smart master device and the communications devices of the plurality of slave devices (D’Amico: Figure 2);
wherein the secure memory device in each of the plurality of slave devices stores data acquired by the slave device when said slave device is offline, and wherein the processor of each slave device is configured to package the data that is saved while the slave device is offline and to send the packaged data once the connection to the network is enabled (D’Amico: Paragraph [0022] and [0024]. If the networks are disabled (and thus the units 40 and 60 would be offline), data continues to be collected in the local databases, where such would be synchronized at some point after the network connection is reestablished.);
wherein the smart master device acquires data from the plurality of slave devices (D’Amico: Paragraph [0024]), wherein the acquired data includes information regarding the status of the plurality of slave devices (D’Amico: Paragraph [0042]. The output data is used to generate audit data, where such audit data concerns at least transactions made and stored by the gaming machine, which is within the scope of the overly broad “information regarding the status of the plurality of slave devices.”; and
wherein the prepared acquired data includes information regarding electronic transactions performed by the electronic devices to which each of the plurality of slave devices are connected (D’Amico: Paragraph [0022]).
D’Amico fails to disclose but Davis teaches the status information including information regarding the status of connections of the slave devices to the corresponding electronic devices (Davis: Column 5, lines 14-22. The gateway (slave) sends status information of connected devices (electronic devices) to the central control center (master) based on monitoring such connections.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to send status information concerning the connections between the slave devices to the electronic devices to allow such information to be available for management and reporting functions in a centralized fashion.
D’Amico fails to teach, but Zhu teaches:
a power source; wherein the power source provides power to the smart master device and the plurality of slave devices; wherein the power is fed to the smart master device and the plurality of slave devices by electrical cables linking the smart master device and the plurality of slave devices (Zhu: Power over Ethernet (PoE) was a known technology that served to utilize the same cabling to transmit data and power to different devices.). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize PoE, whether by having the central authority being the power sourcing device or having the central authority and the units connected to the same power sourcing device, to simplify the connection of the different devices, as power connections would not need to be installed for each and every polling unit. Further, the use of PoE provides additional management benefits, as provided in Zhu (Zhu: Page 5, “What are the advantages of PoE?”).
D’Amico fails to teach expressly, but Calder teaches wherein the processor of the smart master device is configured to prepare the acquired data for uploading to a cloud centralized data base, and wherein the smart master device sends the prepared acquired data (Calder: Paragraph [0019]. Backing up data, such as from a database, to a cloud-based service was known in the art.). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to prepare the acquired data for uploading to a cloud centralized database and send the prepared acquired data to better secure the data, where an issue with the central authority would not result in the loss of the data in the data base, as a backup would be provided. As a note, it was also known to offload storage to a cloud service, which would result in the database of the central authority being placed entirely in the cloud. However, in this case, the use of the cloud storage for backup is being relied upon.
D’Amico fails to teach, but Fork teaches a gateway device; where the prepared acquired data is sent to the gateway device; and wherein the gateway device receives the prepared acquired data from the smart master device, and wherein the gateway device uploads the prepared acquired data to a cloud based data base by encapsulating the data and uploading it through a network using a virtual private network (VPN) (Fork: Paragraph [0020] and Figure 1. The use of a VPN gateway to connect to a cloud provider was well-known in the art.). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize a VPN gateway to receive and prepare communications to the cloud provider to secure such communications (the use of VPN results in the data being encapsulated for transmission (Fork: Paragraph [0035]) without requiring that devices include a VPN client, thus requiring less modification/configuration of the device (e.g. the central authority of D’Amico would only need to transmit the data in accordance with Calder, but would not need to implement the VPN functionality locally, as the gateway would provide such functionality.).
With regard to claim 2, D’Amico in view of Zhu fails to teach, but Official Notice is taken that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the network is wired using modified unshielded twisted pair(UTP) cables (More specifically, while Zhu teaches the use of PoE, which would constitute a modified twisted pair cable, Zhu does not disclose details of being shielded or unshielded. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been aware of both unshielded and shielded network cables, where the specific choice between the two would be a design choice based on the needs of the network.). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to utilize unshielded twisted pair cables to reduce the cost of the cabling in applications where shielded is not necessary, such as lower speed transmissions and/or shorter lengths of cabling.
With regard to claim 3, D’Amico in view of Zhu teaches that the modified UTP cables comprise four pairs of wires, wherein a pair of wires are used to provide a DC voltage to feed power to the smart master device and the plurality of slave devices (Zhu: Pages 6-7).
With regard to claim 4, D’Amico fails to teach, but Official Notice is taken that it would have been well-known in the art at the time of filing to have the network connection between the smart master device and the gateway device is wireless (more specifically, the use of wireless vs. wired communication was well-known in the art, where at least one of the two options would be needed for each and every connection, including the connection between the central authority of D’Amico and the VPN gateway of Fork.). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize a wireless connection between the central authority and the gateway as a design choice, where wireless communications can simplify the installation of the network by not requiring a wire between the central authority and the gateway.
With regard to claim 6, D’Amico teaches that the acquired data also comprises information regarding the status of the connections of the slave devices to the corresponding electronic devices, to the network and/or to the smart master device (D’Amico: Paragraph [0022]. Lacking detail concerning the nature of the information and the use of the information, the receipt of any communication, in itself, would provide information that the slave device is connected (status of the connections to the network) and would also include any information collected by the slave device, which would provide information on the status of the stored data. For clarity, Applicant should provide additional detail concerning what type of information is provided and how it relays the status of the slave devices.).
With regard to claim 7, D’Amico fails to teach expressly, but Official Notice is taken that it would have been well-known in the art at the time of filing to have each of the plurality of slave devices and the smart master device comprises a display screen showing historical and statistical data, as well as identification information of the device (more specifically, the providing of displays on computing device to enable viewing of information stored/collected by the device and information on which device it is was well-known in the art). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide some sort of display to allow for the showing of data collected by the device and information on the device to allow for simplified management of the devices, where if a device is having issues or some information needs to be quickly viewed on a local device, providing only remote connection solutions to view the information would be potentially cumbersome if not impossible (where providing both a local UI and a remote UI would allow a user to determine how to connect to the device and provides a failsafe of the local UI if there are connectivity issues.).
With regard to claim 11, the instant claim is similar to claim 1, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2003/0073495 D’Amico in view of Davis, Zhu, Calder, and Fork, and further in view of US 2009/0254780 (Mizuno) and US 2007/0207852 (Nelson).
With regard to claim 8, D’Amico fails to teach, but Mizuno teaches that the acquired data includes logs (Mizuno: Paragraph [0005]. Logs regarding status information can be collected in addition to information about jobs (e.g. the data of D’Amico) can be collected.). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to collect status logs to enable the presentation of such logged information, including any errors, to a human operator or other functionality to allow for the correction of such issues.
Further, D’Amico in view of Mizuno fail to teach, but Nelson teaches that the logs comprises information regarding an open door condition for an electronic device to which one of the plurality of slave devices is connected (Nelson: Paragraph [0031]. Open and close door events may be logged). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to log open and door closures to allow such events to be reviewed and action to be taken as necessary (such as improve training or investigate theft and/or vandalism).
With regard to claim 9, D’Amico fails to teach, but Mizuno teaches that the acquired data includes logs (Mizuno: Paragraph [0005]. Logs regarding status information can be collected in addition to information about jobs (e.g. the data of D’Amico) can be collected.). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to collect status logs to enable the presentation of such logged information, including any errors, to a human operator or other functionality to allow for the correction of such issues.
Further, D’Amico in view of Mizuno fail to teach, but Nelson teaches that the logs comprises information regarding an energy failure of an electronic device to which one of the plurality of slave devices is connected (Nelson: Paragraph [0031]. Power failure events may be logged). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to power failures to be logged to allow for the reporting and correction of such issues (e.g. a power loss isolated to a single machine would need to be troubleshooted and remedied).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 10 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2003/0073495 D’Amico in view of Davis, Zhu, Calder, and Fork, and further in view of US 2011/0188379 (Calippe).
With regard to claim 13, D’Amico fails to teach, but Calippe teaches that the information regarding the status of connections of the slave devices comprises information regarding the status of connections between the slave devices and the network (Calippe: Paragraph [0147]. Any desired connections can be tested, which, in combination with the testing of Davis, would also test the connections from the slave device to the master device (which would also include the joining network.)).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to also include information regarding the status of connections between the slave devices and the network to ensure that any connection issues are known at the master device, such that corrective actions (even if as simple as providing an alert to a human operator) can be taken if there is an issue.
With regard to claim 14, D’Amico fails to teach, but Calippe teaches that the information regarding the status of connections of the slave devices comprises information regarding the status of connections between the slave devices and the smart master device (Calippe: Paragraph [0147]. Any desired connections can be tested, which, in combination with the testing of Davis, would also test the connections from the slave device to the master device).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to also include information regarding the status of connections between the slave devices and the master device to ensure that any connection issues are known at the master device, such that corrective actions (even if as simple as providing an alert to a human operator) can be taken if there is an issue.
With regard to claim 10, the instant claim is similar to claim 14, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SCOTT B CHRISTENSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1144. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 6AM to 2PM.
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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571) 272-3964. 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.
SCOTT B. CHRISTENSEN
Examiner
Art Unit 2444
/SCOTT B CHRISTENSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444