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 .
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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/25/2026 has been entered.
Joint Inventors
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.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 6-7, 9, 17, and 23 have been amended. Claims 10, 21, and 22 have been previously canceled and no claims have been added. The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections have been withdrawn in view of the amendments and an updated 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection has been presented below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/19/2025 have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s arguments with respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection and finds them moot with consideration to the updated 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection presented below.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 9, 12-13, 17-19, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cooper et al. (US 9221477), herein “Cooper”, further in view of Kramer et al. (US 2014/0183303), herein “Kramer”, further in view of Ngai et al. (US 8781437), herein ‘Ngai’, and further in view of Almgren (CN1109700A).
As an initial matter, it should be noted that the Cooper reference (and several other references utilized later within this section of the Office action) is a published US Patent, and purely in an effort to expedite the Applicant’s review of this reference so as to not require referencing citations with columns and line numbers, which has been known to be cumbersome at times, the citations provided by the Examiner are instead listed as paragraph numbers, similar to how the Examiner cited to paragraphs within any pre-grant publications used for the prior art rejections found herein. For citations to this Cooper reference (as an exemplary example since Cooper is the primary reference), a citation in the form of “BS Paragraph #” indicates the paragraph number within the earlier “Brief Summary” section of the published US Patent (including “Field of the Invention” sub-section starting at “BS Paragraph 1”, “Background of the Invention” sub-section starting at “BS Paragraph 3”, and the “Brief Description of the Invention” sub-section starting at “BS Paragraph 7”, which ends after “BS Paragraph 10”). Likewise, a citation in the form of “DD Paragraph #” indicates the paragraph number within the later “Detailed Description” section of the published US Patent (including “Brief Description of the Drawings” sub-section starting at “DD Paragraph 1”, and “Detailed Description of the Invention” starting at “DD Paragraph 7”, which ends after “DD Paragraph 43” (and is followed by the Claims)). As such, any paragraph number cited to from Cooper over “10” must be from the section for Detailed Description, but any paragraph number cited to from Cooper “10” or below could be from either section, so the citation should be checked to see if it says “BS” or “DD” prior to the Paragraph #. This methodology will be utilized for not just Cooper, but any cited to US Patents included in this Office action or during future Office actions should prosecution be continued/extended/reopened/etc. If Applicant has difficulty finding these citations within published US Patents using this citation format, or simply prefers the Examiner instead use the more traditional citation format of columns and line numbers, Examiner requests Applicant say so in their reply to this Office action, and at that point the Examiner would gladly change their citation format for the Cooper reference (and any other published US Patents used in citations) in all future Office correspondence.
Regarding Claim 1 (independent), Cooper discloses a vehicle control system (“Communications system and method for a rail vehicle”, Title; transportation system 210 per Fig. 4) comprising:
[one or more of a head of vehicle (HOV) unit or an end of vehicle (EOV) unit] (see obviousness discussion pertaining to Kramer below), the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit including functional devices (communications device/-s 130), one or more processors (see processor 120 and control module 124 per Fig. 2), and a location signal receiver (see locator element 140 per Fig. 2, which may be a GPS sensor, in combination with satellites 136 and/or database 208 and/or other external sources, and steps 302/308 per Fig. 3; “A processor 120 is provided that is operable to receive information from the locator element 140”, Detailed Description (DD) Paragraph 12, “communications system 200 is located within the locomotive 110, but may be equivalently located anywhere on the train 100. The control module 124 is communicably coupled to the communications device 130 and to the locator element 140”, DD Paragraph 14, “One or more locator elements 140, configured to determine a location of the train 100, are provided on board the train 100. The locator elements 140 include, for example, a GPS (global positioning system) sensor in communication with one or more satellites 136, or a system of sensors, that determines a location of the train 100”, DD Paragraph 10, “subsequent to the location 202 of the train being determined, the determined location is cross-referenced to the geographic regions 204 in the database, for identifying the region in which the train is currently located. Based on the identified region, the designated control settings 206 for that region are determined by cross-referencing the identified region to the control settings 206 associated with that region in the database 208”, DD Paragraph 16, “At step 302, a first location 202 of the train is determined”, DD Paragraph 18, “at step 308, a determination may be made that the train 100 has traversed from the first location 202 to a second location 218. This may be done by comparing different location information determined at different points in time, e.g., sequentially determined location information”, DD Paragraph 22, “determining a location of the train 100 comprises obtaining location information from multiple locator elements 140 (at least two), for example, from a GPS sensor, wayside devices such as radio frequency automatic equipment identification (RF AEI) tags, dispatch, cellular network devices, video determination, tachometer(s) aboard a locomotive and distance calculations from a reference point, and/or the trip optimizer system or other train control system”, DD Paragraph 24),
the functional devices (communications device/-s 130) configured to perform one or more operations to control operation of a vehicle system on which the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit is disposed (“The control setting may comprise a designated communication channel…among other operational configurations such as communications device volume and/or display settings, default communication messages, or the like”, DD Paragraph 8, “pre-specified channel or frequency settings 206”, DD Paragraph 14),
the location signal receiver configured to receive location signals from an off-board source (satellites 136 and/or database 208 and/or other external sources),
the one or more processors configured to obtain or determine a location of the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit based on the location signals (“A processor 120 is provided that is operable to receive information from the locator element 140”, DD Paragraph 12) and to change a mode of operation of at least one of the functional devices [from a first mode of operation to a second mode of operation] responsive to the location of the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit changing from [a first designated area or location comprising a first wireless interference level] (see first location 202 per Fig. 4 / control setting 206 of communications device 130 operating in a first manner; “At step 304, a control setting 206 of a communications device 130 is determined based on the first location 202 of the train 100. At step 306, the communications device 130 is controlled based on the control setting 206 determined at step 304”, DD Paragraph 18, “subsequent to the location 202 of the train being determined, the determined location is cross-referenced to the geographic regions 204 in the database, for identifying the region in which the train is currently located. Based on the identified region, the designated control settings 206 for that region are determined by cross-referencing the identified region to the control settings 206 associated with that region in the database 208”, DD Paragraph 16) to [a second designated area or location comprising a second wireless interference level that differs from the first wireless interference level], wherein the first mode of operation of the at least one functional device includes the at least one functional device operating at a [first transmission power level for the first wireless interference level], and wherein the second mode of operation of the at least one functional device includes the at least one functional device operating at a [greater or lesser second transmission power level for the second wireless interference level]. (see step 308-312 per Fig. 3 and second location 218 per Fig. 4 / control setting 206 of communications device 130 operating in a second manner; “The designated control settings may be unique for each region, e.g., none of the regions has any of the same control settings”, DD Paragraph 18, “at step 308, a determination may be made that the train 100 has traversed from the first location 202 to a second location 218. This may be done by comparing different location information determined at different points in time, e.g., sequentially determined location information”, DD Paragraph 22, “It is noted that a first communication channel (or other control setting) is used for communicating with the train 100 at the first location 202, while a second communication channel (or other control setting) is used for communicating with the train 100 at the second location 218”, DD Paragraph 22, “The method proceeds to step 310, at which one or more second control settings of the communications device 130 are determined. At step 312, the communications device 130 is controlled (automatically or otherwise) according to the second control settings determined at the step 310. That is, the communications device 130 is automatically (or otherwise) controlled by switching the communications device 130 from the first control setting (e.g., comprising a first, current channel) to a second control setting (e.g., comprising a second, new channel)”, DD Paragraph 22)
Cooper remains silent that the communications device 130 (that has its control settings 206 modified based on the determined location/-s of the vehicle) specifically changes a mode of operation from a first mode of operation to a second mode of operation, wherein the first mode of operation of the at least one functional device includes the at least one functional device operating at a first transmission power level, and wherein the second mode of operation of the at least one functional device includes the at least one functional device operating at a greater or lesser second transmission power level; however, this is taught by Ngai (in a similar field of endeavor) ([col. 23, lines 11-48] The orientation and location of each transmitter 332 and 342 along with any associated antennas 336 or 346 within the device may determine the effect of each transmitter and/or antenna to the specific absorption rate with respect to the other transmitters or antennas. In some access terminal 106 configurations, the transmitters 332 and 342 may be spatially located within the access terminal 106 (e.g., on opposite sides of the access terminal 106) Such that simultaneous transmission does not increase the overall specific absorption rate as compared to when just one antenna is transmitting. However, if the transmitters 332 and 342 are located closely together within an access terminal 106, simultaneous transmission may increase the overall specific absorption rate resulting from the access terminal 106. In this case, the access terminal 106 may be configured to account for the power transmission levels of both transmitters 332 and 342 and limit the transmission power levels of each transmitter 332 and 342 based on the power transmission level of the other. Furthermore, if additional antennas or transmitters (not shown) are also included in the access terminal 106 and which are in close proximity to transmitters 332 and 342, then the power transmission level of the three or more transmitters/antennas may be configured such that the overall contribution to the specific absorption rate is within regulatory limits. An access terminal 106 may therefore be configured to dynamically adjust transmission power limits for multiple
transmitters or antennas according to the various operating modes and any combinations thereof similarly as described above. To provide the adjustments, in one implementation, an access terminal 106 may provide a determined number of pre-configured transmission power limits corresponding to various operating modes for each transmitter 332 or 342. The power transmission levels for each type of transmission transmitted on multiple transmitters 332 and 342 may be stored in look-up tables (LUTs) associated with various communication characteristics which may be indexed by a device state index (DSI) corresponding to various operating modes as will be further described below.)
Cooper further remains silent that the communications device 130 (that has its control settings 206 modified based on the determined location/-s of the vehicle) is specifically or is specifically part of an “end of vehicle (EOV) unit” and/or a “head of vehicle (HOV) unit”; however, this is taught by Kramer (in a similar field of endeavor) (“End-of-train devices are well-known, such as those shown in U.S. patent application 20100213321, U.S. Pat. No. 5,376,925 and U.S. Pat. No. 7,096,096. These devices transmit non-visual, instrumentation information such as acceleration, motion or GPS coordinates to a head-of-train device in the locomotive, where the transmitted information is displayed to the locomotive operator. Non-visual, instrumentation information can be useful”, Paragraph 12, “the present invention is an end-of-train video system that uses paired sets of communication equipment, one located at the end of the train and another on the locomotive or other remote location off of the train. The equipment sets may communicate point to point using wires or fiber optics, or wirelessly using radios”, Paragraph 16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation for success, to have further modified the communications device/-s 130 of Cooper to specifically be or be part of an “end of vehicle (EOV) unit” and/or a “head of vehicle (HOV) unit”, as taught by Kramer, in order to enable vehicle operators (and/or remote nodes of operationally relevant devices) to receive valuable information from an end of the vehicle that may not otherwise be easily available or may not otherwise be as accurate (“Locomotive operators are generally located far from the end of the train and cannot visually observe surroundings near the train end. Nevertheless, many situations require accurately knowing conditions at the train end, such as the movement of the train end or the presence of a tripped signal, or the location of the train end relative to switches, crossings, etc. Heretofore, a locomotive operator could only monitor observed circumstances at the train end by voice radio contact or hand signals from a second observer located at the end of the train. Operators could also estimate the position of the end of the train by subtracting the known train length from locomotive odometer readings or GPS coordinates of the locomotive (on those locomotives equipped with odometers or GPS devices). However, these devices can only estimate the train end position within several meters and substantial uncertainty of the end of train position still exists. Accuracy, certainty and ultimately safety can all be enhanced if only the operator could have available real time visual images or video of the end of train vicinity that eliminated uncertainty of the train end conditions or the train end location relative to switches, crossings, etc.”, Paragraphs 10-11 of Kramer). Please note that this obviousness discussion relating to Kramer is equally applicable to the remainder of the prior art claim rejections below, and more particularly, the prior art rejections of independent Claims 9 and 17 below, but will not be repeated for the sake of brevity.
Cooper further remains silent regarding [a first designated area or location comprising a first wireless interference level] … [a second designated area or location comprising a second wireless interference level that differs from the first wireless interference level] … [first transmission power level for the first wireless interference level] … [greater or lesser second transmission power level for the second wireless interference level].
Cooper is silent regarding the following limitations, however Almgren, from an analogous field of endeavor teaches: a first designated area or location comprising a first wireless interference level … a second designated area or location comprising a second wireless interference level that differs from the first wireless interference level … first transmission power level for the first wireless interference level … greater or lesser second transmission power level for the second wireless interference level ([pg. 3, lines 37-46] the transmit power is adjusted to obtain a target C/I ratio, which is typically a monotonic subtraction function of the interference level occurring on the channel and the gain involved (transmission path loss). Therefore, the power conditioning scheme of the present invention does not involve a fixed target C/I ratio or target received signal strength. On the other hand, it is necessary to determine the interference level and determine the path loss or channel gain under normal conditions in order to find the appropriate target C/I ratio. In the following, the interference level is identified by I when describing the C/I ratio, which is usually indicated by i in the formula, but they are equal. Preferably, P, P', g, i, I, P, SS, α, β and C/I are in logarithmic form dB. Therefore, the gain g is simply given by subtraction, which is obtained from the difference between the received power level and the known transmission power level as described below. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation for success, to have modified the communications device/-s 130 of Cooper to specifically increase the wireless interference relative to the geographical area the locomotive is passing through, as taught by Almgren, in order to alter the severity of the alert system when passing through areas with increased wireless interference.
Regarding Claim 2: Cooper as modified by Ngai, Kramer, and Almgren teaches the vehicle control system of Claim 1, and Cooper further discloses:
wherein the functional devices include one or more communication devices (per Claim 2) / wherein the functional device includes one or more communication devices (per Claim 18) (communications device/-s 130), and
the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the one or more communication devices (per Claim 2) / the mode of operation of the one or more communication devices is changed (per Claim 18) responsive to the location of the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit changing from the first designated area or location to the second designated area or location (see relevant citations above per the rejections of Claims 1 and 17, which are not being repeated for the sake of brevity).
Regarding Claim 3: Cooper as modified by Ngai, Kramer, and Almgren teaches the vehicle control system of Claim 2, and Cooper further discloses:
wherein the one or more communication devices include first and second communication devices (i.e. communications device/-s 130 operating in conjunction with the second communication channel and communications device/-s 130 operating in conjunction with the first communication channel, respectively), and
the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation (per Claims 3 and 10) / the mode of operation is changed (per Claim 19) by preventing the first communication device from being used to communicate while the location of the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit is in the first designated area or location and preventing the second communication device from being used to communicate while the location of the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit is in the second designated area or location (“The designated control settings may be unique for each region, e.g., none of the regions has any of the same control settings”, DD Paragraph 18, “It is noted that a first communication channel (or other control setting) is used for communicating with the train 100 at the first location 202, while a second communication channel (or other control setting) is used for communicating with the train 100 at the second location 218”, DD Paragraph 22).
Regarding Claim 5: Cooper as modified by Ngai, Kramer, and Almgren teaches the vehicle control system of Claim 2, and Cooper further discloses: wherein the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the one or more communication devices by changing which frequencies are used by the one or more communication devices (i.e. the frequencies of communications device 130 while operating in the first control setting 206 may be different than the frequencies of communications device 130 while operating in the second control setting 206; note that the various control settings have inherently different frequencies if their settings and mode of data transfer change: “The control setting may comprise a designated communication channel…among other operational configurations such as communications device volume and/or display settings, default communication messages, or the like”, DD Paragraph 8, “pre-specified channel or frequency settings 206”, DD Paragraph 14).
Regarding Claim 9 (independent) Rejected using the same rationale as claim 1.
Regarding Claims 12, Cooper as modified by Ngai, Kramer, and Almgren teaches the vehicle control system of Claim 9, and Cooper further discloses: wherein the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the one or more communication devices by changing which frequencies are used by the one or more communication devices (i.e. the frequencies of communications device 130 while operating in the first control setting 206 may be different than the frequencies of communications device 130 while operating in the second control setting 206; note that the various control settings have inherently different frequencies if their settings and mode of data transfer change: “The control setting may comprise a designated communication channel…among other operational configurations such as communications device volume and/or display settings, default communication messages, or the like”, DD Paragraph 8, “pre-specified channel or frequency settings 206”, DD Paragraph 14).
Regarding Claim 13, Cooper as modified by Ngai, Kramer, and Almgren teaches the vehicle control system of Claim 9, and Cooper further discloses: wherein the one or more processors also are configured to change the mode of operation of a functional device of the HOV unit or the EOV unit (communications device/-s 130) based on the location (see relevant citations above per the rejection of Claim 9, which are not being repeated for the sake of brevity).
Regarding Claim 17 (independent) Rejected using the same rationale as claims 1 and 9.
Regarding Claims 18: Rejected using the same rationale as claim 2.
Regarding Claim 19: Rejected using the same rationale as claim 3.
Regarding claim 23: Rejected using the same rationale as claims 1 and 9, however further directed to limitations further taught by Ngai: “subsequently determining, by the controller, one or more of a second geographical location [comprising a second wireless interference level] of the vehicle control unit or a second time, the one or more of the second geographical location and/or the second time determined from second GPS data received by the GPS receiver; and controlling the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit to operate in a second mode of operation that is different from the first mode of operation based on the one or more of the second geographical location and/or the second time that is determined, wherein the second mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit operating at a greater or lesser second transmission power level [for the second wireless interference level], ([col. 23, lines 11-48] The orientation and location of each transmitter 332 and 342 along with any associated antennas 336 or 346 within the device may determine the effect of each transmitter and/or antenna to the specific absorption rate with respect to the other transmitters or antennas. In some access terminal 106 configurations, the transmitters 332 and 342 may be spatially located within the access terminal 106 (e.g., on opposite sides of the access terminal 106) Such that simultaneous transmission does not increase the overall specific absorption rate as compared to when just one antenna is transmitting. However, if the transmitters 332 and 342 are located closely together within an access terminal 106, simultaneous transmission may increase the overall specific absorption rate resulting from the access terminal 106. In this case, the access terminal 106 may be configured to account for the power transmission levels of both transmitters 332 and 342 and limit the transmission power levels of each transmitter 332 and 342 based on the power transmission level of the other. Furthermore, if additional antennas or transmitters (not shown) are also included in the access terminal 106 and which are in close proximity to transmitters 332 and 342, then the power transmission level of the three or more transmitters/antennas may be configured such that the overall contribution to the specific absorption rate is within regulatory limits. An access terminal 106 may therefore be configured to dynamically adjust transmission power limits for multiple transmitters or antennas according to the various operating modes and any combinations thereof similarly as described above. To provide the adjustments, in one implementation, an access terminal 106 may provide a determined number of pre-configured transmission power limits corresponding to various operating modes for each transmitter 332 or 342. The power transmission levels for each type of transmission transmitted on multiple transmitters 332 and 342 may be stored in look-up tables (LUTs) associated with various communication characteristics which may be indexed by a device state index (DSI) corresponding to various operating modes as will be further described below.)
wherein one or more of:
(a) the first mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit using a first handshake period to establish communication with a second vehicle control unit and the second mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit using a second handshake period to establish communication with the second vehicle control unit, the first handshake period being longer or shorter than the second handshake period;
(b) the first mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit using a first time interval between data transmissions from the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit and the second mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit using a second time interval between the data transmissions from the vehicle control unit, the first time interval being longer or shorter than the second time interval:
(c) the first mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit sequentially communicating sets of information to an off-board device within a third time interval and the second mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit communicating the sets of information to the off- board device within a fourth time interval, the third time interval being different than the fourth time interval;
(d) the first mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit acquiring device data from an onboard device within a fifth time interval and the second mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit acquiring the device data from the onboard device within a sixth time interval, the fifth time interval being different than the sixth time interval:
(e) the first mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit acquiring off-board data from the off-board device and the second mode of operation includes preventing the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit from acquiring the off-board data from the off-board device; and/or (f) the first mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit communicating with the off-board device using a cellular telephone signal and the second mode of operation includes the electronic device or system of the vehicle control unit communicating with the off-board device using a non-cellular telephone signal.” [col. 25, lines 37-67] FIG. 14B shows a table 1402 that illustrates how the LUT 1400 may be used to determine the transmission power limit for a second transmitter 342 based on the current transmission power level of a first transmitter 332. The transmission power level for a first transmitter 332 may be sampled at various time intervals (e.g., for every power control group (PCG) or at every 1.25 ms) and filtered to provide continual measurements. In one implementation, a processor 320 associated with a first transmitter 332 (or processor 320 configured to handle a class of data being sent using a first transmitter) may perform the sampling and measurements. This data may be communicated to another processor 320 associated with the second transmitter 342 (or a processor 320 configured to handle a class of data being sent using a second transmitter 342). As such, an indication of a DSI may be sent to both processors. In other implementations, any combination of processor 320 or processors may be configured to perform the sampling and adjustment for the power transmission limits for each transmitter and/or antenna. Each time transmission power levels are adjusted, the current transmission power level is compared against the transmission power levels defined in the LUT 1400. If the transmission power level is below the first level in the first row shown in FIG. 14A, a default transmission power limit for the second transmitter 342 may be applied. If the current transmission power level for the first transmitter 332 is between the first and second levels as defined by the LUT 1402, then the associated transmission power limit for the second transmitter 342 associated with the first transmission power level of the first transmitter 332 may be applied.)
Ngai does not teach the following limitations, however Almgren further teaches: comprising a second wireless interference level … for the second wireless interference level ([pg. 3, lines 37-46] the transmit power is adjusted to obtain a target C/I ratio, which is typically a monotonic subtraction function of the interference level occurring on the channel and the gain involved (transmission path loss). Therefore, the power conditioning scheme of the present invention does not involve a fixed target C/I ratio or target received signal strength. On the other hand, it is necessary to determine the interference level and determine the path loss or channel gain under normal conditions in order to find the appropriate target C/I ratio. In the following, the interference level is identified by I when describing the C/I ratio, which is usually indicated by i in the formula, but they are equal. Preferably, P, P', g, i, I, P, SS, α, β and C/I are in logarithmic form dB. Therefore, the gain g is simply given by subtraction, which is obtained from the difference between the received power level and the known transmission power level as described below. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation for success, to have modified the communications device/-s 130 of Cooper to specifically increase the wireless interference relative to the geographical area the locomotive is passing through, as taught by Almgren, in order to alter the severity of the alert system when passing through known wireless interference corridors.
Claims 4, 11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cooper in view of Ngai, Kramer, and Almgren and further in view of Cooper et al. (US 10144440), herein “Cooper 2”.
Regarding Claims 4, 11, and 20, Cooper as modified by Ngai, Kramer, and Almgren teaches the vehicle control system of Claims 3 and 10, but this combination remains silent in that the first communication device is a radio communication device, and the second communication device is a cellular communication device. Cooper does not expressly describe that the communication device/-s 130 comprise at least a radio communication device and a cellular communication device that are used separately depending on which location-specific mode it/they are in. However, this is taught by Cooper 2, in a similar field of endeavor (“the rail vehicle system 100 is equipped with a plurality of different communication devices 120 that form different data communication paths between rail vehicles of the rail vehicle system 100 as well as data communication paths off-board the rail vehicle system 100 such as with the wayside device 130 and/or the remote office 136. The communication management system 114 determines which communication device to use for data communications based on operating conditions. The plurality of communications devices 120 includes a wireless network device 122, a satellite transceiver 124, a radio transceiver 126, and multiple-unit lines 128”, DD Paragraph 27, “the radio transceiver 126 includes a cellular radio transceiver to enable data communications, through a third-party, to remote sources, such as the remote office 136”, DD Paragraph 30, “the radio transceiver 126 includes a cellular radio transceiver (e.g., cellular telephone module) that enables a cellular communication path. In one example, the cellular radio transceiver communicates with cellular telephony towers located proximate to the track. For example, the cellular transceiver enables data communications between the rail vehicle system 100 and the remote office 136 through a third-party cellular provider”, DD Paragraph 31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation for success, to have further modified the communications device/-s 130 of Cooper to specifically utilize a radio communication device as a first control setting 206 based on being in a first operating mode at a first location and to specifically utilize a cellular communication device as a second control setting 206 based on being in a second operating mode at a second location, as taught by Cooper 2, in order to utilize existing third-party cellular telephone infrastructure to communicate whenever said infrastructure is a preferred communication medium and is proximate the current location of the vehicle (in other words, when proximity to the appropriate cellular infrastructure indicates that the vehicle is in a “second designated area or location”).
Claims 6-8 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cooper in view of Ngai, Kramer, Almgren, and further in view of Eckhoff et al. (US 2023/0071247), herein “Eckhoff”.
Regarding Claims 6-7 and 14-15, Cooper as modified by Ngai, Kramer, and Almgren teaches the vehicle control system of Claim 1, but this combination remains silent in that:
the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the at least one of the functional devices (per Claim 6) / wherein the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the functional device (per Claim 14) to monitor one or more of fuel usage or energy usage of the vehicle system responsive to the location of the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit being at or within the first designated area or location (per Claims 6 and 14), and, the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the at least one of the functional devices (per Claim 6) / the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the functional device (per Claim 14) to stop monitoring the one or more of fuel usage or energy usage of the vehicle system responsive to the location of the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit being at or within the second designated area or location (per Claims 6 and 14); and
the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the at least one of the functional devices (per Claim 7) / wherein the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the functional device (per Claim 15) to inspect a route being traveled upon by the vehicle system responsive to the location of the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit being at or within the first designated area or location (per Claims 7 and 15), and, the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the at least one of the functional devices (per Claim 7) / the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the functional device (per Claim 15) to stop inspection of the route responsive to the location of the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit being at or within the second designated area or location (per Claims 7 and 15).
However, these limitations are taught by Eckhoff, in a similar field of endeavor (([0035] The transmitter 120 may be coupled with a determination module 196 for determining the status for the vehicle 100. In one embodiment, the determination module 196 may be instrumentation 198 included with the vehicle 100, such as power-selection instrumentation for selectively enabling one or more of the combustible fuel utilization and the electricity utilization. Alternatively, the instrumentation 198 may be instrumentation included with the vehicle 100 for monitoring the fuel consumption of the vehicle 100, such as a fuel gauge, or the like [0032] The vehicle 100 may include a transmitter 120 for transmitting a status indicative of, for example, one or more of combustible fuel utilization, electricity utilization, and combustible fuel utilization in comparison to electricity utilization for the vehicle 100. The transmitter 120 may transmit the status for the vehicle 100 via a wireless signal 122.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation for success, to have modified the communications device/-s 130 of Cooper to specifically monitor one or more of fuel usage or energy usage of the vehicle system, as taught by Eckhoff, in order to enable vehicle operators (and/or remote nodes of operationally relevant devices) to receive valuable information from the vehicle to make processing determinations related to the sensing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation for success, to have further modified the communications device/-s 130 of Cooper to change it’s mode of operations between a “route inspection” and/or “fuel/energy monitoring” occurring mode responsive to it’s location being a first location and a “route inspection” and/or “fuel/energy monitoring” not occurring mode responsive to it’s location being a second location, as taught by Ngai and Eckhoff, in order to selectively provide automatic toggling points along a route for when to analyze specific information (i.e. one or more first locations) versus when not to analyze specific information (i.e. one or more second locations).
Regarding Claims 8 and 16, Cooper as modified by Ngai, Kramer, and Almgren teaches the vehicle control system of Claim 1, Ngai further teaches: the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the at least one of the functional devices (per Claim 8) / wherein the one or more processors are configured to change the mode of operation of the one or more communication devices by directing the one or more communication devices (per Claim 16) to send a signal responsive to the location of the one or more of the HOV unit or the EOV unit exiting the first designated area or location (per Claims 8 and 16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation for success, to have further modified the communications device/-s 130 Cooper to change it’s mode of operations to send a signal responsive to it’s location leaving a first location, as taught by Ngai, in order to provide an alert to a user that the vehicle is departing a first location (and/or that the device/-s is/are changing modes), thus improving situational awareness to the user.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record, and not relied upon, considered pertinent to applicant' s disclosure or directed to the state of art is listed on the enclosed PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ATTICUS A CAMERON whose telephone number is 703-756-4535. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 4:30 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, Thomas Worden can be reached on 571-272-4876. 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.
/ATTICUS A CAMERON/ /JASON HOLLOWAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Examiner, Art Unit 3658A
Prosecution Insights