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 .
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges receipt of Applicant’s amendment filled 10/16/2025.
In the amendment, Applicant amended claims 1, and 16.
Claims 1-19 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Examiner has fully considered Applicant's arguments, see page 8, filed 10/16/2025, with respect to the rejection of the amended claims 1 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) and they are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of newly found prior art references.
Applicant's arguments, see pages 8 and 11, filed 10/16/2025, with respect to the rejection of the claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) 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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-8, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US 20180286200, hereinafter, Gordon) in view of Ayadurai et al. (US 20160007362 A1, hereinafter, Ayadurai) further in view of Morsillo et al. (US 20170059660 A1, hereinafter, Morsillo).
Regarding Claim 1, Gordon discloses, an electronic monitoring system (Fig. 1) comprising: a monitoring device configured to monitor a characteristic within an environment, the monitoring device including: a device primary radio defined within a primary communication path and configured to communicate monitoring data ("...The manager resource can be configured to transmit the received security data over the primary communication path or the bypass communication path depending on operability of the primary communication path to deliver the received security data to the remote server." [¶0010]); and
a device secondary radio defined within a secondary communication path and configured to communicate diagnostic data upon detection of a communication interruption in the primary communication path ("As an example, if the primary communication path is disabled for any reason such as because of the power outage, link failure, communication service provider failure, etc., the manager resource transmits the received security data over the bypass communication path to the remote server. Accordingly, the manager resource is able to convey data to the remote server even though the primary communication path experiences a respective failure." [¶0011], see also "monitor a location for occurrence of a trigger event, the trigger event indicating security with respect to the location; detect the trigger event; produce a message indicating the trigger event; and select amongst a first wireless access point and a second wireless access point to communicate the message indicating the trigger event to a remote management server." [¶0105]);
Gordon doesn’t explicitly disclose, a security hub in communication with the monitoring device through a WLAN, the security hub including: a hub primary radio defined within the primary communication path through the WLAN and configured to communicate the monitoring data; and
a hub secondary radio defined within the secondary communication path through the WLAN and configured to communicate the diagnostic data for receipt by a user device.
Ayadurai in related art discloses, a security hub in communication with the monitoring device through a WLAN, the security hub including: a hub primary radio defined within the primary communication path through the WLAN and configured to communicate the monitoring data ("A method of controlling a radio node to control spectrum usage to mitigate interference in primary channels of a WLAN comprising: monitoring signal measurements at frequencies corresponding to one or more WLAN channels in one or more frequency bands; determining, based on the signal measurements, whether there are any channels among possible primary and secondary channel pairings of the one or more WLAN channels that are being used by the WLAN as secondary channels; and controlling spectrum usage by the radio node based on said determining." [Claim 32], see also fig. 6, see also "A WLAN access point or AP may broadcast system parameters in its beacon periodically over the primary channel..." [¶0004]); Here the “WLAN access point or AP” works as a hub. and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon with the idea of having an access points act as hubs that allow wireless communication and connectivity as disclosed by Ayadurai. The rationale for having a security hub communicating with a monitoring device through a WLAN primary communication path is that it provides flexibility in physical placement and deployment.
Morsillo, in related art relates, a hub secondary radio defined within the secondary communication path through the WLAN and configured to communicate the diagnostic data for receipt by a user device (“…However, the medical device 240 can also have more than one battery 222. In the case of multiple batteries, the battery diagnostic device 220 can monitor the overall charge state of the connected batteries, or monitor the charge state of each individual battery 222. The battery diagnostic device 220 can further include a transceiver that can transmit data to the client device 210. The data transmitted between the client device 210, the battery diagnostic device 220, and the computer system 230, can be sent by, for example, NFC, BLUETOOTH low-energy, WIFI, LAN, WLAN, peer-to-peer network, etc.” [¶0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon and Ayadurai with the idea of having a hub secondary radio defined within the secondary communication path through the WLAN for communicating diagnostic data as disclosed by Morsillo. The rationale for having the secondary radio provides a robust, dedicated link that increases the system's resilience and manageability, particularly during network failures or high-load conditions.
Regarding Claim 2, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 1.
Gordon also discloses, wherein the system is configured such that: when the system is in a first, operational state, the device primary radio and the hub primary radio communicate the monitoring data through the primary communication path ("Note that under normal circumstances, when the primary communication path 125-1 is operable and available for use by manager resource 150, the manager resource 150 would otherwise communicate the received security data 169 over the primary communication path 125-1 (such as a preferred path) to the remote server 178." [¶0208], see also, "...Under normal circumstances, when the primary communication path is operable, the manager resource would otherwise communicate the received security data over the primary communication path to the remote server." [¶0014]); and
when the system is in a second, fault state, the device secondary radio and the hub secondary radio communicate the diagnostic data through the secondary communication path ("...In other words, as previously discussed, if the primary communication path 125-1 is disabled or unavailable for any reason such as because of a power outage, link failure, service provider failure, etc., the manager resource 150 transmits the received security data 169 over the bypass communication path 125-2 to the remote server 178." [¶0200]).
Regarding Claim 4, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 2.
Gordon also teaches, wherein the fault state is defined at least in part by a failure of communication between the device primary radio and the hub primary radio through the primary communication path ("...A failure condition such as loss of power may render it impossible for the manager resource (such as powered by a battery during a power failure condition) to communicate over the primary communication path. In such an instance, the security sensor device communicates the security data over the bypass communication path to the remote server instead of the primary communication path..." [¶0014]).
Regarding Claim 5, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 4.
Gordon also discloses, wherein the monitoring device is configured to detect a communication failure through the primary communication path ("In one embodiment, the remote communication device may not be able to establish a respective wireless communication link with the first wireless access point. The inability to establish the wireless communication link to the first wireless access point can occur for any reason such as due to failure of power delivery (e.g., failure of grid power, failure of a battery, etc.) to the first wireless access point. In response to detecting the inability to communicate the message to the first wireless access point, the remote communication device communicates the message to the second wireless access point instead of the first wireless access point." [¶0094]).
Regarding Claim 6, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 5.
Gordon also discloses, wherein the monitoring device is configured to command an activation of the device secondary radio upon detection of the communication failure through the primary communication path ("As previously discussed, the remote communication device can be configured to communicate the message (any data payload) to the second wireless access point in response to detecting an inability to communicate the message to the first wireless access point. The second wireless access point may be unpowered (not usable) when the remote communication device comes to communicate the message to the second wireless access point. In such an instance, in order to transmit the message, prior to communicating the message to the second wireless access point, the remote communication device wirelessly communicates a command (such as a power control command) to switch the second wireless access point from a power saving mode to a powered mode in which the respective wireless access point is now available for use." [¶0097], see also, "Upon receiving notification to activate the second wireless access point, appropriate control circuitry powers the second wireless access point to receive subsequent communications from the remote communication device..." [¶0099]).
Regarding Claim 7, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 5.
Gordon also teaches, wherein, upon detection of a communication failure between the device primary radio and the hub primary radio through the primary communication path, the system is configured to:
attempt to reestablish communications through the primary communication path ("In one embodiment, the remote communication device may not be able to establish a respective wireless communication link with the first wireless access point. The inability to establish the wireless communication link to the first wireless access point can occur for any reason such as due to failure of power delivery (e.g., failure of grid power, failure of a battery, etc.) to the first wireless access point. In response to detecting the inability to communicate the message to the first wireless access point, the remote communication device communicates the message to the second wireless access point instead of the first wireless access point." [¶0094]); and
upon failure to reestablish communications through the primary communication path, the system commands activation of the device secondary radio and the hub secondary radio to respective active modes to communicate the diagnostic data through the secondary communication path ("Thus, in the event of a respective failure in which the management resource 150 is unable to communicate over the primary communication path 125-1 or primary wireless communication link 126-1 (as in FIG. 1) through the domain gateway resource 140, the management resource 150 uses the alternate path (bypass wireless communication link 126-2 and corresponding bypass communication path 125-2) to communicate the security data 169 to the remote server 178." [¶0199]).
Regarding Claim 8, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 7.
Gordon also discloses, wherein the diagnostic data includes information about the communication failure through the primary communication path ([¶0094], see also. "In response to receiving the notification 251 over the wireless communication link 127-2 (time slotted communication channel 1850), the repeater 170 communicates the message 251 (such as a command to activate remote communication device 190) downstream from the master wireless communication interface 174 of repeater 170 over the wireless communication link 129-2 (time slotted communication channel 1950) to the slave wireless communication interface 193. Similar to operations as previously discussed, the repeater 170 operates the master wireless communication interface 174 to transmit the message 251 in a respective time slot TS1 of time-slotted communication channel 1950 assigned to the remote communication device 190" [¶0418], see also, "...However, in the event of a failure condition in which the primary communication path 125-1 is unavailable for any reason, the manager resource 150 communicates a data payload (such as one or more messages) received from the remote communication device 160 over the bypass communication path 125-2 to the remote server 178." [¶0189]).
Regarding Claim 11, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 1.
Gordon also teaches, wherein the monitoring device is defined by at least one of:
an imaging device that is configured to capture visual images or video of a monitored area within the environment ("In yet another embodiment, note that remote communication device 160 and corresponding sensor device 161 (such as a video security camera) is potentially powered by only battery B2. As previously discussed, the security data 169 as generated by the sensor device 161 can be video data of images and/or audio data of sound captured by the security sensor device 161...the manager resource 150 communicates the security data 169 over the bypass communication path 125-2 to the remote server 178. Accordingly, even during a power outage or device failure, the manager resource 150 is able to communicate with a target recipient." [¶0206]);
an audio device that includes at least one of: (i) a microphone, and (ii) a speaker configured for audio communication or providing audible alerts; and
a sensor configured to detect at least one of: (i) motion, (ii) opening or closing events or doors or windows, (iii) smoke, (iv) carbon monoxide, (v) water leaks, and (vi) temperature changes.
Regarding Claim 12, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 1.
Gordon also discloses, wherein the system further comprises a second hub communicatively coupled to the security hub for connecting the WLAN to a WAN (wide area network) ("...the first wireless access point is part of a gateway resource (such as an in-home router) communicatively coupled to a hard-wired network to communicate with the remote management server. The second wireless access point is part of communication management hardware communicatively coupled to the remote management server via: i) a primary wireless communication link to the first wireless access point, and ii) a bypass wireless communication link to the remote server." [¶0095]). Here, Connectivity Hub: A remote server, located in a data center or cloud, acts as a central point that users on different Local Area Networks (LANs) connect to via a WAN.
Regarding Claim 13, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 12.
Gordon also discloses, wherein the second hub is configured to connect the WLAN to the WAN using a first communication protocol, and the security hub is configured to connect the WLAN to the WAN using a second communication protocol ("In accordance with yet further embodiments, note that the manager resource 150 can make its own decision over which of multiple possible communication path forward security data 1469. For example, the domain gateway resource 140 may be properly powered and operable to communicate with the remote server 178 over the primary communication path 125-1. Additionally, the manager resource 150 may be operable to communicate with either the domain gateway resource 140 or use the bypass communication path 125-2 to communicate with the remote server 178." [¶0330], Fig. 17, see also, "In processing operation 1740, the remote communication device 160 selects amongst wireless access point 141 (such as a first wireless access point) and wireless access point 151 (such as a second wireless access point) to communicate the message indicating the trigger event to a remote server 178." [¶0338]). Here, wireless access points could be used for second and security hubs.
Claims 3, 10, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon, Ayadurai, Morsillo further in view of AMINI et al. (US 20190261243 A1, hereinafter, Amini).
Regarding Claim 3, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 2.
Combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo don’t explicitly disclose, wherein: a primary coverage zone is defined by a first area covered by the primary communication path; and a secondary coverage zone is defined by a second area that extends beyond the primary coverage zone that is covered by the secondary communication path.
Amini discloses, wherein: a primary coverage zone is defined by a first area covered by the primary communication path (“…In some embodiments, any two wireless Aps in the multi-band wireless network may service clients using a different channel in a different band. For example, a first wireless AP implemented by wireless networking device 200a may provide coverage to clients (e.g., camera 110a) via a particular channel in the 5 GHz frequency band…” [¶0040]); and
a secondary coverage zone is defined by a second area that extends beyond the primary coverage zone that is covered by the secondary communication path (“…while a second wireless AP implemented by wireless networking device 200b provides coverage to clients (e.g., camera 110b) via another channel in the 2.4 GHz frequency band…” [¶0040]). Here 2.4GHz (lower frequency) channel has the larger coverage area than the 5GHz channel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo with the idea of having multiple communication path – one having a larger coverage area than the other as disclosed by Amini. The rationale for having a larger coverage area for diagnostic data through the secondary communication path is to make sure that the failure detection is more reliable.
Regarding Claim 10, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 2.
Combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo don’t explicitly disclose, wherein the system includes a controller and a user interface, wherein the controller is configured to: identify a communication failure through the primary communication path;
command performance of a diagnostic scan of the system to identify potential faults corresponding to the communication failure through the primary communication path; and communicate information corresponding to the communication failure to the user interface for display on the user interface.
Amini teaches, wherein the system includes a controller and a user interface, wherein the controller is configured to: identify a communication failure through the primary communication path (“…FIG. 9 shows a flow chart of an example process 900 for immediately switching channels in response to detecting a critical failure. As in example process 700, example process 900 continues from process 500 and begins at step 902 with continuing to receive data indicative of conditions in the wireless network and of a video stream to be transmitted over the wireless network…” [¶0089]);
command performance of a diagnostic scan of the system to identify potential faults corresponding to the communication failure through the primary communication path (“…if the primary communication path 125-1 is disabled or unavailable for any reason such as because of a power outage, link failure, service provider failure, etc., the manager resource 150 transmits the received security data 169 over the bypass communication path 125-2 to the remote server 178.” [¶0200], see also, “…The process 900 continues at step 904 with detecting a critical failure on a current channel based on the updated data. The process 900 continues at step 906 with immediately moving a wireless link between a wireless camera 110 and wireless AP 120 (or base station 105) to a selected alternative channel in response to the detected failure even if the wireless camera 110 is current transmitting a video stream over the wireless link.” [¶0089], see also, “…Example process 1000 continues from process 500 and begins at step 1002 with continuing to receive data indicative of conditions in the wireless network and of a video stream to be transmitted over the wireless network.” [¶0090]); and
communicate information corresponding to the communication failure to the user interface for display on the user interface (“As an example, if the primary communication path is disabled for any reason such as because of the power outage, link failure, communication service provider failure, etc., the manager resource transmits the received security data over the bypass communication path to the remote server. Accordingly, the manager resource is able to convey data to the remote server even though the primary communication path experiences a respective failure.” [¶0011]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo with the idea of detecting a failure, initiating diagnostics, and informing the user via the user interface as disclosed by Amini. The rationale for this error detection system is to have a robust error-handling mechanism that ensures users are informed of critical system issues.
Regarding Claim 14, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 1.
Combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo doesn’t explicitly disclose, wherein the device primary radio and the security hub primary radio communicate the monitoring data through the primary communication path at a first frequency, and
the device secondary radio and the security hub secondary radio communicate the diagnostic data through the secondary communication path at a second frequency that is lower than the first frequency of the primary communication path.
Amini in related are discloses, wherein the device primary radio and the security hub primary radio communicate the monitoring data through the primary communication path at a first frequency (“…certain client with multiple radios (e.g., camera 110d) may be configured to simultaneously communicate over multiple bands (e.g., 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz). In some embodiments, any two wireless Aps in the multi-band wireless network may service clients using a different channel in a different band. For example, a first wireless AP implemented by wireless networking device 200a may provide coverage to clients (e.g., camera 110a) via a particular channel in the 5 GHz frequency band…” [¶0040]), and
the device secondary radio and the security hub secondary radio communicate the diagnostic data through the secondary communication path at a second frequency that is lower than the first frequency of the primary communication path (“…while a second wireless AP implemented by wireless networking device 200b provides coverage to clients (e.g., camera 110b) via another channel in the 2.4 GHz frequency band. Similarly, any two wireless Aps may provide coverage via different channels within the same band (e.g., two different channels in the 5 GHz frequency band).” [¶0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo with the idea of having a communication system between a device and a security hub using separate radios and frequency paths for different data types as disclosed by Amini. The rationale for using a lower frequency for diagnostics, the system ensures that basic status information can still reach the hub even if the high-frequency primary signal is weakened by distance or physical barriers.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon, Ayadurai, Morsillo further in view of Mckinley at al. (US 20140266705, hereinafter, Mckinley).
Regarding Claim 9, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 8.
Gordon explicitly doesn’t disclose, wherein the diagnostic data includes operational state information about at least one of the monitoring devices and the security hub.
However, Mckinley in analogous art teaches, wherein the diagnostic data includes operational state information (Event detecting component 102 can include a main radio 114 for communicating with an emergency assistance system to report events, receiving information for operating in the system, and/or the like, a secondary radio 116 for providing an additional or alternative mechanism for communicating with the system, and a radio status detecting component 202 for determining whether the main radio 114 and/or secondary radio 116 are connected to the emergency assistance system, functioning properly, and/or the like [¶0030]) about at least one of the monitoring devices (radio status detecting component 202) and the security hub (By way of example, one or more clients 710 can be pendants or other event detecting components that report events to server(s) 730 via communication framework 750. The one or more clients 710 may employ radios that utilize different communication frameworks 750 and/or different routes to connect with communication framework 750, as described herein [¶0062]. Here communication framework could include a security hub.
It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo’s idea with Mckinley teaching and include operational state information from both, a monitoring device and a security hub, in the diagnostic data to mitigate the issues with troubled communication path and ensuring seamless data communication.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon, Ayadurai, Morsillo, Amini further in view of Mckinley.
Regarding Claim 15, combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, Morsillo, and Amini disclose the electronic monitoring system of claim 14.
Combination of Gordon, Ayadurai, Morsillo, and Amini don’t disclose, wherein the second frequency of the secondary communication path is in a sub-GHz (gigahertz) frequency band.
Mckinley in related art relates, wherein the second frequency of the secondary communication path is in a sub-GHz (gigahertz) frequency band (Secondary radio 116 can be another wireless radio and can operate using a different wireless technology and/or over a different frequency than main radio 114 to provide a different mechanism for communicating with event processing component 106 or other components of an emergency assistance system… [¶0026]). Here secondary radio could easily use different frequency, like, sub-GHz (gigahertz) frequency band.
It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gordon, Ayadurai, Morsillo, and Amini’s idea with Mckinley teaching and include secondary radio of sub-GHz (gigahertz) frequency band and increase the coverage area. That is, this sub-GHz (gigahertz) frequency band will provide coverage to a wider range.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon, Ayadurai, Morsillo, in view of Amini and further in view of Mckinley.
Regarding Claim 16, Gordon discloses, an electronic monitoring system (Fig. 1) comprising:
a hub in wireless communication with a WAN;
a monitoring device configured to monitor a characteristic within an environment, the monitoring device including: a device primary radio defined within a primary communication path and configured to communicate monitoring data ("...The manager resource can be configured to transmit the received security data over the primary communication path or the bypass communication path depending on operability of the primary communication path to deliver the received security data to the remote server." [¶0010])
a device secondary radio defined within a secondary communication path and configured to communicate diagnostic data upon detection of a communication interruption in the primary communication path ("As an example, if the primary communication path is disabled for any reason such as because of the power outage, link failure, communication service provider failure, etc., the manager resource transmits the received security data over the bypass communication path to the remote server. Accordingly, the manager resource is able to convey data to the remote server even though the primary communication path experiences a respective failure." [¶0011], see also "monitor a location for occurrence of a trigger event, the trigger event indicating security with respect to the location; detect the trigger event; produce a message indicating the trigger event; and select amongst a first wireless access point and a second wireless access point to communicate the message indicating the trigger event to a remote management server." [¶0105]),
Gordon doesn’t explicitly disclose, a security hub in communication with the monitoring device through a WLAN, the security hub including: a hub primary radio defined within the primary communication path and configured to communicate the monitoring data to the WAN via the primary communication path through the WLAN; and
a hub secondary radio defined within the secondary communication path and configured to communicate the diagnostic data to the WAN for receipt by a user device via the secondary communication path through the WLAN, the hub secondary radio having a longer range than the hub primary radio.
at a first frequency of at least 2.4 GHz,
wherein the diagnostic data is communicated at a second frequency in a sub-GHz frequency band, the device secondary radio having a longer range than the device primary radio;
Ayadurai in related art discloses, a security hub in communication with the monitoring device through a WLAN, the security hub including: a hub primary radio defined within the primary communication path and configured to communicate the monitoring data to the WAN via the primary communication path through the WLAN ("A method of controlling a radio node to control spectrum usage to mitigate interference in primary channels of a WLAN comprising: monitoring signal measurements at frequencies corresponding to one or more WLAN channels in one or more frequency bands; determining, based on the signal measurements, whether there are any channels among possible primary and secondary channel pairings of the one or more WLAN channels that are being used by the WLAN as secondary channels; and controlling spectrum usage by the radio node based on said determining." [Claim 32], see also fig. 6, see also "A WLAN access point or AP may broadcast system parameters in its beacon periodically over the primary channel..." [¶0004]); Here the “WLAN access point or AP” works as a hub. and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon with the idea of having an access points act as hubs that allow wireless communication and connectivity as disclosed by Ayadurai. The rationale for having a security hub communicating with a monitoring device through a WLAN primary communication path is that it provides flexibility in physical placement and deployment.
; and
Morsillo, in related art relates, a hub secondary radio defined within the secondary communication path and configured to communicate the diagnostic data to the WAN for receipt by a user device via the secondary communication path through the WLAN, the hub secondary radio having a longer range than the hub primary radio (“…However, the medical device 240 can also have more than one battery 222. In the case of multiple batteries, the battery diagnostic device 220 can monitor the overall charge state of the connected batteries, or monitor the charge state of each individual battery 222. The battery diagnostic device 220 can further include a transceiver that can transmit data to the client device 210. The data transmitted between the client device 210, the battery diagnostic device 220, and the computer system 230, can be sent by, for example, NFC, BLUETOOTH low-energy, WIFI, LAN, WLAN, peer-to-peer network, etc.” [¶0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon and Ayadurai with the idea of having a hub secondary radio having a longer range and defined within the secondary communication path through the WLAN for communicating diagnostic data as disclosed by Morsillo. The rationale for having the longer-range secondary radio provides a robust, dedicated link that increases the system's resilience and manageability, particularly during network failures or high-load conditions.
Amini discloses, at a first frequency of at least 2.4 GHz (“…certain client with multiple radios (e.g., camera 110d) may be configured to simultaneously communicate over multiple bands (e.g., 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz)…” [¶0040]),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon, Ayadurai, and Morsillo with the idea of having a 2.4GHz first frequency as disclosed by Amini. The rationale for having a 2.4GHz first frequency- which is a lower frequency with wider coverage to make diagnostic more reliable.
Mckinley in related art relates, wherein the diagnostic data is communicated at a second frequency in a sub-GHz frequency band, the device secondary radio having a longer range than the device primary radio (Secondary radio 116 can be another wireless radio and can operate using a different wireless technology and/or over a different frequency than main radio 114 to provide a different mechanism for communicating with event processing component 106 or other components of an emergency assistance system… [¶0026]). Here secondary radio could easily use different frequency, like, sub-GHz (gigahertz) frequency band.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon, Ayadurai, Morsillo and Amini with the idea of having diagnostic data is communicated at a second frequency in a sub-GHz frequency band as disclosed by Mckinley. The rationale for having the diagnostic data which is communicated at a second frequency in a sub-GHz frequency band makes the coverage area even bigger.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon in view of Morsillo.
Regarding Claim 17, Gordon discloses, a method for communicating diagnostic information in an electronic monitoring system, the method comprising: transmitting data between a monitoring device and a hub through a primary communication path ("...The manager resource can be configured to transmit the received security data over the primary communication path or the bypass communication path depending on operability of the primary communication path to deliver the received security data to the remote server." [¶0010]);
detecting a failure in the transmission of the data through the primary communication path ("As an example, if the primary communication path is disabled for any reason such as because of the power outage, link failure, communication service provider failure, etc., the manager resource transmits the received security data over the bypass communication path to the remote server. Accordingly, the manager resource is able to convey data to the remote server even though the primary communication path experiences a respective failure." [¶0011], see also "monitor a location for occurrence of a trigger event, the trigger event indicating security with respect to the location; detect the trigger event; produce a message indicating the trigger event; and select amongst a first wireless access point and a second wireless access point to communicate the message indicating the trigger event to a remote management server." [¶0105]); and,
Gordon also discloses, upon the transmission failure detection, transmitting data between the monitoring device and a security hub through a secondary communication path (“…if the primary communication path is disabled for any reason such as because of the power outage, link failure, communication service provider failure, etc., the manager resource transmits the received security data over the bypass communication path to the remote server... [¶0011], see also “…produce a message indicating the trigger event; and select amongst a first wireless access point and a second wireless access point to communicate the message indicating the trigger event to a remote management server." [¶0105]; and
Gordon doesn’t explicitly disclose, within the WLAN; transmitting the diagnostic data for receipt and display on a user device.
Morsillo, also relates, within the WLAN (“…The battery diagnostic device 220 can further include a transceiver that can transmit data to the client device 210. The data transmitted between the client device 210, the battery diagnostic device 220, and the computer system 230, can be sent by, for example, NFC, BLUETOOTH low-energy, WIFI, LAN, WLAN, peer-to-peer network, etc.” [¶0035]).
Morsillo, in related art relates, transmitting the diagnostic data for receipt and display on a user device (“…the battery diagnostic device 220 can monitor the overall charge state of the connected batteries, or monitor the charge state of each individual battery 222. The battery diagnostic device 220 can further include a transceiver that can transmit data to the client device 210…” [¶0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon with the idea of transmitting the diagnostic data for receipt and display on a user device as disclosed by Morsillo. The rationale for displaying the diagnostic result on a user device makes the system more manageable.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon, Morsillo in view of Amini.
Regarding Claim 18, combination of Gordon, and Morsillo disclose the method of claim 17.
Combination of Gordon, and Morsillo don’t explicitly disclose, further comprising: performing a diagnostic scan of the system after detecting the transmission failure through the primary communication path; generating diagnostic information corresponding to results of the diagnostic scan; and displaying the diagnostic information corresponding to the diagnostic data on a user interface.
Amini in related art discloses, further comprising: performing a diagnostic scan of the system after detecting the transmission failure through the primary communication path (“…if the primary communication path 125-1 is disabled or unavailable for any reason such as because of a power outage, link failure, service provider failure, etc., the manager resource 150 transmits the received security data 169 over the bypass communication path 125-2 to the remote server 178.” [¶0200], see also, “…The process 900 continues at step 904 with detecting a critical failure on a current channel based on the updated data. The process 900 continues at step 906 with immediately moving a wireless link between a wireless camera 110 and wireless AP 120 (or base station 105) to a selected alternative channel in response to the detected failure even if the wireless camera 110 is current transmitting a video stream over the wireless link.” [¶0089], see also, “…Example process 1000 continues from process 500 and begins at step 1002 with continuing to receive data indicative of conditions in the wireless network and of a video stream to be transmitted over the wireless network.” [¶0090]);
generating diagnostic information corresponding to results of the diagnostic scan ("...For example, a wireless AP 120 may monitor interference over one day and then generate aggregated measurements such as average interference, maximum interference, minimum interference, etc. for the day. These aggregated measurements may then be input as data indicative of network conditions at step 502 of example process 500." [¶0050], see also, "...the process of detecting physical objects in the captured video may include identifying, recognizing, and/or classifying the detected physical objects through observation, for example, using machine learning techniques such as deep learning and neural networks." [¶0070]); and
displaying the diagnostic information corresponding to the diagnostic data on a user interface
(“As an example, if the primary communication path is disabled for any reason such as because of the power outage, link failure, communication service provider failure, etc., the manager resource transmits the received security data over the bypass communication path to the remote server. Accordingly, the manager resource is able to convey data to the remote server even though the primary communication path experiences a respective failure.” [¶0011]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon, and Morsillo with the idea of detecting a failure, initiating diagnostics, and informing the user via the user interface as disclosed by Amini. The rationale for this error detection system is to have a robust error-handling mechanism that ensures users are informed of critical system issues.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon, Morsillo in view of Amini and further in view of Mckinley.
Regarding Claim 19, combination of Gordon, and Morsillo disclose the method of claim 17.
Combination of Gordon, and Morsillo don’t explicitly disclose, further comprising: transmitting the monitoring data at a first frequency of at least 2.4 GHz; and transmitting the diagnostic data at a second frequency that is lower than the first frequency and that is in a sub-GHz frequency band.
Amini discloses, further comprising: transmitting the monitoring data at a first frequency of at least 2.4 GHz (“…certain client with multiple radios (e.g., camera 110d) may be configured to simultaneously communicate over multiple bands (e.g., 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz)…” [¶0040]); and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon, and Morsillo with the idea of having a 2.4GHz first frequency as disclosed by Amini. The rationale for having a 2.4GHz first frequency- which is a lower frequency with wider coverage to make diagnostic more reliable.
Mckinley in related art relates, transmitting the diagnostic data at a second frequency that is lower than the first frequency and that is in a sub-GHz frequency band (Secondary radio 116 can be another wireless radio and can operate using a different wireless technology and/or over a different frequency than main radio 114 to provide a different mechanism for communicating with event processing component 106 or other components of an emergency assistance system… [¶0026]). Here secondary radio could easily use different frequency, like, sub-GHz (gigahertz) frequency band.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Gordon, Morsillo and Amini with the idea of having diagnostic data is communicated at a second frequency in a sub-GHz frequency band as disclosed by Mckinley. The rationale for having the diagnostic data which is communicated at a second frequency in a sub-GHz frequency band makes the coverage area even bigger.
Conclusion
References cited but not used: Shivam et al. (US 11678241 B2), last part of claim 1, Fig.3, Col 7, Line 30-44.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD AINUL HUDA whose telephone number is (703)756-1594. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 6:30 ET.
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, HASSAN PHILLIPS can be reached on (571)272-3940. 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.
/MUHAMMAD AINUL HUDA/Examiner, Art Unit 2467
/HASSAN A PHILLIPS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2467