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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 October 10th, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges receipt of Applicant’s amendment filled 02/09/2026.
In the amendment, Applicant canceled claims 1-18.
In the amendment, Applicant introduced new claims 19-38.
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.
In 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 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 factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 19-22, 24, 26-30, and 32-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheong at al. (US 20220303863 A1, hereinafter, Cheong), in view of Iyer at al. (US 20220086690, hereinafter, Iyer) further in view of Venkataraman et al. (US 20190254085 A1, hereinafter, Venkat).
Regarding Claim 19, Cheong discloses, a computing device comprising:
a first wireless communications interface to provide a first communications link between the computing device and a human interface device (HID) via Bluetooth, and to provide a second communications link between the computing device and a headset profile (HSP) device or a hands- free profile (HFP) device via Bluetooth (Fig.3, ¶0078 recites, "...For example, routing communications through the docking station 370 may include transceiving data through a wired link 376 internal to the docking station 370 between a port at which wired link 332 or wireless link 331 connects to the docking station 370 and a port connecting the docking station 370 to either wireless link 373 or wired link 375..."; Here the wireless link 331 and 373 could use a Bluetooth interface.
a second wireless communications interface to provide a third communications link between the computing device and an access point via Wi-Fi (¶0039 states, "...a second wireless link may transceive in the 5 GHz Wi-Fi frequency band...");
a processor (processor 102) to: detect that a dock is connected to the computing device (¶0062 recites, "In an embodiment, the dock-assisted DBS communication diversity system 160 may communicate with the main memory 104, the processor 102...");
Cheong doesn’t explicitly disclose, determine that the dock is capable of supporting communications via Bluetooth;
select a first data flow that occurs over the first communications link for transferring to the dock, wherein selecting the first data flow comprises classifying the first data flow as non-real-time data;
provide a media access control (MAC) address associated with the HID to the dock to allow the dock to establish a fourth communications link between the dock and the HID via Bluetooth using the MAC address;
transfer the first data flow from the first communications link to the fourth communications link to balance wireless communications;
determine that the dock is capable of supporting communications via Wi-Fi;
select a second data flow that occurs over the third communications link for transferring to the dock, wherein selecting the second data flow comprises classifying the second data flow as real-time data;
provide a second MAC address associated with the access point to the dock to allow the dock to establish a fifth communications link between the dock and the access point via Wi-Fi using the second MAC address; and
transfer the second data flow from the third communications link to the fifth communications link to balance wireless communications.
Iyer, in related art relates, determine that the dock is capable of supporting communications via Bluetooth (¶0027 recites, "...The information handling system 202 may be connected to and communicate with the dock 204 via a plurality of wired and wireless interfaces. For example, the information handling system 202 may be connected to the dock 204 via a wired USB-C interface 214, via a wireless Bluetooth interface 212, and via another wireless interface 216, such as a Wi-Fi interface...");
select a first data flow that occurs over the first communications link for transferring to the dock, wherein selecting the first data flow comprises classifying the first data flow as non-real-time data (¶0009 recites, "A determination may be made of one or more characteristics of at least a portion of data to be transmitted between the information handling system and the dock. Such characteristics may, for example, include a desired latency of transmission of the data, a required bandwidth for transmission of the data, a type or multiple types of data to be transmitted, a round trip latency of the data, and other data characteristics...", see also, ¶0055 recites, "Based on the detected changes in data characteristics, the allocation of data between the wired and wireless interfaces for transmission between the information handling system and the dock may be adjusted, at step 516....For example, an information handling system may be connected to first and second 4k displays, a mouse, and a keyboard via a dock and may initially communicate with the dock exclusively via a wireless interface. The information handling system service may detect one or more changes in data characteristics, such as an increase in data latency for one or more types of data that exceeds a data latency threshold.); Here higher latency data are considered as non-real-time data;
determine that the dock is capable of supporting communications via Wi-Fi (¶0027 recites, "...The information handling system 202 may be connected to and communicate with the dock 204 via a plurality of wired and wireless interfaces. For example, the information handling system 202 may be connected to the dock 204 via a wired USB-C interface 214, via a wireless Bluetooth interface 212, and via another wireless interface 216, such as a Wi-Fi interface...");
select a second data flow that occurs over the third communications link for transferring to the dock, wherein selecting the second data flow comprises classifying the second data flow as real-time data (¶0009 recites, "A determination may be made of one or more characteristics of at least a portion of data to be transmitted between the information handling system and the dock. Such characteristics may, for example, include a desired latency of transmission of the data, a required bandwidth for transmission of the data, a type or multiple types of data to be transmitted, a round trip latency of the data, and other data characteristics...", see also, ¶0031 recites, "...For example, data requiring a low latency, such as a latency below a latency threshold, may be transmitted via the wired interface 318 as the wired interface 318 may introduce less latency in transmission of the data than the wireless interface 320...”; Here lower latency data are considered as real-time data and wired interface could be replaced by wireless interface;
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 Cheong with the idea of having a data flow which could be selected for transmission over a protocol by classifying it into low latency and high latency data and then selecting the low latency portion for transmission as disclosed by Iyer. The rationale for following this approach ensures that time-sensitive data is prioritized and transmitted using a protocol optimized for speed and real-time performance.
Venkat in analogous art discloses, provide a media access control (MAC) address associated with the HID to the dock to allow the dock to establish a fourth communications link between the dock and the HID via Bluetooth using the MAC address (¶0113 recites, “Accessory device 107 may further estimate or calculate quality indicators for the Bluetooth link based on such metrics. For example, accessory device 107 may determine PHY quality indicators based on whether an LE or Classic link is active. Accessory device 107 may determine link quality indicators (e.g., Rx/Tx packet error rate (PER)). A moving average of any such metrics may be tracked over time. Such link quality indicators may evaluate link layer quality using MAC metrics and/or may utilize a moving average of PER...", ¶0114 recites, "...In an LPAS mode, a WLAN radio may be associated with an access point (e.g., a Wi-Fi access point), and may have a valid IP address...", see also, ¶0131 recites, "...For example, a Bluetooth or WLAN link may be considered available when the accessory device 107 is associated with an access point or companion device 106 and has a valid routable IP address..."); In the specification: ¶0039 "...The connection data may include a MAC address of the end device, a channel identifier, and any other available information to facilitate establishment of the communications link...".
transfer the first data flow from the first communications link to the fourth communications link to balance wireless communications (¶0105 recites, "...the accessory device 107 may be configured to select (e.g., or maintain/continue) a Bluetooth link for short range link 202, as opposed to a WLAN link, subject to certain criteria. According to some embodiments, the accessory device 107 may dynamically decide when to use a Bluetooth short range link 202 and when to use a WLAN link 202. For example, the accessory device 107 may select a WLAN link under conditions in which the performance benefits of WLAN may improve the user experience and may select a WLAN link under other conditions (e.g., in which the lower power use of the Bluetooth link may be more advantageous).");
PNG
media_image1.png
562
434
media_image1.png
Greyscale
provide a second MAC address associated with the access point to the dock to allow the dock to establish a fifth communications link between the dock and the access point via Wi-Fi using the second MAC address [¶0086 recites, "Another exemplary event may be a change in the quality of a WLAN link, e.g., based on a radio quality indicator (e.g., reference signal strength indicator or RSSI) and/or a link quality indicator (e.g., a packet loss rate of uplink and/or downlink transmissions). Companion device 106 may detect an event based on the quality of a WLAN link crossing a threshold, as measured by one or more such indicators. In response to such an event, the companion device 106 may change (e.g., increase, decrease, begin, end, pause, etc.) its use of the WLAN link. For example, companion device 106 may transfer one or more bearers to cellular in response to a decrease in the quality of the WLAN link.", see also, ¶0114 recites, "...In an LPAS mode, a WLAN radio may be associated with an access point (e.g., a Wi-Fi access point), and may have a valid IP address...", see also, ¶0131 recites, "...For example, a Bluetooth or WLAN link may be considered available when the accessory device 107 is associated with an access point or companion device 106 and has a valid routable IP address..."); In the specification: ¶0039 "...The connection data may include a MAC address of the end device, a channel identifier, and any other available information to facilitate establishment of the communications link...". and
transfer the second data flow from the third communications link to the fifth communications link to balance wireless communications (¶0090 recites, "...Similarly, in the case that the event is entering LQM mode, the assistance information may include when a cellular connection was (or will be) deactivated and may further include when such a connection may become available again (e.g., based on a minimum time between mode transitions, among other possibilities). Still further, the assistance information may include the cause of the event (e.g., a RACH failure rate, etc.). Still further, the assistance information may include details of any actions that the companion device 106 may take in relation to the event (e.g., initiating a cell selection scan, offloading a bearer, etc.). In other words, the assistance information may specify a response of companion device 106 to the detected event.")
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 Cheong and Iyer with the idea of using a dynamic network offloading and link-balancing routine, commonly seen in multi-radio management systems as disclosed by Venkat. The rationale for following this approach is to ensure that it optimizes wireless data flow by shifting bandwidth-heavy or specific-purpose traffic between Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.
Regarding Claim 20, combination of Cheong, Iyer and Venkat disclose the computing device of claim 19.
Cheong doesn’t explicitly disclose, wherein: the second wireless communications interface is to provide a sixth communications link between the computing device and a television via Wi-Fi; and
the processor is to: provide a third MAC address associated with the television to the dock to allow the dock to establish a seventh communications link between the dock and the television via Wi-Fi using the third MAC address; and
after providing the third MAC address to the dock, disconnect the sixth communications link.
Venkat in related art discloses, wherein: the second wireless communications interface is to provide a sixth communications link between the computing device and a television via Wi-Fi (¶0054 recites, "As shown, the SOC 300 may be coupled to various other circuits of the UE 106/107. For example, the UE 106/107 may include various types of memory (e.g., including NAND flash 310), a connector interface 320 (e.g., for coupling to a computer system, dock, charging station, etc.)...", see also, ¶0115 recites, "Accessory device 107 may determine higher layer metrics (e.g., identity services metrics). Such metrics may indicate the end-to-end quality of the WLAN link or Bluetooth link with companion device 106...", see also, ¶0114 recites, “Accessory device 107 may determine metrics related to the WLAN link..."); Here “UE 106/107” could be a TV. and
the processor is to: provide a third MAC address associated with the television to the dock to allow the dock to establish a seventh communications link between the dock and the television via Wi-Fi using the third MAC address (¶0113 recites, "Accessory device 107 may further estimate or calculate quality indicators for the Bluetooth link based on such metrics. For example, accessory device 107 may determine PHY quality indicators based on whether an LE or Classic link is active. Accessory device 107 may determine link quality indicators (e.g., Rx/Tx packet error rate (PER)). A moving average of any such metrics may be tracked over time. Such link quality indicators may evaluate link layer quality using MAC metrics and/or may utilize a moving average of PER...", ¶0114 recites, "...In an LPAS mode, a WLAN radio may be associated with an access point (e.g., a Wi-Fi access point), and may have a valid IP address...", see also,
¶0131 recites, "...For example, a Bluetooth or WLAN link may be considered available when the accessory device 107 is associated with an access point or companion device 106 and has a valid routable IP address..."); and
after providing the third MAC address to the dock, disconnect the sixth communications link (¶0091 recites, “According to some embodiments, multiple events may be detected simultaneously (e.g., or within close time proximity). Assistance information may be transmitted for multiple events concurrently, or separate transmissions of assistance information may occur. For example, if one event causes a companion device 106 to disconnect a cellular connection and a second event causes the companion device 106 to connect a WLAN connection, both events may be reported simultaneously or separately.”), In the specification: ¶0039 "...The connection data may include a MAC address of the end device, a channel identifier, and any other available information to facilitate establishment of the communications link...".
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 Cheong and Iyer with the idea of how to freeing up the computer's wireless interface for other tasks as disclosed by Venkat. The rationale for following this approach is to ensure seamless "hand-off" process where a computing device transfers its direct Wi-Fi connection with a TV over to a docking station, allowing the computer to free up its own wireless antenna.
Regarding Claim 21, combination of Cheong, Iyer and Venkat disclose the computing device of claim 20.
Cheong explicitly doesn’t disclose, wherein: the first wireless communications interface is to provide an eighth communications link between the computing device and a smart watch via Bluetooth; and
the processor is to: provide a fourth MAC address associated with the smart watch to the dock to allow the dock to establish a ninth communications link between the dock and the smart watch via Bluetooth using the fourth MAC address; and
after providing the fourth MAC address to the dock, disconnect the eighth communications link.
Venkat in related art discloses, wherein: the first wireless communications interface is to provide an eighth communications link between the computing device and a smart watch via Bluetooth ((¶0054 recites, "As shown, the SOC 300 may be coupled to various other circuits of the UE 106/107. For example, the UE 106/107 may include various types of memory (e.g., including NAND flash 310), a connector interface 320 (e.g., for coupling to a computer system, dock, charging station, etc.)...", see also, ¶0115 recites, "Accessory device 107 may determine higher layer metrics (e.g., identity services metrics). Such metrics may indicate the end-to-end quality of the WLAN link or Bluetooth link with companion device 106...", see also, ¶0105 recites, "...the accessory device 107 may be configured to select (e.g., or maintain/continue) a Bluetooth link for short range link 202, as opposed to a WLAN link, subject to certain criteria. According to some embodiments, the accessory device 107 may dynamically decide when to use a Bluetooth short range link 202 and when to use a WLAN link 202..."; Here “UE 106/107” could be a smart watch; and
the processor is to: provide a fourth MAC address associated with the smart watch to the dock to allow the dock to establish a ninth communications link between the dock and the smart watch via Bluetooth using the fourth MAC address (¶0056 recites, "...Further, Bluetooth logic 340 may enable the wireless device 106/107 to perform Bluetooth communications…”, see also, ¶0113 recites, "Accessory device 107 may further estimate or calculate quality indicators for the Bluetooth link based on such metrics. For example, accessory device 107 may determine PHY quality indicators based on whether an LE or Classic link is active. Accessory device 107 may determine link quality indicators (e.g., Rx/Tx packet error rate (PER)). A moving average of any such metrics may be tracked over time. Such link quality indicators may evaluate link layer quality using MAC metrics and/or may utilize a moving average of PER..."); and
after providing the fourth MAC address to the dock, disconnect the eighth communications link (¶0091 recites, “According to some embodiments, multiple events may be detected simultaneously (e.g., or within close time proximity). Assistance information may be transmitted for multiple events concurrently, or separate transmissions of assistance information may occur. For example, if one event causes a companion device 106 to disconnect a cellular connection and a second event causes the companion device 106 to connect a WLAN connection, both events may be reported simultaneously or separately.” Here “a companion device 106” could be used to disconnect a Bluetooth communication. See also, ¶0128 recites, “FIG. 12 illustrates a BT chip 1210 (e.g., BT baseband 1022) providing information to BT daemon 1020, which in turn provides BT metrics to RAT Manager 1012, according to some embodiments. Such BT metrics may be or include any or all of the metrics discussed herein, among other possibilities.”). In the specification: ¶0039 "...The connection data may include a MAC address of the end device, a channel identifier, and any other available information to facilitate establishment of the communications link...".
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 Cheong and Iyer with the idea of how to freeing up the computer's wireless interface for other tasks as disclosed by Venkat. The rationale for following this approach is to ensure seamless Bluetooth "handoff" process where a computing device transfers its direct connection with a smartwatch over to a docking station.
Regarding Claim 22, combination of Cheong, Iyer and Venkat disclose the computing device of claim 19.
Cheong doesn’t explicitly disclose, wherein the processor is to execute a daemon program to perform the detection, the determining, the providing, the selecting, and the transferring.
Iyer in analogous art discloses, wherein the processor is to execute a daemon program to perform the detection, the determining, the providing, the selecting, and the transferring (¶0044 recites, "...An example method 500 for allocation of data is shown in FIG. 5. The method 500 may begin at step 502 with determination of a wired connection between an information handling system and a dock. For example, an information handling system and/or a dock may detect that a wired connection has been established between the information handling system and the dock...", see also, ¶0045 recites, "At step 502, a wireless connection between the information handling system and the dock may be determined...", see also, ¶0046 recites, "At step 506, data characteristics of data to be transmitted between the information handling system and the dock may be determined. For example, the information handling system and/or dock may monitor applications executed by the information handling system to determine characteristics of data to be transmitted...", see also, ¶0047 recites, "Based on the data characteristics, data may be allocated, at step 508, for transmission between a wired interface and a wireless interface...").
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 Cheong with the idea of having a process which monitors server metrics, evaluates node status, and reassigns workloads between servers as disclosed by Iyer. The rationale for following this approach is to ensures that load balancing is optimized.
PNG
media_image2.png
826
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 24, combination of Cheong, Iyer and Venkat disclose the computing device of claim 19.
Cheong doesn’t explicitly disclose, wherein the processor is to: after providing the MAC address to the dock, disconnect the first communications link; and after providing the second MAC address to the dock, disconnect the third communications link.
Venkat in related art relates, wherein the processor is to: after providing the MAC address to the dock, disconnect the first communications link; and after providing the second MAC address to the dock, disconnect the third communications link (¶0072 recites, "...There may be a variety of possible transport link options for an accessory device 107 to use for communication with a network. Briefly, such options may include at least: 1) a Bluetooth connection with companion device 106, which may in turn connect to (and provide data to and from) a network 100; 2) a WLAN connection with companion device 106, which may in turn connect to (and provide data to and from) a network 100...", see also, ¶0113 recites, "...Accessory device 107 may determine link quality indicators (e.g., Rx/Tx packet error rate (PER)). A moving average of any such metrics may be tracked over time. Such link quality indicators may evaluate link layer quality using MAC metrics and/or may utilize a moving average of PER...", see also, [0085] Another exemplary event may be a change in the quality of a cellular link, e.g., based on one or more measurements such as RSRP, RSRQ, SINR, SNR, transmission power, etc. Companion device 106 may detect an event based on the quality of a cellular link crossing a threshold, as measured by one or more such indicators. In response to such an event, the companion device 106 may change (e.g., increase, decrease, begin, end, pause, etc.) its use of the cellular link. For example, companion device 106 may offload one or more bearers to WLAN in response to a decrease in the quality of the cellular link. See also, ¶0131 recites, "...For example, a Bluetooth or WLAN link may be considered available when the accessory device 107 is associated with an access point or companion device 106 and has a valid routable IP address..."). Similarly, companion device 106 may offload one or more bearers to Bluetooth when certain link condition exists.
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 Cheong with the idea of disconnecting the communication links (WLAN/ BT) immediately after providing MAC addresses (or any other information to establish communication link) as disclosed by Venkat. The rationale for doing this, which forces the device and dock to drop the current connection, thereby, free up the radio resources.
Regarding Claim 26, Cheong discloses, A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium (¶0045 recites, Main memory 104 may contain computer-readable medium (not shown), such as RAM in an example embodiment.) storing instructions (¶0044 recites, “The dock-assisted DBS communication diversity system 160 may utilize a computer-readable medium 161 in which one or more sets of instructions 162 such as software may be embedded. The instructions 162 may embody one or more of the methods or logic as described herein.) which, when executed by a processor (Processor 102) of a computing device, cause the computing device to: establish a first communications link between the computing device and a human interface device (HID) via Bluetooth;
Regarding claims 30, The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 26,
Cheong also discloses, wherein the instructions are implemented as a daemon program operating as a background service of the computing device (¶0027 recites, "...The information handling system 100 may execute code instructions 162 that may operate on servers or systems, remote data centers, or on-box in individual client information handling systems 100 according to various embodiments herein. In some embodiments, it is understood any or all portions of code instructions 162 may operate on a plurality of information handling systems 100...", see also, ¶0043 recites, "...For example, instructions 162 may include a particular example of a dock assisted DBS communication diversity system 160, or other aspects or components. Various software modules comprising application instructions 162 may be coordinated by an operating system (OS), and/or via an application programming interface (API)...".
Regarding claims 38, combination of Cheong, Iyer and Venkat disclose the method of claim 32.
Cheong doesn’t explicitly disclose, wherein the first protocol comprises Bluetooth and the second protocol comprises Wi-Fi.
Iyer, in related art relates, wherein the first protocol comprises Bluetooth and the second protocol comprises Wi-Fi (¶0027 recites, "...The information handling system 202 may be connected to and communicate with the dock 204 via a plurality of wired and wireless interfaces. For example, the information handling system 202 may be connected to the dock 204 via a wired USB-C interface 214, via a wireless Bluetooth interface 212, and via another wireless interface 216, such as a Wi-Fi interface...").
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 Cheong with the idea of having first protocol as Bluetooth and the second protocol as Wi-Fi as disclosed by Iyer. The rationale for having dual-protocol devices to take advantage of specific and distinct capabilities of both wi-fi and Bluetooth.
Regarding claims 26 and 32 “CRM/method”, are rejected under the same reasoning as claim 19 “device”, where Cheong, Iyer, and Venkat teach CRM/ Method/device.
Regarding claim 27 “CRM”, are rejected under the same reasoning as claim 24 “device”, where Cheong, Iyer, and Venkat teach CRM/device.
Regarding claims 28, 35, and 37 “CRM/method/method”, are rejected under the same reasoning as claim 20 “device”, where Cheong, Iyer, and Venkat teach CRM/ Method/device.
Regarding claims 29 and 36 “CRM/method”, are rejected under the same reasoning as claim 21 “device”, where Cheong, Iyer, and Venkat teach CRM/ Method/device.
Claim 37 and 20 are essentially the same. Both claims establish links between dock and other device (television for claim 20 and second computing device for claim 37) using the third MAC address via wi-Fi or other (second protocol), and after providing MAC address to the dock, disconnect the sixth communication link. The applicant's attention is directed towards claim 20 which is rejected. Claim 37 is rejected under the same rational as claim 20.
Regarding claims 33, combination of Cheong, Iyer and Venkat disclose the method of claim 32.
Cheong doesn’t explicitly disclose, comprising: after providing the MAC address to the dock, disconnecting the first communications link; and after providing the second MAC address to the dock, disconnecting the third communications link
Venkat is related art relates, comprising: after providing the MAC address to the dock, disconnecting the first communications link; and after providing the second MAC address to the dock, disconnecting the third communications link (¶0072 recites, "...There may be a variety of possible transport link options for an accessory device 107 to use for communication with a network. Briefly, such options may include at least: 1) a Bluetooth connection with companion device 106, which may in turn connect to (and provide data to and from) a network 100; 2) a WLAN connection with companion device 106, which may in turn connect to (and provide data to and from) a network 100...", see also, ¶0113 recites, "...Accessory device 107 may determine link quality indicators (e.g., Rx/Tx packet error rate (PER)). A moving average of any such metrics may be tracked over time. Such link quality indicators may evaluate link layer quality using MAC metrics and/or may utilize a moving average of PER...", see also, [0085] Another exemplary event may be a change in the quality of a cellular link, e.g., based on one or more measurements such as RSRP, RSRQ, SINR, SNR, transmission power, etc. Companion device 106 may detect an event based on the quality of a cellular link crossing a threshold, as measured by one or more such indicators. In response to such an event, the companion device 106 may change (e.g., increase, decrease, begin, end, pause, etc.) its use of the cellular link. For example, companion device 106 may offload one or more bearers to WLAN in response to a decrease in the quality of the cellular link.). Similarly, companion device 106 may offload one or more bearers to Bluetooth when certain link condition exists.
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 Cheong with the idea of disconnecting the communication links (WLAN/ BT) immediately after providing MAC addresses (or any other information to establish communication link) as disclosed by Venkat. The rationale for doing this, which forces the device and dock to drop the current connection, thereby, free up the radio resources.
Regarding claims 34, combination of Cheong, Iyer and Venkat disclose the method of claim 32.
Cheong also discloses, wherein the second data flow comprises communications associated with video conferencing (¶0061 recites, "...For example, in an embodiment in which the software application 170 is latency-sensitive, the dock-assisted DBS communication diversity system 160 may dedicate a wireless link exhibiting the low relative latency to transceiving data pursuant to execution of application 170..."). Low relative latency data flow is used for video conferencing.
Claims 23, 25, 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheong, Iyer and Venkat in view of Cheong et al. (US20220159543, hereinafter Cheong-43)
Regarding Claim 23, combination of Cheong, Iyer and Venkat disclose the computing device of claim 22.
Cheong doesn’t explicitly disclose, wherein the processor is to execute the daemon program to periodically detect that the dock is connected to the computing device.
Cheong-43 also discloses, wherein the processor is to execute the daemon program to periodically detect that the dock is connected to the computing device (Fig.3 (Docking station connection detection module 312 acquires information associated with which wireless transceivers possess an active wireless connection with their corresponding wireless transceivers 108A-N configured in docking station 104. IHS 102 may possess an active connection with docking station 104 using only one wireless transceiver or multiple wireless transceivers. Alternatively, IHS 102 may possess no active connection with docking station 104, such as when IHS 102 is located at a substantial distance from docking station 104. Docking station connection detection module 312 acquires such information, and provides this connection status to wireless channel selection engine 302 for selection of one wireless communication link [¶0047]).
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 Cheong, Iyer and Venkat with the idea of utilizing a background service (daemon) to monitor hardware connectivity as disclosed by Cheong-43. The rationale for following this approach is to ensures that it could dynamically adjusts resource allocation and network workloads across the connected devices.
Regarding Claim 25, combination of Cheong, Iyer, Venkat and Cheong-43 disclose the computing device of claim 23.
Cheong doesn’t explicitly disclose, wherein the processor is to execute the daemon program to periodically detect that the dock is connected to the computing device via a wired connection.
Venkat in related art discloses, wherein the processor is to execute the daemon program to periodically detect that the dock is connected to the computing device via a wired connection (¶0032 recites, "Communication Device—any of various types of computer systems or devices that perform communications, where the communications can be wired or wireless...", ¶0054 recites, As shown, the SOC 300 may be coupled to various other circuits of the UE 106/107. For example, the UE 106/107 may include various types of memory (e.g., including NAND flash 310), a connector interface 320 (e.g., for coupling to a computer system, dock, charging station, etc.), the display 360, and wireless communication circuitry 330..”, ¶0114 recites, "Accessory device 107 may determine metrics related to the WLAN link. For example, accessory device 107 may determine RSRP, RSRQ, SINR, SNR, RSSI, BLER, BER, PER, throughput, bandwidth, etc. A moving average of any such metrics may be tracked over time. Such metrics may be reported periodically and/or may be measured as (e.g., when) needed...").
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 Cheong, Iyer and Cheong-43 with the idea of periodically detects whether a dock is connected via a wired connection as disclosed by Venkat. The rationale for following this approach is to ensure the system can respond to wired dock connections without user intervention.
Regarding claim 31 “CRM”, are rejected under the same reasoning as claim 23 “device”, where Cheong, Iyer, Venkat and Cheong-43 teach CRM/device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
References cited but not used: Venkataraman et al. (US 20190253277 A1) can be used for independent claims 19, 26 and 32 in addition to the one used.
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 at (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 4126
/HASSAN A PHILLIPS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights