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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see REMARKS, filed on 09/16/2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 42-61 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Claus et al., (Pub. No.: US 2008/0115146 A1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the non-final rejection dated 06/16/2025 has overcome. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Maniatis et al., (International Publication Number: WO 2013/143586 A1).
The rejection of claims 47 and 58 under 35 U.S.C. 112 overcomes in view of corrections/amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 42-61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claus et al., (Pub. No.: US 2008/0115146 A1), in view of Maniatis et al., (International Publication Number: WO 2013/143586 A1).
Claims 1 - 41. (Cancelled).
Regarding Claim 42, (Previously Presented) Claus discloses a method in a first network node for verifying availability of at least part of a communication link, the method comprising: (Claus, Abstract, paragraph [0012] watchdog function to verify communications integrity, paragraph [0049] verify the data, paragraph [0027] discloses wireless device which is first node, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link, Fig. 1, Master (GUI host) 101 is also interpreted as a first node: For entire disclosure Figs. 1, 4, 5, and paragraphs [0008]-[0012], paragraph [0027], and paragraphs [0046]-[0048] are given emphasis, see “connection”, “safety”, and “watchdog” in the Abstract)
receiving (Claus, paragraphs [0007], [0026], and [0035] disclose receiving modules, paragraphs [0025], and [0027] disclose receiving data, paragraph [0049] discloses receiving), from a first functional safety application, a plurality of first messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) for verifying availability (Claus, paragraph [0012] watchdog function to verify communications integrity, paragraph [0049] verify the data) of a communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and a second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively) according to one or more parameters associated with the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), wherein each first message includes one or more respective data (Claus, Abstract, data); and
exchanging (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0031], and [0032] disclose exchanging data), with a second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) over at least part of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), a plurality of second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and a plurality of acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) for verifying availability of the at least part of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), wherein the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of the second messages are successively exchanged with the second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) in accordance with at least one of the one or more parameters associated with the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), and the second messages and the acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) do not include the one or more data (Claus, Abstract, data). (Claus, The present design/disclosure enables a synchronous communications watchdog mechanism, also known as a safety critical communications watchdog or a medical event safety critical communications watchdog. The master module sends an explicit request message to the slave module to start a communication data object. This data object defines two bytes that affect the performance of the communication watchdog. A cyclic interval (CycInt) byte defines the interval, in milliseconds, at which both the master and slave test the communications watchdog. An expected packet (EPR) byte defines the initial message timer value. Both the master and slave modules contain a copy of the EPR byte. The present design decrement the EPR byte value for each elapsed interval as defined by the CycInt byte. Each time a data packet is received from the other module, the EPR byte value is reset to the initial value. When a sufficient number of elapsed intervals are experienced by either module to cause the EPR byte value to be decrement to zero, the module considers the communications watchdog to have failed and take appropriate safety critical actions at this point. Paragraph [0046]; Figs. 4 and 5; the watch dog functionality be implemented in the form of virtual device drivers known in the art, one residing on the master and one residing on the slave to enable the monitoring of the communications in both directions, in paragraph [0048]; wireless devices in paragraph [0027])
Claus does not explicitly disclose the minor difference as follow:
resource availability management of computer networks
However, Claus in view of Maniatis disclose following:
resource availability management of computer networks (Maniatis, Abstract, the UE communicates the average heartbeat time via RRC signaling to the target base station, on page 6, lines 11-18; figures 1 and 2)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to combine the teachings of Claus before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with that of Maniatis so that resource availability management of computer networks be included in a method in a first network node for verifying availability of at least part of a communication link. The motivation to combine the teachings of Maniatis would enable radio resource control connection, in particular to radio resource control connections between a base station and a user equipment (i.e. master and slave respectively running an always-on application. (Maniatis, Abstract, Emphasis: page 1-6, page 6, lines 11-18; figures 1 and 2)
Regarding Claim 43, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 42, further comprising, before receiving the plurality of first messages: (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages)
receiving (Claus, paragraphs [0007], [0026], and [0035] disclose receiving modules, paragraphs [0025], and [0027] disclose receiving data, paragraph [0049] discloses receiving), from the first functional safety application or the second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively), a request to establish the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and the second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively), wherein the request indicates the one or more parameters associated with the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link); and
establishing (Claus, Abstract, paragraph [0011], and Claim 1 disclose establishing communications) the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and the second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively).
Regarding Claim 44, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 42, wherein the one or more parameters include a first frequency (Claus, paragraph [0038] discloses frequency) of successively receiving each of the first messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) from the first functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively) and/or a time period between receiving each first message from the functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively), and wherein receiving the first messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) from the first functional safety application comprises successively receiving each of the plurality of messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) at substantially the first frequency (Claus, paragraph [0038] discloses frequency) or in accordance with the time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period) between each first message (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages).
Regarding Claim 45, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 44, wherein exchanging (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0031], and [0032] disclose exchanging data) a plurality of second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and a plurality of acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement / acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) comprises successively receiving the plurality of second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) from the second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) substantially at the first frequency (Claus, paragraph [0038] discloses frequency) or in accordance with the time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period), and sending a respective one of the acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement / acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) to the second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) in response to each of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages).
Regarding Claim 46, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 44, wherein exchanging (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0031], and [0032] disclose exchanging data) a plurality of second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and a plurality of acknowledgements of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) comprises successively sending the plurality of second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) to the second network node substantially at the first frequency (Claus, paragraph [0038] discloses frequency) or in accordance with the time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period), and receiving a respective one of the acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of the second messages from the second network node in response to each of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages).
Regarding Claim 47, (Currently Amended) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 46, wherein the one or more parameters include a further time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period), and the method comprises, in response to an acknowledgement (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of one of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) not being received within the further time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period) after sending one of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages), indicating to the application that the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) is inoperative.
Regarding Claim 48, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 42, wherein the one or more parameters include a communication protocol associated with the first messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages).
Regarding Claim 49, (Currently Amended) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 42, comprising determining that the plurality of first messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) are for verifying availability of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and the second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively).
Regarding Claim 50, (Currently Amended) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 49, comprising determining that each of the first messages is for verifying availability of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and the second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively) by comparing at least one field in each first message with at least one corresponding field in at least one earlier message received from the first functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively), wherein the at least one field in each first message contains the respective one or more data for the first message (Claus, Abstract, data).
Regarding Claim 51, (Currently Amended) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 49, comprising determining that at least one further message from the first functional safety application is not for verifying availability of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and the second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively), and forwarding the at least one further message to the second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively).
Regarding Claim 52, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 42, wherein the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) is associated with a first message time period, and wherein the first frequency (Claus, paragraph [0038] discloses frequency) is based on the first message time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period).
Regarding Claim 53, (Previously Presented) Claus discloses a method in a first network node for verifying availability (Claus, paragraph [0012] watchdog function to verify communications integrity, paragraph [0049] verify the data) of at least part of a communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), the method comprising:
generating and sending (Claus, Abstract, sending data, various other passages disclose send/sending data, Fig. 4, paragraphs [0041]-[0043] disclose send a request/message/data. Fig. 5, paragraphs [0044]-[0045] also disclose send), to a first functional safety application, a plurality of first messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) for verifying availability (Claus, paragraph [0012] watchdog function to verify communications integrity, paragraph [0049] verify the data) of a communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and a second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively) according to one or more parameters associated with the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), each first message includes one or more respective data (Claus, Abstract, data); and
exchanging (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0031], and [0032] disclose exchanging data), with a second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) over at least part of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), a plurality of second messages and a plurality of acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) for verifying availability of the at least part of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), wherein the second messages and acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement / acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) are successively exchanged with the second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) in accordance with at least one of the one or more parameters associated with the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), and the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and the acknowledgements of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) do not include the one or more data (Claus, Abstract, data).
(Claus, The present design/disclosure enables a synchronous communications watchdog mechanism, also known as a safety critical communications watchdog or a medical event safety critical communications watchdog. The master module sends an explicit request message to the slave module to start a communication data object. This data object defines two bytes that affect the performance of the communication watchdog. A cyclic interval (CycInt) byte defines the interval, in milliseconds, at which both the master and slave test the communications watchdog. An expected packet (EPR) byte defines the initial message timer value. Both the master and slave modules contain a copy of the EPR byte. The present design decrement the EPR byte value for each elapsed interval as defined by the CycInt byte. Each time a data packet is received from the other module, the EPR byte value is reset to the initial value. When a sufficient number of elapsed intervals are experienced by either module to cause the EPR byte value to be decrement to zero, the module considers the communications watchdog to have failed and take appropriate safety critical actions at this point. Paragraph [0046]; Figs. 4 and 5; the watch dog functionality be implemented in the form of virtual device drivers known in the art, one residing on the master and one residing on the slave to enable the monitoring of the communications in both directions, in paragraph [0048]; wireless devices in paragraph [0027])
Claus does not explicitly disclose the minor difference as follow:
resource availability management of computer networks
However, Claus in view of Maniatis disclose following:
resource availability management of computer networks (Maniatis, Abstract, the UE communicates the average heartbeat time via RRC signaling to the target base station, on page 6, lines 11-18; figures 1 and 2)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to combine the teachings of Claus before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with that of Maniatis so that resource availability management of computer networks be included in a method in a first network node for verifying availability of at least part of a communication link. The motivation to combine the teachings of Maniatis would enable radio resource control connection, in particular to radio resource control connections between a base station and a user equipment (i.e. master and slave respectively running an always-on application. (Maniatis, Abstract, Emphasis: page 1-6, page 6, lines 11-18; figures 1 and 2)
Regarding Claim 54, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 53, further comprising, before receiving the plurality of first messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages):
receiving (Claus, paragraphs [0007], [0026], and [0035] disclose receiving modules, paragraphs [0025], and [0027] disclose receiving data, paragraph [0049] discloses receiving), from the first functional safety application or the second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively), a request to establish (Claus, Abstract, paragraph [0011], and Claim 1 disclose establishing communications) the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and the second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively), wherein the request indicates the one or more parameters associated with the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link); and
establishing (Claus, Abstract, paragraph [0011], and Claim 1 disclose establishing communications) the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and the second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively).
Regarding Claim 55, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 53, wherein the one or more parameters include a first frequency (Claus, paragraph [0038] discloses frequency) of successively sending each of the first messages from the first functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively) and/or a time period between sending each first message from the functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively), wherein sending the first messages to the first functional safety application comprises successively sending each of the plurality of messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) at substantially the first frequency (Claus, paragraph [0038] discloses frequency) or in accordance with the time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period) between each first message.
Regarding Claim 56, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 55, wherein exchanging (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0031], and [0032] disclose exchanging data) a plurality of second messages and a plurality of acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) comprises successively receiving the plurality of second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) from the second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) substantially at the first frequency (Claus, paragraph [0038] discloses frequency) or in accordance with the time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period), and sending a respective one of the acknowledgements of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) to the second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) in response to each of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages).
Regarding Claim 57, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 55, wherein exchanging (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0031], and [0032] disclose exchanging data) a plurality of second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and a plurality of acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement / acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) comprises successively sending the plurality of second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) to the second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) substantially at the first frequency (Claus, paragraph [0038] discloses frequency) or in accordance with the time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period), and receiving a respective one of the acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) from the second network node in response to each of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages).
Regarding Claim 58, (Currently Amended) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 57, wherein the one or more parameters include a further time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period), and the method comprises, in response to an acknowledgement (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of one of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) not being received within the further time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period) after sending one of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages), indicating to the application that the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) is inoperative.
Regarding Claim 59, (Previously Presented) The combination of Claus and Maniatis disclose the method of claim 53, wherein the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) is associated with a first message time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period), and wherein the first frequency (Claus, paragraph [0038] discloses frequency) is based on the first message time period (Claus, Claims 8, and 17 disclose period of time which is time period).
Regarding Claim 60, (Previously Presented) Claus discloses apparatus in a first network node for verifying availability (Claus, paragraph [0012] watchdog function to verify communications integrity, paragraph [0049] verify the data) of at least part of a communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), the apparatus comprising a processor (Claus, paragraph [0007] processing resources (i.e. CPU)) and a memory (Claus, paragraph [0007] memory), the memory (Claus, paragraph [0007] memory) containing instructions executable by the processor such that the apparatus is operable to: (Claus, paragraph [0007] processing resources (i.e. CPU))
receive (Claus, paragraphs [0007], [0026], and [0035] disclose receiving modules, paragraphs [0025], and [0027] disclose receiving data, paragraph [0049] discloses receiving), from a first functional safety application, a plurality of first messages for verifying availability of a communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and a second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively) according to one or more parameters associated with the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), wherein each first message includes one or more respective data (Claus, Abstract, data); and
exchange (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0031], and [0032] disclose exchanging data), with a second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) over at least part of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), a plurality of second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and a plurality of acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement / acknowledgement message) of the second messages for verifying availability of the at least part of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), wherein the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) are successively exchanged with the second network node in accordance with at least one of the one or more parameters associated with the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), and the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and the acknowledgements of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) do not include the one or more data (Claus, Abstract, data). (Claus, The present design/disclosure enables a synchronous communications watchdog mechanism, also known as a safety critical communications watchdog or a medical event safety critical communications watchdog. The master module sends an explicit request message to the slave module to start a communication data object. This data object defines two bytes that affect the performance of the communication watchdog. A cyclic interval (CycInt) byte defines the interval, in milliseconds, at which both the master and slave test the communications watchdog. An expected packet (EPR) byte defines the initial message timer value. Both the master and slave modules contain a copy of the EPR byte. The present design decrement the EPR byte value for each elapsed interval as defined by the CycInt byte. Each time a data packet is received from the other module, the EPR byte value is reset to the initial value. When a sufficient number of elapsed intervals are experienced by either module to cause the EPR byte value to be decrement to zero, the module considers the communications watchdog to have failed and take appropriate safety critical actions at this point. Paragraph [0046]; Figs. 4 and 5; the watch dog functionality be implemented in the form of virtual device drivers known in the art, one residing on the master and one residing on the slave to enable the monitoring of the communications in both directions, in paragraph [0048]; wireless devices in paragraph [0027])
Claus does not explicitly disclose the minor difference as follow:
resource availability management of computer networks
However, Claus in view of Maniatis disclose following:
resource availability management of computer networks (Maniatis, Abstract, the UE communicates the average heartbeat time via RRC signaling to the target base station, on page 6, lines 11-18; figures 1 and 2)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to combine the teachings of Claus before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with that of Maniatis so that resource availability management of computer networks be included in a apparatus in a first network node for verifying availability of at least part of a communication link. The motivation to combine the teachings of Maniatis would enable radio resource control connection, in particular to radio resource control connections between a base station and a user equipment (i.e. master and slave respectively running an always-on application. (Maniatis, Abstract, Emphasis: page 1-6, page 6, lines 11-18; figures 1 and 2)
Regarding Claim 61, (Previously Presented) Claus discloses apparatus in a first network node for verifying availability (Claus, paragraph [0012] watchdog function to verify communications integrity, paragraph [0049] verify the data) of at least part of a communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), the apparatus comprising a processor (Claus, paragraph [0007] processing resources (i.e. CPU)) and a memory (Claus, paragraph [0007] memory), the memory (Claus, paragraph [0007] memory) containing instructions executable by the processor such that the apparatus is operable to: (Claus, paragraph [0007] processing resources (i.e. CPU))
generate and send (Claus, Abstract, sending data, various other passages disclose send/sending data, Fig. 4, paragraphs [0041]-[0043] disclose send a request/message/data. Fig. 5, paragraphs [0044]-[0045] also disclose send), to a first functional safety application, a plurality of first messages for verifying availability of a communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) between the first functional safety application and a second functional safety application (Claus, paragraph [0025] discloses applications which are first application and second application respectively) according to one or more parameters associated with the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link) each first message includes one or more respective data (Claus, Abstract, data); and
exchange (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0031], and [0032] disclose exchanging data), with a second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) over at least part of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), a plurality of second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and a plurality of acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) for verifying availability of the at least part of the communications link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), wherein the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and acknowledgements of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) are successively exchanged with the second network node (Claus, Fig. 1, Slave (Instrument Host) 102 is interpreted as second node) in accordance with at least one of the one or more parameters associated with the communication link (Claus, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035] discloses communication path which is a communication link), and the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) and the acknowledgements (Claus, Fig. 2C, paragraphs [0019], [0037], Fig. 4, paragraphs [0042]-[0043] acknowledgement 403, Fig. 5, paragraph [0045] disclose acknowledgement/acknowledgement message) of the second messages (Claus, paragraph [0036], Fig. 5, paragraphs [0045] response data 503 message, and paragraphs [0047], and [0049] disclose messages which are plurality of messages) do not include the one or more data (Claus, Abstract, data). (Claus, The present design/disclosure enables a synchronous communications watchdog mechanism, also known as a safety critical communications watchdog or a medical event safety critical communications watchdog. The master module sends an explicit request message to the slave module to start a communication data object. This data object defines two bytes that affect the performance of the communication watchdog. A cyclic interval (CycInt) byte defines the interval, in milliseconds, at which both the master and slave test the communications watchdog. An expected packet (EPR) byte defines the initial message timer value. Both the master and slave modules contain a copy of the EPR byte. The present design decrement the EPR byte value for each elapsed interval as defined by the CycInt byte. Each time a data packet is received from the other module, the EPR byte value is reset to the initial value. When a sufficient number of elapsed intervals are experienced by either module to cause the EPR byte value to be decrement to zero, the module considers the communications watchdog to have failed and take appropriate safety critical actions at this point. Paragraph [0046]; Figs. 4 and 5; the watch dog functionality be implemented in the form of virtual device drivers known in the art, one residing on the master and one residing on the slave to enable the monitoring of the communications in both directions, in paragraph [0048]; wireless devices in paragraph [0027])
Claus does not explicitly disclose the minor difference as follow:
resource availability management of computer networks
However, Claus in view of Maniatis disclose following:
resource availability management of computer networks (Maniatis, Abstract, the UE communicates the average heartbeat time via RRC signaling to the target base station, on page 6, lines 11-18; figures 1 and 2)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to combine the teachings of Claus before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with that of Maniatis so that resource availability management of computer networks be included in a apparatus in a first network node for verifying availability of at least part of a communication link. The motivation to combine the teachings of Maniatis would enable radio resource control connection, in particular to radio resource control connections between a base station and a user equipment (i.e. master and slave respectively running an always-on application. (Maniatis, Abstract, Emphasis: page 1-6, page 6, lines 11-18; figures 1 and 2)
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANJAY K DEWAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4086. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM to 5:30 PM M-F.
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, Nicholas A. Jensen can be reached at (571)270-5443. 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.
/S.K.D./Examiner, Ar