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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/21/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The following is an office action in response to applicant’s amendment filed in connection with the RCE on 05/21/2026 for response of the office action mailed on 04/02/2026. Independent Claims 1, 12, and 20 and dependent claims 3 and 14 are amended. Claims 2, 6-7, 10 and 13 were previously canceled. Claims 1, 3-5, 8-9, 11-12, 14-23 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims, particularly independent Claims 1, 12 and 20 (as amended), have been fully 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 Objections
Claims 1, 3-5, 8-9, 11-12 and 14-23 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 1, line 15, Claim 12, line 9 and Claim 20, line 11,"scan duration" should read - - -scan time - - - for alignment with the specification and record clarity. The term "scan duration" is not supported found in the specification or figures. (For examination purposes, examiner interprets “scan duration” to correspond to a scan time).
Claims 3-5, 8-9, 11, 14-19, and 22-23 are objected to by virtue of their dependency (directly or indirectly) on Claims 1, 12 and 20.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4, 8-9, 11-12, 15, 17-19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KWON et al. (KR 20200048821 A) hereinafter, KWON in view of Miao et al. (US 20160157161 A1), hereinafter Miao.
Regarding Claim 1, KWON teaches an electronic device (KWON FIG. 1; FIG. 3; page 2, page 5, ¶2; electronic device 101) comprising:
a communication module (KWON FIG. 1 (190), communication module);
at least one memory (KWON FIG. 1, 130) storing instructions (KWON page 8 ¶3, instructions or computer codes that cause the operation of the electronic device 101 may be stored in the memory 130), and
at least one processor communicatively coupled to the communication module and the at least one memory (KWON FIG. 2, 120 page 5, ¶2 at least one processor connected/embedded in electronic device and/or connected to communication module, interpreted as “communicatively coupled”; see also page 8, ¶3, stored instructions or computer code may cause the processor 120 to perform the corresponding operation using at least one component of the electronic device 101.),
wherein the stored instructions, when executed by the at least one processor is configured individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
upon executing an application stored in the electronic device (KWON FIG. 1; page 6, ¶2, the program 140/application 146) in the electronic device 101), identify type information of at least one external electronic device registered in the application (KWON page 10, ¶10, the electronic device (101) (example: in each of the scan of the multiple times like 401 operation or 402 operation" the processor (120)) can acquire the information associated with outer electronic devices (211" 212" 213" 214)/”at least one external electronic device”, e.g. an SSID/”type information”), [and]
identify at least one first communication protocol supported by the at least one external electronic device among a plurality of communication protocols supported by the electronic device based on the type information of the at least one external electronic device (KWON FIG. 2; page 8, ¶6, the electronic device (101) (example: the processor (120)) can scan outer electronic devices (211" 212"213" 214) /”external electronic device”, at least one among multiple wireless communication schemes/ (201" 202" 203" 204)/ “communication protocol” based on each [outer electronic device/external device]).
KWON does not explicitly teach [to:] set at least one scan duration based on excluding at least one second communication protocol among the plurality of communication protocols supported by the electronic device except for the identified at least one first communication protocol supported by the at least one external electronic device for the setting of the at least one scan duration.
However, in the analogous art, Miao explicitly discloses [to:] set at least one scan duration (7161, ¶0001,¶¶0005-0006, FIG. 3, ¶0036; ¶0056-0057 FIG. 6, ¶0059 limit service scan by reducing network service scan time) based on excluding at least one second communication protocol among the plurality of communication protocols supported by the electronic device except for the identified at least one first communication protocol supported by the at least one external electronic device for the setting of the at least one scan duration (7161, Abstract, ¶0006-0009; FIG. 3, ¶0042 at 320, Fig. 6, ¶0063 at 630, selecting a subset of the plurality of RATs supported by the wireless communication device [and] at 330/640, performing a service scan for at least one RAT included in the selected subset . . .[and] any of the plurality of RATs supported by the wireless communication device 102 that is not included in the selected subset is excluded from the service scan).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine KWON’s disclosure of an electronic device and method for controlling scan frequency based on detection pattern with Miao’s multi-mode wireless communication device and method. The motivation would be reducing scan time by selecting a target subset/target device and reduce power consumption by the wireless device [Miao, ¶0005; ¶0019].
Regarding Claim 4, KWON and Miao teach claim 1.
KWON further teaches . . . to start or end a scan on a communication protocol based on a life cycle of the application (KWON Fig. 4, page 9, ¶10, the processor (120) can (scan) multiple times at least one scan signal 401 operation . . . based on at least one wireless communication scheme transmissions (411, 413); based on the first wireless communication scheme for the first period, examiner interprets “first wireless scheme for the first period” to correspond to a life cycle).
Regarding Claim 8, KWON and Miao teach claim 1.
KWON further teaches [to:] receive, from a server (KWON FIG. 1, 108), at least one of location information or the type information of the at least one external electronic device registered in the application; (KWON FIG. 1, page5, ¶ 2, the electronic device 101 may communicate with the external electronic device 104 through the server 108; page 7, ¶7, “data can be received through the server (108) . . . between the electronic device (101) and external electronic device (104) as the transmission”; examiner interprets “data” to include “identifying type information e.g. SSID“ of outer electronic devices (211" 212" 213" 214) registered in the application(page 12, ¶6); see also page 10, ¶10, the electronic device (101) (example: in each of the scan of the multiple times like 401 operation or 402 operation" the processor (120)) can acquire the information associated with outer electronic devices (211" 212" 213" 214), e.g. an SSID/”type information”).
Regarding Claim 9, KWON and Miao teach claim 1.
KWON further teaches the application is an Internet of things (IoT) application that identifies a state of the at least one external electronic device and controls an operation of the at least one external electronic device (KWON page 2, ¶1 the application is an Internet of things (IoT) technology application; page 13, ¶3 and can “confirm the operation state of the (at least one) electronic device”).
Regarding Claim 11, KWON and Miao teach claim 1.
KWON further teaches each of the plurality of communication protocols is one of Bluetooth (BT), Bluetooth low energy (BLE), Wi-Fi, peer-to-peer (P2P) network, universal plug and play (UPnP), CLOUD, or ultra-wideband (UWB) (KWON FIG. 2, page 8, ¶6; page 9, ¶10; page 10, ¶2, each of the plurality of communication (protocols) schemes (201”, 202”, 203”, 204) is, for example Bluetooth, WiFi, . . .).
Regarding Claims 12, 15, and 17-19, the claims disclose similar features of Claims 1, 4, 8-9, and 11 respectively, and are rejected based on the same rationales of Claims 1, 4, 8-9, and 11 respectively in method form (KWON, FIG. 1-4, page 1, Technical Field, page 2, Summary of Invention; and disclosed throughout, a method performed by an electronic device).
Regarding Claim 20, the claim discloses similar features of Claim 1 and is rejected based on the same rationales of Claim 1 (one or more non-transitory computer readable storage media storing instructions (KWON page 8 ¶3, instructions or computer codes that cause the operation of the electronic device 101 may be stored in the memory 130).
Claims 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KWON in view of Miao and further in view of BERNSEN et al. (US 20210204177 A1), hereinafter BERNSEN.
Regarding Claim 3, KWON and Miao teach claim 1.
KWON further teaches [to] exclude a communication protocol among the plurality of communication protocols from a scan target based on the scan order (KWON page 11, ¶6 - page 12, ¶1; “exclude/rejection [with] at least one outer electronic devices (211,212,213,214) in which the electronic device (101) is detected based on at least one wireless communication (protocol) scheme”; FIG. 8, page 16, ¶8-10, rejection of the scan signal based on the “obtained detection pattern among multiple wireless communication (protocols) schemes (201,202,203,204)”; examiner interprets “detection pattern” to correspond to scan target).
KWON further teaches to . . . set a scan order [of the plurality of communication protocols] (page 28, 13, "the scan frequency of the first wireless communication scheme is adjusted in order to be different from the pre-set scan frequency and the electronic device (101) which is set up in order to perform the scan based on the first wireless communication scheme" can be provided"; examiner interprets a pre-set scan frequency to correspond to a pre-set scanning order).
KWON and Miao do not explicitly teach . . . excluding the at least one second communication protocol among the plurality of communication protocols supported by the electronic device except for the identified at least one first communication protocol supported by the at least one external electronic device for the setting of the scan order.
However, in the analogous art, BERNSEN explicitly discloses BERNSEN explicitly discloses excluding at least one second communication protocol among the plurality of communication protocols supported by the electronic device (BERNSEN, ¶0030, the second protocol indication may be different from the initial protocol indication, for example by excluding an alternative protocol that is not supported or not preferred; ¶0057 [and] the alternative communication protocols include at least one of Wi-Fi according to [802.11], Wi-Fi Peer-to-Peer according to [P2P], Wi-Fi device provisioning protocol according to [DPP], Wi-Fi Simple Config according to [WSC], Bluetooth according to [BT], Zigbee according to [ZIGBEE], interpreted to correspond to “the at least one second communication protocol among the plurality of communication protocols” (also ¶0008)); except for the identified at least one first communication protocol supported by the at least one external electronic device (BERNSEN, ¶0016, it [the device] parses the received message and judges which of the Alternative Carriers listed in the received message it supports and is willing to use; ¶0025 requesting device sends a request message comprising a protocol indication indicating one or more alternative protocols / supported by the requesting device / “external electronic device”¶0034 the second channel indication comprises multiple channels and a priority for at least one of the channels indicating a preference for a channel to be used for the new connection).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine KWON’s disclosure of an electronic device and method for controlling scan frequency based on detection pattern and Miao’s multi-mode wireless communication device and method with BERNSEN’s method for establishing a new connection according to a selected alternative communication protocol. The motivation would be to provide a system for reliably setting up a new wireless connection [BERNSEN, ¶0022].
Regarding Claim 21 and Claim 22, KWON and Miao teach claim 20 and claim 1, respectively.
KWON does not explicitly teach the at least one second communication protocol is not supported by the at least one external electronic device.
However, in the analogous art, BERNSEN further teaches the at least one second communication protocol is not supported by the at least one external electronic device (BERNSEN ¶0016, parses the received message and judges which of the Alternative Carriers listed in the received message it supports and is willing to use; ¶0030, excluding an alternative protocol that is not supported or not preferred).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine KWON’s disclosure of an electronic device and method for controlling scan frequency based on detection pattern and Miao’s multi-mode wireless communication device and method with BERNSEN’s method for establishing a new connection according to a selected alternative communication protocol. The motivation would be to provide a system for reliably setting up a new wireless connection [BERNSEN, ¶0022].
Regarding Claim 23, the claim discloses similar features of Claim 22 and is rejected based on the same rationales of Claim 22, in method form (KWON, FIG. 1-4, page 1, Technical Field, page 2, Summary of Invention; and disclosed throughout, a method performed by an electronic device).
Claims 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KWON in view of Miao and further in view of Wang (US 20190208399 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, KWON and Miao teach claim 1.
KWON further teaches the stored instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: exclude, from a scan target. . . based on location information about the electronic device and location information about the at least one external electronic device (KWON FIG. 12; page 21, ¶3, processor configured to exclude/ “confirm detection acceptance or rejection” and “scan [Vienna] can adjust the control section in the case in which outer electronic devices (211,212,213, 214) the electronic device (101) are not detected").
KWON and Miao do not explicitly teach . . . an external electronic device, which is away from the electronic device by a preset threshold distance or more, among the at least one external electronic device, . . .
However, in the analogous art, Wang explicitly discloses . . . an external electronic device, which is away from the electronic device by a preset threshold distance or more, among the at least one external electronic device, . . . (Wang FIG. 2, FIG. 8, ¶0008 determining, by the mobile device /electronic device, that the information about the distance is less than a [preset] first distance threshold; ¶0060 first distance threshold may be preset according to an actual requirement),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine KWON’s disclosure of an electronic device and method for controlling scan frequency based on detection pattern and Miao’s multi-mode wireless communication device and method with Wang’s disclosure of a wireless network scanning method. The motivation would be to reduce unnecessary active scanning and resolve the problem of relatively high-power consumption of scanning a wireless network by a mobile device [Wang, ¶0005-¶0006].
Regarding Claim 16, the claim discloses similar features of Claim 5 and is rejected based on the same rationales of Claim 5, in method form (KWON, FIG. 1-4, page 1, Technical Field, page 2, Summary of Invention; and disclosed throughout, a method performed by an electronic device).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACY L WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7694. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30-5:30.
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, Ayman Abaza can be reached at 571-270-0422. 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.
/TRACY L WILLIAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 2465 /CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights