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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 April 16, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 4-6 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Gnessin (Pub. No. US 2020/0287974 A1, hereinafter referred to as Gnessin), and further in view of Kossey, et al (Pub. No. US 2021/0367980 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kossey) and Azagury, et al (Pub. No. US 2005/0132022 A1, hereinafter referred to as Azagury).
Claim 1 is an independent claim and Gnessin discloses a device for use in the internet of things, the device comprising:
a communication interface (network interface, para. [0050]);
a configuration memory (see para. [0051]); and
a microcontroller (see para. [0027], [0052]) with firmware for controlling the communication interface (see para. [0036]);
wherein the microcontroller is programmed to:
establish a connection to a first cloud service on the basis of a configuration stored in the configuration memory (firmware pre-configured to connect the connected device on which it is installed, via the communication network, to a cloud switch 110…the connected device and the cloud switch are configured to perform a connection process…for establishing a first connection between the connected device and a first cloud (e.g. cloud A) and for registering to one or more channels of a publish/subscribe service, para. [0036]);
receive a control command (upon a command to switch clouds, para. [0036], [0100]); and
on receipt of the control command set up a connection to a second cloud service without adapting any firmware or configuration data of the microcontroller (upon a command to switch clouds…the connected device and the cloud switch are configured to perform a cloud switch process…and connect it to another cloud, other than the cloud it is connected to (e.g. cloud B), and for registering it to one or more channels of a publish/subscribe service provided by other cloud, para. [0036]; see also para. [0079]).
Gnessin does not specifically disclose, but Kossey teaches, to receive a control command from a local triggering device not connected to the first cloud service (user input for third party cloud software as a service being selected; user input via serial interface (e.g. a keyboard, keypad and mouse), para. [0072]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Kossey’s local user input device for sending commands for device usage with Gnessin’s control command because it would have allowed for well-known user input device usage.
Gnessin and Kossey do not specifically disclose, but Azagury teaches, that the control command is received via a local network (a computer with a LAN interface to communicate over a LAN and input and output devices coupled to communicate over the LAN to each of the computers, para. [0006]-[0009]; I/O device such as keyboard or mouse, para. [0002]; see also para. [0038]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Azagury’s keyboard/mouse inputs over LAN with Gnessin and Kossey’s keyboard/mouse inputs for controlling computer functions because it would have allowed for remote control of a system, increasing the overall efficiency of using a computing device without requiring a user to be physically located at the computing device.
As per claim 2, claim 1 is incorporated and Gnessin further discloses wherein the microcontroller is further programmed to:
exchange data arising during operation unidirectionally or bidirectionally with the first cloud service after the connection to the first cloud service has been established (send at least one message to a given cloud via one of the publish/subscribe channels to which the given connected device is registered, para. [0071], [0072]); and
exchange data arising during operation unidirectionally or bidirectionally with the second cloud service after the connection to the second cloud service has been established (see para. [0071], [0072]).
As per claim 4, claim 1 is incorporated and Gnessin further discloses wherein the microcontroller is further programmed, prior to establishing the connection to the first cloud service, to establish a connection to a commissioning server and to receive address data and/or cryptographic data from the commissioning server (connection information is sent to the given connected device 100…connection information includes unique security credentials and URL/IP address associated with the given cloud, para. [0070]), and on the basis of the address data and/or cryptographic data to establish the connection to the first cloud service (connection information enables identification of the given cloud to which the given connected device is to connect and information identifying the publish/subscribe channels of a publish/subscribe service provided by the given cloud to which the given connected device is to register, and URL enabling identification of the given cloud to which the given connected device is to connect, para. [0070]).
As per claim 5, claim 1 is incorporated and Gnessin further discloses wherein the microcontroller is further programmed to establish the connection to the first cloud service on the basis of a configuration stored in the configuration memory (see para. [0065]).
As per claim 6, claim 1 is incorporated and Gnessin further discloses wherein the microcontroller is further programmed to receive, with the control command, address data for the second cloud service and to set up the connection using the address data (cloud switch can send to the given URL device, URL/IP address for connecting the given device to the given cloud for cloud service connections, para. [0063], [0064], [0070]).
As per claim 9, claim 1 is incorporated and Gnessin and Kossey do not specifically disclose, but Azagury teaches, wherein the microcontroller is further programmed to receive the control command from a connection comprising at least one of: a Bluetooth interface and a wireless local area network interface (a computer with a LAN interface to communicate over a LAN and input and output devices coupled to communicate over the LAN to each of the computers, para. [0006]-[0009]; I/O device such as keyboard or mouse, para. [0002]; see also para. [0038]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Azagury’s keyboard/mouse inputs over LAN with Gnessin and Kossey’s keyboard/mouse inputs for controlling computer functions because it would have allowed for remote control of a system, increasing the overall efficiency of using a computing device without requiring a user to be physically located at the computing device.
As per claim 10, claim 1 is incorporated and Gnessin further discloses wherein the microcontroller is further programmed to receive the control command in a push message (a command to switch clouds, para. [0036]; a given manufacturer of a group of connected devices can request to switch clouds, para. [0100]; see also para. [0037]-[0039]).
While Gnessin does not specifically disclose an HTTP push message, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention would have easily recognized an HTTP push message as a well-known type of push communication allowing for a wider range of supported communication protocols.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury as applied above, and further in view of Buchstaller (Pub. No. US 2020/0145494 A1, hereinafter referred to as Buchstaller).
As per claim 3, claim 2 is incorporated and Gnessin further discloses wherein the microcontroller is further programmed to send data to the first cloud service and second cloud service (at least one of the first and second publish/subscribe service is an MQTT based publish/subscribe service, para. [0011])
Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury do not specifically disclose, but Buchstaller teaches, wherein the microcontroller is further programmed to: send operational data to the first cloud service after the connection to the first cloud service has been established; and send operational data to the second cloud service after the connection to the second cloud service has been established, wherein the operational data is selected from the following non-exhaustive list: measured data, time stamps, results of calculations and control command data for actuators and/or interfaces (MQTT is an example of a given protocol that allows the publishing and subscription of data, such as measurement data, para. [0039]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Buchstaller’s MQTT communications with Gnessin and Kossey and Azagury’s MQTT communications and remote input because it would have allowed for known communication types within the MQTT protocol to be sent.
Claims 7-8 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury as applied above, and further in view of Lingamallu, et al (Pub. No. US 2018/054434 A1, hereinafter referred to as Lingamallu).
As per claim 7, claim 1 is incorporated and Gnessin, Kossey and Agazury do not specifically disclose, but Lingamallu teaches, wherein the microcontroller is further programmed, after the connection to the second cloud service is set up, to receive certificates from the second cloud service and to store them (downloading user certificate for the user with an accompanying authority certificate issued by said web service and storing certificates, see claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Lingamallu’s certificate download for service with Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury’s cloud service setups and remote input because it would have allowed for a more efficient secure session setup (Lingamallu, para. [0001]).
As per claim 8, claim 1 is incorporated and Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury do not specifically disclose, but Lingamallu teaches, wherein the microcontroller is further programmed to send identification information to the second cloud service and to receive the certificates in response to the identification information (device sending user credentials for receiving certificates, see claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Lingamallu’s certificate download for service with Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury’s cloud service setups and remote input because it would have allowed for a more efficient secure session setup (Lingamallu, para. [0001]).
Claim 13 is an independent claim and Gnessin discloses a method for connecting a device previously connected to a first cloud service, to a second cloud service, the method comprising:
triggering a control command to the device (upon a command to switch clouds…, para. [0037]);
setting up a connection to the second cloud service in response to the control command (upon a command to switch clouds…the connected device and the cloud switch are configured to perform a cloud switch process…and connect it to another cloud, other than the cloud it is connected to (e.g. cloud B), and for registering it to one or more channels of a publish/subscribe service provided by other cloud, para. [0036]; see also para. [0079]).
Gnessin does not specifically disclose, but Kossey teaches, triggering a control command using a local device not connected to the first cloud service (user input for third party cloud software as a service being selected; user input via serial interface (e.g. a keyboard, keypad and mouse), para. [0072]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Kossey’s local user input device for sending commands for device usage with Gnessin’s control command because it would have allowed for well-known user input device usage.
Gnessin and Kossey do not specifically disclose, but Azagury teaches, that the control command is via a local network (a computer with a LAN interface to communicate over a LAN and input and output devices coupled to communicate over the LAN to each of the computers, para. [0006]-[0009]; I/O device such as keyboard or mouse, para. [0002]; see also para. [0038]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Azagury’s keyboard/mouse inputs over LAN with Gnessin and Kossey’s keyboard/mouse inputs for controlling computer functions because it would have allowed for remote control of a system, increasing the overall efficiency of using a computing device without requiring a user to be physically located at the computing device.
Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury do not specifically disclose, but Lingamallu teaches, providing certificates in the second cloud service that can be received on a restricted basis (authority certificate issued by web service upon obtained user credentials, see claim 1); and receiving the certificates from the second cloud service (downloading user certificate for the user with an accompanying authority certificate issued by said web service and storing certificates, see claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Lingamallu’s certificate download for service with Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury’s cloud service setups and remote input because it would have allowed for a more efficient secure session setup (Lingamallu, para. [0001]).
As per claim 14, claim 13 is incorporated and Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury do not specifically disclose, but Lingamallu teaches, receiving from the second cloud service an address generated for the provision of the certificates for the device and transmitting said address to the device (URL challenges for receiving user certificate, para. [0030]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Lingamallu’s certificate download for service with Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury’s cloud service setups and remote input because it would have allowed for a more efficient secure session setup (Lingamallu, para. [0001]).
As per claim 15, claim 13 is incorporated and Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury do not specifically disclose, but Lingamallu teaches, transmitting identification information for the device to the second cloud service, the device transmits the identification information to the second cloud service, and on receipt of the identification information the second cloud service transmits or provides the certificates to the device (device sending user credentials for receiving certificates, see claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Lingamallu’s certificate download for service with Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury’s cloud service setups and remote input setups because it would have allowed for a more efficient secure session setup (Lingamallu, para. [0001]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury as applied above, and further in view of Chen, et al ("A Data Sharing Method And Desktop Cloud Service", Jan. 12 2018, CN 107580011 A (English Translation), hereinafter referred to as Chen).
As per claim 11, claim 1 is incorporated and Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury do not specifically disclose, but Chen teaches, wherein the microcontroller is further programmed, on receipt of the control command, to select the second cloud service from higher-level structures stored in the configuration memory (according to connection request identification information, lookup identification of a second desktop cloud service in mapping table stored in memory, page 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Chen’s memory lookup for cloud service connections with Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury’s cloud service connections and remote input because it would have allowed for local access of cloud information, increasing the efficiency of the overall system without requiring extra communications for the cloud information.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury as applied above, and further in view of Qi, et al (NPL "A Service Dispatching Method and Device", 09/19/2007, CN 101039468 A (English Translation), pages 1-23, hereinafter referred to as Qi).
As per claim 12, claim 1 is incorporated and Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury do not specifically disclose, but Qi teaches, wherein the microcontroller is further programmed to terminate the connection to the first cloud service when the connection to the second cloud service is set up (stop current service and establish new service, see page 1, abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to incorporate Qi’s service management with Gnessin, Kossey and Azagury’s service provisioning and remote inputs because it would have allowed for a more efficient overall usage of resources.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN A BUI whose telephone number is (571)270-7168. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9AM - 530PM.
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 R Taylor can be reached at (571) 272-3889. 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.
/JONATHAN A BUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights