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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/05/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed, 02/05/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant's argument of “as agreement was reached during the interview that the proposed claim amendments would overcome the applied references” fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
Applicant should submit an argument under the heading “Remarks” pointing out disagreements with the examiner’s contentions. Applicant must also discuss the references applied against the claims, explaining how the claims avoid the references or distinguish from them.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Dependent claim 21, dependent upon claim 1, recites the limitation "the bus self-discovery ends”. Independent claim 1 does not cite a “bus self-discovery”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osterberg et al. (“Osterberg”) [PGPUB 2016/0105320] in view of Li et al. (“Li”) [PGPUB 2022/0335002].
Regarding claim 1, the Osterberg reference discloses a method for node discovery and configuration including a plurality of nodes, comprising: determining, by a host that is distinct from the plurality of nodes, at least one new sub-node has been added to the plurality of nodes, wherein the determining comprises discovering, by the host, the at least one new sub-node [ie. master device (“host”); Osterberg; figures 1C and 14; paragraphs 0024, 0102, and 0108];
reading module information for the at least one new sub-node [Osterberg; figure 14; para 0102 and 0108];
configuring the at least one new sub-node [Osterberg; figure 14; para 0102 and 0108];
configuring a system, based on information from each of the plurality of nodes [Osterberg; figure 14; para 0108]; and
periodically triggering a discovery attempt, wherein the discovery attempt including determining whether at least one newer sub-node has been added to the chained network [ie. re-discovery; Osterberg; figure 14; para 0108].
The Osterberg reference discloses a chain but does not specifically disclose in a daisy-chained network, configuring a system including the daisy-chained network, and the daisy-chained network.
However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses a daisy-chained network, configuring a system including the daisy-chained network, and the daisy-chained network [Li; fig 3-5; paragraph 0004, 0036, 0061 and 0066]. The Osterberg and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage communication in a master/slave system. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of daisy-chained network, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Osterberg. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve reliability of the chained network.
Regarding claim 9, the Osterberg reference discloses a system for node discovery and configuration, comprising: a plurality of nodes; and a host that is distinct from the plurality of nodes, the host configured to: discover at least one new sub-node added to the plurality of nodes [ie. master device (“host”); Osterberg; figures 1C and 14; paragraphs 0024, 0102, and 0108];
read module information for the at least one new sub-node [Osterberg; figure 14; para 0102 and 0108];
configure the at least one new sub-node [Osterberg; figure 14; para 0102 and 0108];
configure the system based on information from each of the plurality of nodes [Osterberg; figure 14; para 0102 and 0108]; and
periodically trigger a discovery attempt, wherein the discovery attempt includes determining whether at least one newer sub-node has been added to the chained network [ie. re-discovery; Osterberg; figure 14; para 0108].
The Osterberg reference discloses a chain but does not specifically disclose in a daisy-chained network, configuring a system including the daisy-chained network, and the daisy-chained network.
However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses a daisy-chained network, configuring a system including the daisy-chained network, and the daisy-chained network [Li; fig 3-5; paragraph 0004, 0036, 0061 and 0066]. The Osterberg and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage communication in a master/slave system. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of daisy-chained network, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Osterberg. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve reliability of the chained network.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9-14, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dibirdi et al. ("Dibirdi") [PGPUB 2015/0319043] in view of Li et al. ("Li") [PGPUB 20220335002].
Regarding claim 1, the Dibirdi reference discloses a method for node discovery and configuration in a daisy-chained network including a plurality of nodes, comprising: determining at least one new subnode has been added to the plurality of nodes [Dibirdi; figure 2; paragraph 0019 and 0025];
wherein the determining comprises discovering the at least one new sub-node [ie. discovering by the SBN server; Dibirdi; fig 2; para 0025, 0029, 0031, 0037, and 0039];
reading module information for the at least one new sub-node [ie. service capabilities; Dibirdi; para 0025 and 0028];
configuring the at least one new sub-node [Dibirdi; para 0025 and 0028];
configuring a system including the daisy-chained network, based on information from each of the plurality of nodes [ie. IP addresses or capabilities; Dibirdi; para 0020, 0025, and 0028-0029]; and
periodically triggering a discovery attempt, wherein the discovery attempt including determining whether at least one newer sub-node has been added to the daisy-chained network [ie. constantly updating every time there is a change in topology; Dibirdi; para 0005, 0025, 0029, and 0048].
The Dibirdi reference discloses SBN Server, which is different than the SBN Clients [Dibirdi; figure 2; para 0023-0025]. The Dibirdi reference does not specifically disclose a host that is distinct from the plurality of nodes.
However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses a host that is distinct from the plurality of nodes and discovering by the host [ie. “the host obtains mapping relationship information”; Li; fig 1, 2A, and 5; para 0004, 0012, and 0059-0062]. The Dibirdi and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage a network. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of a host, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Dibirdi. The motivation for doing so would have been to connect the nodes to one specific host.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses determining at least one new sub-node has been added to the plurality of nodes further comprises bus self-discovery, and wherein a controller of the host queries the plurality of nodes present in the daisy-chained network [Dibirdi; para 0028-0029] [ie. controller of host sends read command (“query”); Li; fig 5; para 0003-0004 and 0143-0145].
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses bus self-discovery occurs at system start up [Dibirdi; para 0028 and 0038] [li; para 0078].
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses bus-self-discovery includes determining a number of nodes in the plurality of nodes [Dibirdi; para 0020, 0028, and 0038] [Li; para 0069 and 0077].
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses detecting a reconfiguration of a first sub-node from the plurality of nodes [Dibirdi; para 0029 and 0034].
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses reading module information for the first sub-node; configuring the first sub-node; and reconfiguring the system based on information from the first sub-node and each remaining node of the plurality of nodes [Dibirdi; para 0028-0029 and 0033-0034].
Regarding claim 9, Dibirdi discloses system for node discovery and configuration, comprising: a daisy-chained network of nodes including a plurality of nodes; a host configured to: discover at least one new sub-node added to the plurality of nodes [Dibirdi; para 0019 and 0025];
read module information for the at least one new sub-node; configure the at least one new sub-node [Dibirdi; para 0025 and 0028-0029];
configure the system including the daisy-chained network based on information from each of the plurality of nodes [Dibirdi; para 0020, 0025, and 0028-0029]; and
periodically trigger a discovery attempt, wherein the discovery attempt includes determining whether at least one newer sub-node has been added to the daisy-chained network [Dibirdi; para 0005, 0025, 0029, and 0048].
The Dibirdi reference discloses SBN Server, which is different than the SBN Clients [Dibirdi; figure 2; para 0023-0025]. The Dibirdi reference does not specifically disclose a host that is distinct from the plurality of nodes.
However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses a host that is distinct from the plurality of nodes [Li; fig 1, 2A, and 5; para 0004 and 0059-0062]. The Dibirdi and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage a network. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of a host, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Dibirdi. The motivation for doing so would have been to connect the nodes to one specific host.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses at least one new sub-node includes a memory, and the memory includes the module information [Dibirdi; para 0057].
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses the host is configured to use the module information to find stored code for configuring the at least one new sub-node [Dibirdi; para 0025 and 0028-0029].
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses the module information includes at least one of vendor information, product information, version information, model information, capability information, serial number, make information, configuration information, routing information, authentication information, and calibration coefficients [Dibirdi; para 0025, 0028-0029, and 0038].
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses the host is further configured to determine an access method for reading the module information [Dibirdi; para 0020, 0025, and 0035].
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses a plurality of slots, and wherein the host is further configured to assign at least one of the plurality of slots to each of the plurality of nodes [Dibirdi; para 0025 and 0053] [Li; para 0069-0071].
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses the bus self-discovery ends when at least one of the following occurs: no new node for the host to discover, a time-out, or a short of cables [ie. after self-discovery; Dibirdi; para 0027-0029 and 0039] [ie. self-discover ends after slave device 1 sends first data to control device and then to host (“no new node for the host to discover”); Li; fig 5; para 0003-0004, 0143-0145, and 0156-0159].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dibirdi-Li as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Owen et al. ("Owen") [PGPUB 2002/0103945].
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses the plurality of nodes is a first plurality of nodes and further comprising: reconfiguring the system based on information from each of a second plurality of nodes, wherein the second plurality of nodes includes connected nodes from the first plurality of nodes [Dibirdi; para 0029 and 0034] but does not specifically disclose detecting a disconnection of a current node from the first plurality of nodes.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Owen discloses detecting a disconnection of a current node from the first plurality of nodes [Owen; para 0080 and 0104]. The Dibirdi-Li and Owen references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to add new nodes. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of detecting a disconnection of a node, taught by Owen, into the system, taught by Dibirdi-Li. The motivation for doing so would have been to keep track of all connections (and disconnections) between devices [Owen; para 0104].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dibirdi-Li as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Thomasson et al. ("Thomasson") [PGPUB 2020/0044940].
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Dibirdi-Li further discloses the plurality of nodes is a first plurality of nodes, wherein the first plurality of nodes plus the at least one newer sub-node [ie. adding a node to plurality of nodes; Dibirdi; para 0019 and 0025] and discloses configuring a node and reconfiguring a system [Dibirdi; para 0034]. Dibirdi does not specifically adding a new sub-node would relabel the first plurality of nodes into a second plurality of nodes.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Thomasson discloses a first plurality of nodes plus the at least one newer sub-node is a second plurality of nodes [Thomasson; para 0024 and 0088], and further comprising, when the at least one newer sub-node has been added: reading module information for the at least one newer sub-node; configuring the at least one newer sub-node; and reconfiguring the system based on information from each of the second plurality of nodes [Thomasson; para0088]. The Dibirdi-Li and Thomasson references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to add new nodes into a network. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of updating a network when a node is added, taught by Thomasson, into the system, taught by Dibirdi-Li. The motivation for doing so would have been to rename the new network with the new node.
Claims 15-17 and 22 are rejected under35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owen et al. ("Owen") [PGPUB 2002/0103945] in view of Leyrer et al. ("Leyrer") [PG PUB 2018/0091245].
Regarding claim 15, Owen discloses a method for finding configuration information for a sub-node in a daisy-chained network [Owen; para 0036 and 0189-0190], comprising: discovering, by a host distinct from one or more nodes in the daisy-chained network, the sub-node [Owen; para 0008, 0012, 0102, and 0104-0105];
determining a module information access method for reading module information for the sub-node [Owen; para 0052-0054];
reading a module identifier [ie. unit ID; Owen; para 0052-0053];
determining whether the module identifier matches with an expected value [Owen; para 0055 and 0057];
reading the module information via the module information access method [Owen; para 0058];
determining register settings for the sub-node based on the module information [Owen; para 0132-0134];
applying the register settings to the sub-node [Owen; para 0015, 0102, 0107, and 0134];
Owen discloses location of a chain and nodes [Owen; para 0134] but does not specifically disclose assigning at least one slot to the sub-node.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Leyrer discloses assigning at least one slot to the sub-node [ie. master device assigns time slots to slave devices; Leyrer; para 0030, 0071, and 0081 ]. The Owen and Leyrer references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to add new nodes into a network. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of assigning slots, taught by Leyrer, into the system, taught by Owen. The motivation for doing so would have been to avoid collision of packets from another slave (sub-node) device.
Regarding claim 16, Owen-Leyrer further discloses writing sub-node information to a main node in the daisy-chained network [Owen; para 0048 and 0112] [Leyrer; para 0046 and 0071].
Regarding claim 17, Owen-Leyrer further discloses reading module information comprises reading at least one of version information, vendor information, product information, capability information, serial number, make information, model information, configuration information, routing information, authentication information, and calibration coefficients [Owen; para 0024 and 0058] [Leyrer; para 0069 and 0081 ].
Regarding claim 22, Owen-Leyrer further discloses the module information is read from one of an Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memory (EPROM) in the sub-node or a microcontroller of the sub-node [ie. microcontroller in each device; Owen; para 0035 and 0058].
Claims 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S. C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owen-Leyrer as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Arknaes-Pedersen ("Arknaes") [PGPUB 2017/0070195].
Regarding claim 18, Owen-Leyrer further discloses register settings [Owen; para 0015, 0102, 0107, and 0134] and peripherals [Owen; para 0005] but does not specifically disclose applying sub-node peripheral register settings to at least one sub-node peripheral device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Arknaes discloses applying sub-node peripheral register settings to at least one sub-node peripheral device [Arknaes; para 0023, 0107, and 0196-0198]. The Owen-Leyrer and Arknaes references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to add new nodes into a network. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of registering peripheral devices, taught by Arknaes, into the system, taught by Owen-Leyrer. The motivation for doing so would have been to add specific peripheral devices to the network.
Regarding claim 20, Owen-Leyrer do not specifically disclose assigning an audio channel to the sub-node and communicating the audio channel assignment to a main node in the daisy-chained network.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Arknaes discloses assigning an audio channel to the sub-node and communicating the audio channel assignment to a main node in the daisy-chained network [Arknaes; para0121-0123, 0215 and 0265]. The Owen-Leyrer and Arknaes references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to add new nodes into a network. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of registering peripheral devices, taught by Arknaes, into the system, taught by Owen-Leyrer. The motivation for doing so would have been to add specific peripheral devices to audio channels.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owen-Leyrer as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Dibirdi et al. ("Dibirdi") [PGPUB 2015/0319043].
Regarding claim 19, Owen-Leyrer further discloses determining whether there is an additional sub-node [Leyrer; para 0045] and a daisy-chained network [Owen; para 0036 and 0189-0190] but does not specifically disclose configuring the additional sub-node.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Dibirdi discloses configuring the additional sub-node [Dibirdi; para 0020 and 0025]. The Owen-Leyrer and Dibirdi references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to add new nodes into a network. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, bet ore the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of configuring a new device, taught by Dibirdi, into the system, taught by Owen-Leyrer. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase the size of the network [Dibirdi; para 0002].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON D CARDONE whose telephone number is (571)272-3933. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8am-4pmEST.
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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 571-270-3037. 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.
/JASON D CARDONE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458