DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/26/2025 has been entered
Claims 1 – 5, 7, 8, and 10 – 22 are pending. Claims 6 and 9 are canceled. Claim 22 is newly added. Claims 1, 5, 8, 10 – 13, 15, 16, and 19 are amended. Claim 1, 16, and 19 are in independent form.
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 Amendment
This Office Action is in response to the applicant’s remarks and arguments filed on 11/18/2025.
Claims 1, 5, 8, 10 – 13, 15, 16, and 19 were amended. Claim 22 was newly added. Claims 6 and 9 were canceled. Claims 1 – 5, 7, 8, and 10 – 22 remained pending in the application. Claims 1 – 5, 7, 8, and 10 – 22 are being considered on the merits.
The objections of claims 7, 8, 13, and 15 has been withdrawn due to the amendment to the claim filed on 12/26/2025.
The rejection of claims 1 – 5, 7, 8, and 10 – 22 under 35 U.S.C. §112(a) has been withdrawn due to the amendment to the claim filed on 12/26/2025.
The previous rejection of claims 1 – 5, 7, 8, and 10 – 21 under 35 U.S.C. §103 has been withdrawn due to the amendment to the claim filed on 12/26/2025. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of a newly found prior art (Guo et al. US Pub. No. US 20230333801 A1), and in view of the previously cited prior art(s). Reference Guo, in combination with previously cited prior art(s), discloses each element of the claim highlighted by the applicant.
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s remarks and/or arguments, filed on 12/26/2025 have been fully considered with the following result(s).
The examiner is entitled to give claim limitations their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. See MPEP 2111 [R-1] Interpretation of Claims-Broadest Reasonable Interpretation. The applicant always has the opportunity to amend the claims during prosecution, and broad interpretation by the examiner reduces the possibility that the claim, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified. In re Prater, 162 USPQ 541,550-51 (CCPA 1969).
Response to Claim Objections Remarks
Applicant’s argument filed on 12/26/2025 regarding Claim Objections have been fully considered and they are persuasive. The examiner agreed with all of the amends made to the updated of the claims 7, 8, 13, and 15. The Claim Objections has been withdrawn
Response to 35 U.S.C. §112 Rejections Remarks
Applicant’s argument filed on 12/26/2025 regarding 35 U.S.C. §112(a) Rejections have been fully considered and they are persuasive. The examiner agreed with all of the amends made to the updated of the claims 1 – 5, 7, 8, and 10 – 22. The 35 U.S.C. §112 Rejections has been withdrawn.
Response to 35 U.S.C. §103 Remarks
Applicant's arguments in the applicant’s remarks and amendments of claims 1 – 5, 7, 8, and 10 – 21, found on pages 8 – 10 and filed on 12/26/2025, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the previous claim(s) rejection under 35 U.S.C § 103 has been withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of a newly found prior art (Guo et al. US Pub. No. US 20230333801 A1), and in view of the previously cited prior art(s). Reference Guo, in combination with previously cited prior art(s), discloses each element of the claim highlighted by applicant.
For further details, please see below claims rejections under 35 U.S.C § 103.
Claim Objections
Claim 22 is objected to because of the following informalities: “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 1”. It should be “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 19”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 – 4, 13, 14, and 16 – 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AHN et al. US Pub. No. US 20220036882 A1 (hereafter AHN), in further view of Deza et al. US Pub. No. US 20220365867 A1 (hereafter Deza), Tian US Pub. No. US 20080313649 A1, and Guo et al. US Pub. No. US 20230333801 A1 (hereafter Guo)
Regarding claim 1, AHN teaches the invention substantially as claimed: A method performed on a first processor of a device, the method comprising: receiving, over an electronic interface, from a second processor of the wearable device, a command; (e.g. FIG. 1 – 3, and [0078]: “In order for the electronic apparatus 100 to use a speech recognition service, an application may be installed to perform various processes required to provide the speech recognition service.” and e.g. [0073]: The service controller 120 may be implemented with at least one memory for storing a program for carrying out the aforementioned and following operations and associated data, and at least one processor for executing the program.” and e.g. [0083]: “The service engine module 130 may be implemented with at least one memory for storing a program to perform an operation of each service engine and associated data, and at least one processor for executing the program.”) The citation discloses at FIG. 2 the electronic apparatus 100 has the service controller 120, which is implemented with one processor/second processor ([0073]), that responsible for receiving and analyzing the voice control from the user. The electronic apparatus 100 has another component service engine module 130, which is implemented with one processor/first processor ([0083]), for calling a service to handle the voice command from the user. Since the service controller 120 and the service engine module 130 exchange information, it implies that there is an interface/electronic interface, between the two components, as the “interface”, under BRI, can be interpreted as “shared boundary across which two or more separate components of a computer system exchange information. The exchange can be between software, computer hardware, peripheral devices, humans, and combinations of these.” AHN does not indicate that the electronic apparatus 100(a device) is a wearable device and the voice command from the user is a Remote Procedure Call. The missing limitation is covered by a second ref and will be discussed below.
determining a first service to call for the command; (e.g. [0103]: “The service manager 122 searches the stored wakeup word table for a type of the speech recognition service corresponding to the wakeup word A, and determines the first service as a service corresponding to the wakeup word A.”) The citation discloses the service manager checks for the service/first service, corresponding to wakeup word A.
causing the first service to be run on the first processor; (e.g. FIG. 3 and [0102] – [0104]) The citation discloses the process of receiving the wakeup word, determining the corresponding services (first service) to the wakeup word, and running the first service engine that corresponding to the wakeup word A.
calling, on the first processor, the first service to handle the command; (e.g. FIG. 3 and [0083]: “The service engine module 130 may be implemented with at least one memory for storing a program to perform an operation of each service engine and associated data, and at least one processor for executing the program.” and [0106]: “The service manager 122 may send the user command to the first service engine 131”) the citation discloses the service engine module is implemented with one processor/first processor. At [0106], the service manager, based on the user wakeup word, send the user command to the first service engine for processing the user request.
and receiving a result from the first service; (e.g. FIG. 4 and [0106]: “the first service engine 131 may transmit the user command to the first service server 10 through the communication module 140.” and [0112]: “Alternatively, when it is possible that the request of the user is performed in the electronic apparatus 100, the first service server 10 may also send a result of speech recognition and NLU to the electronic apparatus 10 as a service response.”) the citation disclose the first service engine, after receive the service request, send the request to the first service server for processing, and at [0112] discloses the first service server send the result back after processing the requested service.
Sending, to the second processor, over the electronic interface, a response to the command comprising the result.; ([0113]: “When the communication module 140 of the electronic apparatus 100 receives the service response from the first service server 10, the first service engine 131 may send the received service response to the main controller 150.”)
AHN fail to teach a command is a remote procedure call (RPC); a device is a wearable device; ........ in response to a first status of the service indicating the service is not running, .........; .......... running a second service, wherein a current operation comprises the second service and not the first service; and in response to an indication that an operating system of the wearable device requests that memory usage be trimmed, stopping the first service based on the current operation comprising the second service.
However, Deza teaches a remote procedure call (RPC) ([0024]: “The device under test is booted to start receiving remote procedure call commands at least one wireless circuit of the device under test.”) The citation discloses the communication methods between devices is a remote procedure call
a wearable device (FIG 1 - 2) FIG 1 – 2 disclose the eyewear device/wearable device.
By combining the device as a wearable device from the teaching of Sridharan with electronic apparatus 100 in the teaching of Deza, and the communication method as the RPC, one with the ordinary skill in the art would be able to come up with the claim invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the remote procedure call (RPC); a wearable device, as taught in Deza’s invention into AHN’s invention because it provides a structure and efficient way to manage services on a wearable device. By integrating a wearable device and remote procedure call (RPC) as the communication method, with the method only launching a service when a remote procedure call request is received, the wearable device can avoid running unnecessary background processes, which helps to save power and improve performance, especially important for wearable devices with limited resources and battery power.
However, Tian teaches in response to a first status of the service indicating the service is not running ([0052] In block 224, the web services application (now in "sleep mode") determines whether the web services application has received a "wake-up" signal. Such a "wake-up" signal may be received, for example, when the web services application receives a request from client 102 or from some other entity. If the web services application has received a "wake-up" signal, then control passes to block 226. Otherwise, control passes back to block 224, and the web services application continues to sleep.”) The citation discloses a web application is in “sleep mode”/not running, and would wake-up and process to the next step when receives a wake-up signal.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the in response to a status of the service indicating the service is not running, as taught in Tian’s invention into AHN’s invention because by keeping the plurality of services in sleep mode and only wake them up when needed, the wearable device can reduce the power consumption, optimizes resource allocation, improves responsiveness, prolong the usability, and supports real time interactions for wearable applications.
However, Guo teaches running a second service, wherein a current operation comprises the second service and not the first service; (e.g. [0100]: “The activity1 is in an active state (active/running) in which the activity1 is visible and can interact with a user. When the electronic device wo receives a user operation, and a new application interface needs to be displayed, a new activity (activity2) is displayed at the top of the task stack. If the activity2 shows an application interface that is not displayed in full screen or is a transparent application interface, that is, the activity2 does not cover the activity1 or does not completely cover the activity1, the activity1 is in a paused (Paused) state, and the activity1 still keeps connected to the window manager, remains all data remains, is visible on the display 194, but is no longer able to interact with the user....... If the activity2 completely covers the activity1, the activity1 is in a stopped state (Stopped), and the activity1 remains all data, but is invisible on the display 194.”) The citation discloses when the system receives the user operating that runs the activity 2/second service, the activity 1/first service, will be placed in a paused state or stopped state, and the activity 1 no longer able to interact with the user, so it implies that the current operation only comprises the activity 2, not the activity 1.
in response to an indication that an operating system of the wearable device requests that memory usage be trimmed, stopping the first service based on the current operation comprising the second service. (e.g. [0100]: “When the system memory of the electronic device wo is insufficient, the activity1 is forcibly killed (killed). If the activity2 completely covers the activity1, the activity1 is in a stopped state (Stopped), and the activity1 remains all data, but is invisible on the display 194. When the system memory of the electronic device wo is insufficient, an activity in a stopped state is killed prior to an activity in a paused state. It should be noted that when an application is closed, all activities in a task stack of the application are also killed.”) the citation discloses when the memory of the device is insufficient/memory usage be trimmed, the activity 1, which is in the paused state or stopped state, is killed, and only the activity 2 is running.
And in response to an indication that a user interface of the second service is not visible on a display of the wearable device, stopping the second service. (e.g. [0100]: “The activity1 is in an active state (active/running) in which the activity1 is visible and can interact with a user. When the electronic device wo receives a user operation, and a new application interface needs to be displayed, a new activity (activity2) is displayed at the top of the task stack....... If the activity2 completely covers the activity1, the activity1 is in a stopped state (Stopped), and the activity1 remains all data, but is invisible on the display 194. When the system memory of the electronic device wo is insufficient, an activity in a stopped state is killed prior to an activity in a paused state.”) The citation discloses the concept when an interface of an activity is invisible/not visible, the activity is in a stopped state.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the running a second service, wherein a current operation comprises the second service and not the first service; in response to an indication that an operating system of the wearable device requests that memory usage be trimmed, stopping the first service based on the current operation comprising the second service; and in response to an indication that a user interface of the second service is not visible on a display of the wearable device, stopping the second service, as taught in Guo’s invention into AHN’s invention because the addition method helps to enhances the efficiency of the wearable device and overall system stability by optimizing resource management in low memory constrained environment and reducing unnecessary memory consumption. This also improves responsiveness by ensuring that the critical service can continue running smoothly without being disrupted by memory constraints, and enhancing the efficiency and processing power of the wearable device for critical tasks.
Regarding claim 2, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, and Deza further teaches: and wherein the method further comprises: receiving, from a backend device via a wireless communication protocol, a notification to run a second service; (Deza – e.g. [0104]: “As illustrated in FIG. 10, the test execution flow 1000 starts by downloading to test server 500 an operating system master for the mobile device 390 and a version of an operating system running a communication application on the device under test 100 at 1010. At 1020, the device under test 100 is booted to start receiving remote procedure call commands at least one wireless circuit of the device under test 100...... As noted above, a user interface of the test server 500 may be adapted to execute the commands for emulating a button press command using a client program (e.g., C++ client 930, FIG. 9A) loaded into the device under test 100.”) The citation discloses device 100 receiving RPC call from the server/backend devices performing the button testing/second service.
causing the second service to run on the first processor. (Deza – e.g. [0104]: “At 1030, remote procedure call commands are executed to generate a test between the mobile device 390 and the device under test 100.”)
Tian further teaches and in response to a second status of the second service indicating the second service is not running, (Tian – e.g. [0052] In block 224, the web services application (now in "sleep mode") determines whether the web services application has received a "wake-up" signal. Such a "wake-up" signal may be received, for example, when the web services application receives a request from client 102 or from some other entity. If the web services application has received a "wake-up" signal, then control passes to block 226. Otherwise, control passes back to block 224, and the web services application continues to sleep.”) The citation discloses a web service application is in “sleep mode”/not running, and would wake-up and process to the next step when receives a wake-up signal. Since there are many web services application, the second service is within the many services in the sleep mode.
Regarding claim 3, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, and AHN further teaches and wherein the method further comprises: receiving, from the first processor, an indication of a request for a second service; (e.g. FIG. 5 and [0117]: “as shown in FIG. 5, the service controller 120 may send wakeup word B uttered by the user to all of the first service engine 131, the second service engine 132, and the third service engine 133.” and [0121] The service manager 122 may determine a speech recognition service corresponding to a wakeup word uttered by the user to be the second service based on the stored wakeup word table”) The citation discloses the wakeup word B is received at the service controller 120/first processor. The wakeup word B is corresponding to the second service according to the wakeup word table
causing the second service to run on the first processor; ([0121]: “The service manager 122 may determine a speech recognition service corresponding to a wakeup word uttered by the user to be the second service based on the stored wakeup word table, and transmit a command uttered after the wakeup word to the second service server 20 through the second service engine 132 and the communication module 140.”) The citation discloses the second service engine receive the command and processes the command, using the second service server 20, through the communication module 140.
and calling, on the first processor, the second service to handle the request (FIG. 5 and [0119] and [0121]) The citation discloses the service engine 132 that corresponding to the wakeup word B is running base on the user command, and process the corresponding service base on the wakeup word B.
And Tian further teaches in response to a second status of the second service indicating the second service is not running, (Tian – e.g. [0052] In block 224, the web services application (now in "sleep mode") determines whether the web services application has received a "wake-up" signal. Such a "wake-up" signal may be received, for example, when the web services application receives a request from client 102 or from some other entity. If the web services application has received a "wake-up" signal, then control passes to block 226. Otherwise, control passes back to block 224, and the web services application continues to sleep.”) The citation discloses a web service application is in “sleep mode”/not running, and would wake-up and process to the next step when receives a wake-up signal. Since there are many webs services application, the second service is within the many services in the sleep mode.
Regarding claim 4, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, and Deza further teaches receiving, by the second processor, the RPC from a user device via a wireless communication protocol. (Deza – e.g. FIG. 3 and [0104]: “At 1020, the device under test 100 is booted to start receiving remote procedure call commands at least one wireless circuit of the device under test 100. At 1030, remote procedure call commands are executed to generate a test between the mobile device 390 and the device under test 100.”) The citation discloses the device 100 receive RPC via wireless communication with the mobile device 390
Regarding claim 13, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, and AHN further teaches and wherein the method further comprises: receiving, from the first processor, an indication of an event; (AHN – e.g. [0100]: “when the user utters B, the service manager 122 determines a speech recognition service desired by the user to be the second service”) user utters B is an event from the user.
determining a second service to call for the event; (AHN - [0121]: “The service manager 122 may determine a speech recognition service corresponding to a wakeup word uttered by the user to be the second service based on the stored wakeup word table”)
causing the second service to be run on the first processor; (AHN - [0079]: “Execution of the application may be performed by a service engine module 130. In the embodiment, the service engine module 130 may include a first service engine 131 for performing a process to provide the first service, a second service engine 132 for performing a process to provide the second service” and [0083] The service engine module 130 may be implemented with at least one memory for storing a program to perform an operation of each service engine and associated data, and at least one processor for executing the program.) The citation discloses the service engine module is implemented with one processor/first processor, and there is a second service engine 131 to provide the second service
and calling, on the first processor, the second service to handle the event. (AHN - [0119]: “the second service engine 132 that provides the speech recognition service corresponding to the wakeup word B uttered by the user may recognize the wakeup word B and send the result to the service controller 120.”) The citation discloses the second service engine 132 is used from handling the wakeup word B event from the user.
And Tian further teaches in response to a second status of the second service indicating the second service is not running, (Tian – e.g. [0052] In block 224, the web services application (now in "sleep mode") determines whether the web services application has received a "wake-up" signal. Such a "wake-up" signal may be received, for example, when the web services application receives a request from client 102 or from some other entity. If the web services application has received a "wake-up" signal, then control passes to block 226. Otherwise, control passes back to block 224, and the web services application continues to sleep.”) The citation discloses a web service application is in “sleep mode”/not running, and would wake-up and process to the next step when receives a wake-up signal. Since there are many web service applications, the second service is within the many services in the sleep mode.
Regarding claim 14, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 13, and AHN further teaches wherein the event is a change in a state of the wearable device or input from a user (AHN - [0064]: “Referring to FIG. 1, an electronic apparatus 100 according to an embodiment includes a mike 110 for receiving speech uttered by the user” and [0065] The mike 110 may include a microphone that receives and converts a sound to an electric signal.) the citation discloses the electronic apparatus 100 comprises a mike (microphone) for receiving speech/input event from the user. AHN does not disclose the apparatus 100 is a wearable device.
Guo further teach wherein the wearable device is an augmented reality (AR) wearable device. (e.g. [0060]: “The electronic device 100 and the electronic device 200 in the embodiments of this application may be a mobile phone, a tablet computer, a desktop computer, a laptop computer, a handheld computer, a notebook computer, an ultra-mobile personal computer (ultra-mobile personal computer, UMPC), a netbook, and an electronic device having a touchscreen (or a display), such as a cellular phone, a personal digital assistant (personal digital assistant, PDA), an augmented reality (Augmented reality, AR)/virtual reality (virtual reality, VR) device.”)
Regarding claim 16, the claim is a wearable device claim that having similar limitations cited in claim 1. Thus, claim 16 is also rejected under the same rational as cited in the rejection of rejected claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is a wearable device claim that having similar limitations cited in claim 2. Thus, claim 17 is also rejected under the same rational as cited in the rejection of rejected claim 2.
Regarding claim 18, the claim is a wearable device claim that having similar limitations cited in claim 3. Thus, claim 18 is also rejected under the same rational as cited in the rejection of rejected claim 3.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is a non-transitory computer readable storage medium claim that having similar limitations cited in claim 1. Thus, claim 19 is also rejected under the same rational as cited in the rejection of rejected claim 1.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is a non-transitory computer readable storage medium claim that having similar limitations cited in claim 2. Thus, claim 20 is also rejected under the same rational as cited in the rejection of rejected claim 2.
Regarding claim 21, the claim is a non-transitory computer readable storage medium claim that having similar limitations cited in claim 3. Thus, claim 21 is also rejected under the same rational as cited in the rejection of rejected claim 3.
Regarding claim 23, the claim is a non-transitory computer readable storage medium claim that having similar limitations cited in claim 4. Thus, claim 22 is also rejected under the same rational as cited in the rejection of rejected claim 4.
Claims 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AHN, Tian, Guo, and Deza, in further view of YANAGIHARA et al. US Pub. No. US 20190339885 A1 (hereafter YANAGIHARA)
Regarding claim 5, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to teaches receiving from an operating system of the wearable device a signal to trim memory for the first service; and passing, to the service, the signal to trim memory.
However, YANAGIHARA teaches receiving from an operating system of the wearable device a signal to trim memory for the first service; ([0039]: “The OS 108 can grant the request and provide the cache engine 112 with a response that identifies a new allocation of memory storage space within the storage device.”) The citation disclose the OS 108 grant the request with response that a new allocation of memory storage is needed.
and passing, to the first service, the signal to trim memory. ([0007]: “When the amount of available memory storage space is less than the threshold value, a request can be transmitted to a background service to attempt to pro-actively free additional memory storage space by purging data from within a temporary data store associated with one or more applications installed on the computing device.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the receiving from an operating system of the wearable device a signal to trim memory for the service; and passing, to the first service, the signal to trim memory, as taught in YANAGIHARA’s invention into AHN, Tian, Guo, and Deza’s invention because by allowing the operating system to signal memory trimming and passing this signal to the relevant service, the wearable device can ensures optimized memory usage, prevents performance degradation, and prolongs battery life.
Regarding claim 10, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to teaches further comprising: in response to receiving a first trim memory request from an operating system of the wearable device or determining to trim memory, sending a second trim memory request to the service.
However, YANAGIHARA teaches further comprising: in response to receiving a first trim memory request from an operating system of the wearable device or determining to trim memory, sending a second trim memory request to the service. ([0065]: “In order to avoid reaching a point where the total amount of available memory storage space 306 is below the first threshold value 310, the storage controller 214 is configured to attempt to free additional memory storage space allocated to one or more applications within the temporary data store 304 to increase the total amount of available memory storage space 306 when the total amount of available memory storage space 306 is less than a second threshold value 320 but greater than the first threshold value 310.” and [0066]: “In some embodiments, when the storage controller 214 determines that the amount of available memory storage space 306 in the non-volatile memory 120 is below the second threshold value 320, the storage controller 214 transmits a request to a background service to request the release of memory storage space allocated to the temporary data store 304”) The citation disclose that the additional free up memory storage is needed as, the current available memory is still below a threshold.
Claims 7, 8, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AHN, Tian, Guo, and Deza, in further view of Alambritis et al. US Pub. No. US 20100205410 A1.
Regarding claim 7, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to teach running one or more non-critical services; and in response to an indication that an operating system of the wearable device requests that memory usage be trimmed, stopping one or more of the one or more non-critical services.
However, Alambritis teaches running one or more non-critical services; (e.g. [0096]: “Thus at the end of this step, computer 103 holds an up-to-date list of all running programs, with each marked either as boostable (non-essential) or non-boostable (essential). In alternative embodiments, the boost table may comprise for example only non-essential programs, rather than both essential and non-essential programs.”) The citation discloses the running programs are marked as boostable/non-essential/non-critical.
and in response to an indication that an operating system of the wearable device requests that memory usage be trimmed, stopping one or more of the one or more non-critical services. (e.g. [0057]: “If the amount of memory needed by the processes and services running on the processing system approaches the total available memory then the computer will run noticeably slower, possibly seizing up altogether.” and [0060]: “Efficiency application 505 addresses these issues. When the user of computer 103 wishes to boost the efficiency of the computer by removing non-essential programs from memory, he can request efficiency application 505 to perform an efficiency boost.”) The citation discloses the removing of non-essential programs when the total amount of memory approaching the limit.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the running one or more non-critical services; and in response to an indication that an operating system of the wearable device requests that memory usage be trimmed, stopping one or more of the one or more non-critical services, as taught in Alambritis’s invention into AHN, Tian, Guo, and Deza’s invention because by integrating the stopping of non-critical services in response to a memory trim requests, the wearable device can enhance resource efficiency and responsiveness, smoother performance, and reduce the risks of service failures due to limited amount of memory, and extend the battery life.
Regarding claim 8, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, and Alambritis further teaches wherein the method further comprises: running a second service, wherein the first service comprises a first priority, the second service comprises a second priority, and the first priority is greater than the second priority; ([0050]: “Data 509 required by efficiency application 505 includes a local boost table 511. This is a list of programs that are or have been running on computer 103, together with an indication of whether they are essential or non-essential.”) The citation discloses the list of program/service that are or have been running, which are divided into 2 group: essential/first priority program, and non-essential/second priority program. Even the ref silent on the indication that the essential program would have more priority than the non-essential program, one with the ordinary skill in the art would know the silent feature.
and in response to an indication that an operating system of the wearable device requests that memory usage be trimmed or determining to trim memory, stopping the second service based on the first priority being greater than the second priority. ([0057]: “If the amount of memory needed by the processes and services running on the processing system approaches the total available memory then the computer will run noticeably slower, possibly seizing up altogether.” and [0060]: “Efficiency application 505 addresses these issues. When the user of computer 103 wishes to boost the efficiency of the computer by removing non-essential programs from memory, he can request efficiency application 505 to perform an efficiency boost.”) The citation discloses the removing of non-essential programs when the total amount of memory approaching the limit.
Regarding claim 12, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, and Alambritis further teaches running a first plurality of services, the first plurality of services comprising the service, wherein the first plurality of services are essential services; (e.g. [0049]: “Operating systems generally have a large number of background services, some of which are essential for the functioning of the operating system,”) The citation discloses the OS comprises a large number of services, and some are essential for the function of the OS.
running a second plurality of services, wherein the second plurality of service are non- essential services; [0049]: “Operating systems generally have a large number of background services, some of which are essential for the functioning of the operating system, some of which are non-essential,”) The citation discloses the OS comprises a large number of services, and some are non-essential for the function of the OS.
and in response to receiving a trim memory request from an operating system of the wearable device or determining to trim memory, stopping one or more of the second plurality of services. (e.g. [0057]: “If the amount of memory needed by the processes and services running on the processing system approaches the total available memory then the computer will run noticeably slower, possibly seizing up altogether.” and [0060]: “Efficiency application 505 addresses these issues. When the user of computer 103 wishes to boost the efficiency of the computer by removing non-essential programs from memory, he can request efficiency application 505 to perform an efficiency boost.”) The citation discloses the removing of non-essential programs when the total amount of memory approaching the limit.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AHN, Tian, Guo, and Deza, in further view of Srour et al. US Pub. No. US 20130047198 A1 (hereafter Srour)
Regarding claim 11, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, but fail to teach running a plurality of services, the plurality of services comprising the first service; maintaining a least recently used list of the plurality of services; and in response to receiving a trim memory request from an operating system of the wearable device or determining to trim memory, stopping one or more of the plurality of services based on the least recently used list.
However, Srour teaches running a plurality of services, the plurality of services comprising the first service; (e.g. FIG. 1 and [0013]: “Computing device 100 includes an operating system 102 and one or more applications 104. During operation, operating system 102 and applications 104 run on computing device 100, with operating system 102 managing applications 104. The management of applications 104 includes automatically terminating one or more applications 104, as discussed in more detail below.”) The citation discloses the applications/service that are available in the computing system.
maintaining a least recently used list of the plurality of services; (e.g. [0043]: “In one or more embodiments, applications in list 202 are selected based on how recently used the applications were. Application termination module 120 selects applications from list 202 in order from least recently used to most recently used, so that the least recently used application is the first application in list 202 to be selected and the most recently used application is the last application in list 202 to be selected.”) The citation discloses a list of the list of applications that ranked from the least recently used to the most recently used.
and in response to receiving a trim memory request from an operating system of the wearable device or determining to trim memory, (e.g. [0030]: “In response to determining that memory is to be freed, module 114 notifies application termination module 120 to terminate one or more applications 104. A terminated application is no longer running on computing device 100, and is no longer allocated memory in computing device 100.”)
stopping one or more of the plurality of services based on the least recently used list. (e.g. [0043]: “In one or more embodiments, applications in list 202 are selected based on how recently used the applications were. Application termination module 120 selects applications from list 202 in order from least recently used to most recently used, so that the least recently used application is the first application in list 202 to be selected and the most recently used application is the last application in list 202 to be selected. Module 120 continues selecting applications from list 202 until system responsiveness analysis module 114 determines that no more applications are to be terminated (or until all applications in list 202 are terminated.”) The citation discloses the module 120 selects application from the list 202 (ranked from the least recently used) to terminate.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the running a plurality of services, the plurality of services comprising the service; maintaining a least recently used list of the plurality of services; and in response to receiving a trim memory request from an operating system of the wearable device or determining to trim memory, stopping one or more of the plurality of services based on the least recently used list, as taught in Srour’s invention into AHN, Tian, Guo, and Deza’s invention because the terminating the least recently used applications or services, it helps to enhances the efficiency of the wearable device and overall system stability by optimizing resource management in low memory constrained environment and reducing unnecessary memory consumption. This also improves responsiveness by ensuring that the most recently used applications or services can continue running smoothly without being disrupted by memory constraints.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AHN, Tian, Guo, and Deza, in further view of Kohl US Pub. No. US 20160381182 A1
Regarding claim 15, AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza, discloses the method of claim 1, the RPC is a first RPC and Deza further teach and wherein the method further comprises: receiving, from a second processor of the wearable device, a second RPC; determining a second service to call for the second RPC; (Deza - [0104]: “As illustrated in FIG. 10, the test execution flow 1000 starts by downloading to test server 500 an operating system master for the mobile device 390 and a version of an operating system running a communication application on the device under test 100 at 1010. At 1020, the device under test 100 is booted to start receiving remote procedure call commands at least one wireless circuit of the device under test 100...... As noted above, a user interface of the test server 500 may be adapted to execute the commands for emulating a button press command using a client program (e.g., C++ client 930, FIG. 9A) loaded into the device under test 100.”) The citation discloses device 100 receiving RPC call from the server/backend devices performing the button testing/second service.
AHN, in view of Tian, Guo, and Deza fail to teach and in response to a second status of the second service indicating the service is not running, and a determination to queue the second RPC, queuing the second RPC.
However, Kohl teaches and in response to a second status of the second service indicating the service is not running, and a determination to queue the second RPC, queuing the second RPC. ([0035]: “For example, once a remote procedure call is queued 110, the RPC process 10 may evaluate 112 the remote procedure call to determine if the remote procedure call added to the RPC queue is a duplicate of another pending remote procedure call that is already present on the RPC queue, but which has not been executed and/or for which a response has not yet been received from the server.”) The citation discloses the RPC calls are added to the RPC queue is queued, that need to be executed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the in response to a second status of the second service indicating the service is not running, and a determination to queue the second RPC, queuing the second RPC, as taught in Kohl’s invention into AHN, Tian, Guo, and Deza’s invention because by integrating a queuing of the second RPC when the second service is not running, the system can prevent the critical requests are not lost when a required services is unavailable, reduce latency spikes, and prevent unnecessary failures.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20220300358 A1: a system where devices use RPC adapters to enable applications on one device to access or provide services on another device. Each device maintains a pool of unassigned RPC adapters, which are dynamically assigned when a new service is exposed or requested, and released when the service is no longer in use. A communication service gateway on each device manages these RPC adapters, to link client and server applications over a communication channel (e.g., socket connections). This structure allows multiple applications across devices to share services.
US 20180198824 A1: a system for distributing access to services in a host operating system of a computing device includes a host operating system configured to implement a host runtime environment, and one or more services implemented by the host operating system. The system further includes a service control manager configured to enable communication between a client stub of a service implemented in a client runtime environment and a service provider of the service that is implemented in a service runtime environment that is separate from the first client runtime environment.
US 20190187905 A1: a method for managing a local storage memory for a mobile device includes detecting a level of memory usage of the local storage memory of the mobile device rising above a first threshold; determines a respective portion of the level of memory usage of the local storage memory on a per software application basis for a plurality of software applications, and determines a user preference for a memory relief action; then implements the memory relief action for at least one software application of the plurality of software applications based on the user preference.
Examiner has cited particular columns/paragraphs/sections and line numbers in the references applied and not relied upon to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
When responding to the Office action, applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the reference(s) cited or the objections made. A showing of how the amendments avoid such references or objections must also be present. See 37 C.F.R. 1.111(c).
When responding to this Office action, applicant is advised to provide the line and page numbers in the application and/or reference(s) cited to assist in locating the appropriate paragraphs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUAN M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-1599. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:30am - 5:30PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pierre Vital can be reached on (571) 272-4215. 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.
/TUAN M NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2198
/PIERRE VITAL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2198
Prosecution Insights