DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to applicant’s response filed under 37 C.F.R. §1.111 in response to a non-final office action. Claim 5 have been canceled. Claims 1-4, and 6-19 are subject to examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Applicant’s Argument:
The applicant argues, on page 8-9 in substance that "Magley fails to teach or suggest the feature of a low earth orbit (LEO) satellite, let alone the features of "transmission from the that to a satellite communication subsystem of the terrestrial gateway device" and "wherein transmission of the edge computing code from the core server to the satellite communication subsystem via the low earth satellite is configured for prolonged persistence for high latency communication," as recited by claim 1.
The examiner alleges that the disclosure of "satellite communications networks" at para. [0017], which the applicant respectfully notes is the only mention or suggestion of satellites in general in Magley, amounts to the disclosure of a low earth orbit satellite."
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Magley teaches in [0017] comprise various networking technologies, one of them which includes satellite communication networks. Further, Magley teaches collection hub and the repeater are both shown including a long-range (“LoRa”) frequency module (LFM) and is intended to be compatible with radios inside nodes not limited to LoRaWAN [0020], alternatively be performed in a network server for networks, such as in an open network a LoRaWAN require LEO in the satellite network. LoRaWAN networks are effective in urban and rural areas with connectivity, they cannot cover remote locations like deserts, mountain tops, or oceans. Integrating LEO satellites into the network architecture solves this problem. Therefore, examiner is construing that satellite communications networks involves low earth orbit satellite.
Applicant’s Argument:
The applicant argues, on page 10 in substance that "Magley does not disclose the feature of "wherein the edge computing code transmitted to the low earth orbit satellite is broken into discrete batches or packets for assembly into assembled edge computing code at the terrestrial gateway device after transmission from the low earth orbit satellite to a satellite communication subsystem of the terrestrial gateway device". The examiner alleges that this feature is disclosed at para. [0041] which discloses that "updating "session" may comprise multiple BRFUs of the same firmware file". However, there is nothing in this paragraph of Magley, or anywhere else therein, that teaches or suggests breaking an edge computing code module into discrete batches or packets for assembly into assembled edge computing code at the terrestrial gateway device after transmission. In contrast, as taught in the portion cited by the examiner and elsewhere in Magley, Magley merely teaches transmitting multiple identical copies of the same firmware file in its entirety to targeted nodes. There is no teaching nor suggestion in Magley that any of the firmware files are broken into discrete batches or packets for assembly into assembled edge computing code.”
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Magley teaches BRFU setup message contains several items of information. Magley gives a description in para [0045] about a firmware file may comprise as many as 1000 data packets, each packet filling a memory block and each data packet has a specific memory address associated with it. A transmission of a copy of a firmware file thus involves the sequential sending of one data packet after another, using store and forward commands. The targeted devices did not receive a complete copy of the updating firmware file in one or more previous transmissions. Finally, Magley also teaches, in [0036] mass storage device may be encoded with computer-executable instructions that, perform portions of managing firmware update communications in a communication network, Therefore, examiner is construing …wherein the edge computing code transmitted to the low earth orbit satellite is broken into discrete batches or packets for assembly… However, claim 1 merely recites … wherein the edge computing code transmitted to the low earth orbit satellite is broken into discrete batches or packets for assembly into assembled edge computing code at the terrestrial gateway device…
Regarding all other arguments presented by applicant, the arguments are substantially the same as those which have already been addressed above and in the interest of brevity; the examiner directs the applicant to those responses above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 9, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Magley et al. (Magley hereafter) (US 20190058630 A1).
Regarding claim 1 Magley teaches, A method of remote management of a terrestrial gateway device in communication with a low earth orbit satellite, the method including:
determining at a core server (host 102) that edge computing code is required to be installed (utility provider used to collect data from, control, and manage the various nodes… file to be sent to other devices in system 100 when firmware updates) at the terrestrial gateway device (See fig. 1 HUB 108) configured to perform edge server functions for a plurality of remote devices (nodes 200A-200D) (Magley; [0016] The AMI system 100 may include utility provider systems, such as host 102. The host 102 may represent a combination of application servers, database servers, communication servers, web servers, and the like that comprise the systems of the utility provider used to collect data from, control, and manage the various nodes 200A-200D… The host 102 is shown being operatively connected to a database 103 that stores a firmware file 105, which is the file to be sent to other devices in system 100 when firmware updates of other system devices are conducted), wherein the terrestrial gateway device is remote from the core server (Magley; See fig. 1 [0017] collection hubs 108 may comprise specialized network nodes installed in the field that act as a “parent node” [0023] collection hubs 108, repeaters 114, and the like, to be communicated over the wireless AMI network.) ([0020] long-range (“LoRa”) frequency module (LFM) 111. The LFM 111 is a radio module mounted to a board that can be installed in the hub 108 and the repeater 114, and is intended to be compatible with radios inside nodes 200, including but not limited to LoRaWAN);
transmitting from the core server to the low earth orbit satellite (Magley; [0017]The network 112 may comprise various networking technologies that connect the collection hubs 108 in the field to the host 102, including (among others) cellular data networks, satellite communication networks) edge computing code for an edge computing code module that is to be executed by the terrestrial gateway device as part of the edge server functions (Magley;[0021] [0041] managing, at an upstream source, firmware update communications between devices in a communication system. Method 400 begins at block 402, in which the upstream source (again, either host 102 or the NMT 106 in FIG. 1) retrieves a copy of an updating firmware (“FW”) file from a storage source. In the case of host 102, the storage source is database 103 (FIG. 1), and in the case of NMT 106, the storage source is the cloud 107 (FIG. 1).), wherein the edge computing code transmitted to the low earth orbit satellite is broken into discrete batches or packets for assembly into assembled edge computing code (updating “session” may comprise multiple broadcast remote firmware updates (BRFUs) of the same firmware file) at the terrestrial gateway device after transmission from the low earth orbit satellite to a satellite communication subsystem of the terrestrial gateway device (Magley; [0041] …at block 404, the upstream source sends a copy of the firmware file to a transmitting device, a term used herein to refer to the hub 108 and/or repeater 114 for an Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) system 100 (FIG. 1), as well as to a collector (not shown) for an Automatic Meter Reading (AMR) system. Method 400 proceeds to block 406, where a user determines a number of broadcast remote firmware updates (BRFUs) that are deemed necessary to effect a firmware update for all intended downstream devices. As to be discussed in greater detail herein, a “BRFU” comprises a predetermined number of transmissions of a copy of a firmware file to targeted nodes 200, and an updating “session” may comprise multiple BRFUs of the same firmware file) ([0036], [0045]).
wherein transmission of the edge computing code from the core server to the satellite communication subsystem via the low earth satellite is configured for prolonged persistence for high latency communication (between the sending of each transmission, and no delays between each BRFU) (Magley; [0041] The transmissions of a copy of the firmware file defining each BRFU are consecutive, as are the repeated BRFUs defining a session, meaning that there are no delays between the sending of each transmission, and no delays between each BRFU in the same session, beyond those intended in a programmed routine governing execution of the BRFU. Such repetition allows the targeted nodes 200 to fill in any portions of the firmware file that it may have missed in preceding broadcasts of the same firmware file).
Regarding claim 9 Magley teaches, A server system for remote management of a terrestrial gateway device in communication with a low earth orbit satellite,
the server system including: at least one core server processor (Magley; Fig. 3)
wherein the core server memory comprises an edge computing code module library storing multiple edge computing code modules (Magley; [0016] The host 102 is shown being operatively connected to a database 103 that stores a firmware file 105, which is the file to be sent to other devices in system 100 when firmware updates of other system devices are conducted), and the core server memory stores program code executable by the at least one core server processor to configure an edge computing management module to transmit at least one edge computing code module selected from the edge computing code module library to the terrestrial gateway device via a low earth orbit satellite (Magley;[0017] (Magley; [0017]The network 112 may comprise various networking technologies that connect the collection hubs 108 in the field to the host 102, including …satellite communication networks) [0021], [0041] managing, at an upstream source, firmware update communications between devices in a communication system. Method 400 begins at block 402, in which the upstream source (again, either host 102 or the NMT 106 in FIG. 1) retrieves a copy of an updating firmware (“FW”) file from a storage source. In the case of host 102, the storage source is database 103 (FIG. 1), and in the case of NMT 106, the storage source is the cloud 107 (FIG. 1).);
wherein the at least one edge computing code module is executable at the terrestrial gateway device to enable the terrestrial gateway device to perform edge server functions (Magley; [0021] [0041] managing, at an upstream source, firmware update communications between devices in a communication system. Method 400 begins at block 402, in which the upstream source (again, either host 102 or the NMT 106 in FIG. 1) retrieves a copy of an updating firmware (“FW”) file from a storage source. In the case of host 102, the storage source is database 103 (FIG. 1), and in the case of NMT 106, the storage source is the cloud 107 (FIG. 1).) ([0020] long-range (“LoRa”) frequency module (LFM) 111. The LFM 111 is a radio module mounted to a board that can be installed in the hub 108 and the repeater 114, and is intended to be compatible with radios inside nodes 200, including but not limited to LoRaWAN),
wherein the edge computing management module is further configured for prolonged persistence for high latency communication (between the sending of each transmission, and no delays between each BRFU) for transmitting the edge computing code to the terrestrial gateway device via the low earth satellite (Magley; [0017] satellite communication, [0041] The transmissions of a copy of the firmware file defining each BRFU are consecutive, as are the repeated BRFUs defining a session, meaning that there are no delays between the sending of each transmission, and no delays between each BRFU in the same session, beyond those intended in a programmed routine governing execution of the BRFU. Such repetition allows the targeted nodes 200 to fill in any portions of the firmware file that it may have missed in preceding broadcasts of the same firmware file).
Regarding claim 17 Magley teaches in a terrestrial data communication gateway device for satellite communication with a low earth orbit satellite, the terrestrial data communication gateway device having at least one processor and memory accessible to the at least one processor, a method comprising (Fig. 2. [0017] collection hubs 108 may comprise specialized network nodes installed in the field that act as a “parent node”):
operating a low power wide area network (LPWAN) wireless communication subsystem responsive to the at least one processor to allow wireless communication between the gateway device and the multiple remote devices (Magley; [0020]The LFM 111 is a radio module mounted to a board that can be installed in the hub 108 and the repeater 114, and is intended to be compatible with radios inside nodes 200, including but not limited to LoRaWAN™ radio, and radios in node types [0023] The node 200 may allow data to and from devices in the AMI system 100,…collection hubs 108, repeaters 114, and the like, to be communicated over the wireless AMI network.) (See fig. 1);
operating a satellite communication subsystem to allow high-latency wireless communication (between the sending of each transmission, and no delays between each BRFU) with at least one orbiting low earth orbit satellite (Magley; [0017] satellite communication, [0041] The transmissions of a copy of the firmware file defining each BRFU are consecutive, as are the repeated BRFUs defining a session, meaning that there are no delays between the sending of each transmission, and no delays between each BRFU in the same session, beyond those intended in a programmed routine governing execution of the BRFU. Such repetition allows the targeted nodes 200 to fill in any portions of the firmware file that it may have missed in preceding broadcasts of the same firmware file); and
operating the at least one processor to perform gateway server functions in relation to the multiple remote devices, wherein the server functions include executing multiple processing threads, the multiple processing threads including message processing threads to process messages communicated between the gateway device and the remote devices and communicated between the gateway device and the low earth orbit satellite (Magley; [0042] The broadcast remote firmware updates (BRFUs) setup message may be a configuration file, also referred to as a command file. The BRFU setup message contains several items of information, including but not limited to a session number (also called a session identification (ID)), a wake time at which targeted nodes 200 in the communication system 100 should wake from a sleeping state, and as well as a channel to which each targeted node 200 should tune after waking. The session number (session ID) informs the target node, for example, whether a BRFU is part of a same session as a previously-transmitted BRFU. Additionally, the BRFU setup message may contain filtering information to limit the firmware update to only a subset of the plurality of nodes 200 present in the system 100. Thus, for example, the BRFU setup message may include a message field designation corresponding to only a particular type of node 200 (such as only AMI nodes 200))
Regarding claim 16 Magley teaches the method of claim 1
Magley teaches, A server system for remote management of a terrestrial gateway device, the server system including: at least one server processor (Magley; Fig. 3); server memory accessible to the at least one server processor (Magley; Fig. 3);
wherein the server memory comprises program code executable by the at least one server processor to perform the method of claim 1 (Magley; Fig. 3).
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 2, 3, 4, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magley as applied to claim 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Malladi et al. (Malladi hereafter) (US 20170060574 A1).
Regarding claim 2 Magley teaches, The method of claim 1,
Magley fails to explicitly teach, wherein the edge computing code includes a software or firmware update
However, in the same field of endeavor Malladi teaches, wherein the edge computing code includes a software or firmware update (Malladi; [0059], [0061] Components of the edge gateway include the following: ingestion 421, enrichment 425, complex event processing (CEP) engine 429, applications 432, analytics through an expression language 435, and transport 438. The cloud can include edge provisioning and orchestration 443 and cloud and edge analytics and apps portability 446.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Malladi in order to enable intelligence at the edge (Malladi; [0006]).
Regarding claim 3 Magley teaches, The method of claim 1,
Magley fails to explicitly teach, wherein the edge computing code includes an edge computing code module
However, in the same field of endeavor Malladi teaches, wherein the edge computing code includes an edge computing code module (Malladi; [0106] The edge hardware includes a physical layer between physical sensors and an external communication channels).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Malladi in order to enable intelligence at the edge (Malladi; [0006]).
Regarding claim 4 Magley-Malladi teaches the method of claim 3,
Magley fails to explicitly teach, wherein the transmitting includes transmitting edge computing code for multiple edge computing code modules to be executed by the terrestrial gateway device to perform the edge server functions
However, in the same field of endeavor Malladi teaches, wherein the transmitting includes transmitting edge computing code for multiple edge computing code modules to be executed by the terrestrial gateway device to perform the edge server functions (Malladi; [0090] ...applications developed using the FogHorn software development kit can either be deployed on the edge or in the cloud, thereby achieving app mobility between edge and cloud... [0092] The edge application infrastructure can provide real-time feedback and automated control systems to some of the toughest and most remote industrial environments).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Malladi in order to enable intelligence at the edge (Malladi; [0006]).
Regarding claim 13 Magley teaches. The system of claim 9,
Magley fails to explicitly teach, wherein the program code in the core server memory is executable by the at least one core server processor to configure a data presentation and application programming interface (API) application to make data from the gateway device available to the client device.
However, in the same field of endeavor Malladi teaches, wherein the program code in the core server memory is executable by the at least one core server processor to configure a data presentation and application programming interface (API) application to make data from the gateway device available to the client device (Malladi; [0067] ... Application mobility across the cloud and edge. Advanced machine learning (ML) and model transfer between cloud and edge. Out of the box, FogHorn supports the major industrial data ingestion protocols (e.g. OPC-UA, Modbus, MQTT, DDS, and others) as well as other data transfer protocols... [0090] ...the FogHorn software development kit can either be deployed on the edge or in the cloud, thereby achieving app mobility between edge and cloud. The apps can be used as part of the edge or as part of the cloud).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Malladi in order to enable intelligence at the edge (Malladi; [0006]).
Claim 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magley as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Reynolds et al. (Reynolds hereafter) (US 20160006837 A1).
Regarding claim 6 Magley teaches the method of claim 1,
Magley fails to explicitly teach, further including the core server receiving data from the terrestrial gateway device via the low earth orbit satellite, and wherein the core server implements part of a backhaul network to make data received from the terrestrial gateway device accessible to a remotely located client device
However, in the same field of endeavor Reynolds teaches, further including the core server receiving data from the terrestrial gateway device via the low earth orbit satellite (Reynolds; [0059] These networks or sub-networks are considered hybrid in that that they may operate across multiple wireless transmission types, including, e.g., Satellite, etc.), and wherein the core server implements part of a backhaul network to make data received from the terrestrial gateway device accessible to a remotely located client device (Reynolds; [0069] ... A pseudo-gateway may use its connection to the central server (via a gateway) to relay request data for another device(s) that does not have a direct connection to a gateway. It should be appreciated that, in practice, not every client device with a direct uplink connection to a gateway will be chosen to act as a pseudo-gateway. Likewise, each client 102 is preferably capable of communication with the central server(s) 110, either via direct connections or via a gateway or pseudo-gateway. A pseudo-gateway should have a connection to the client it is relaying request data for either directly or indirectly through another client to which the pseudo-gateway has a direct connection... [0070] ... the webserver(s) may receive data over the Internet from a backhaul source (e.g., an optical fiber cable connection to an ISP). The server(s) 110 may communicate directly with gateways 106, client devices 102, and remote webservers, e.g., over TCP/IP networking).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Reynolds in order to coordinating the flow of data in the network (Reynolds; [0072]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magley-Reynolds as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Karim et al. (Karim hereafter) (EP 3208950 A1) (IDS provided).
Regarding claim 7 Magley-Reynolds teaches the method of claim 6,
Magley-Reynolds fails to explicitly teach, further including decoding the received data to determine a property of one or more of the remote devices.
However, in the same field of endeavor Karim teaches, decoding the received data to determine a property of one or more of the remote devices (Karim; [0025] Data messages are sent as data frames beginning with a synchronisation word and containing an identifier of the actual protocol being used. Based on the used frequency and this identifier the dedicated radio communication module is able to identify and decode data frames and send to the processor the received data messages)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley-Reynolds to include the above recited limitations as taught by Karim in order to identify the communication module (Karim; [0025]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magley- Reynolds-Karim as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Harter et al. (Harter hereafter) (US 20170134497 A1).
Regarding claim 8 Lee-Malladi-Reynolds-Karim teaches, the method of claim 7,
Magley-Reynolds-Karim fails to explicitly teach, wherein at least one of the remote devices comprise at least one actuator to control a remote machine component and wherein the method further includes transmitting a data packet from the core server to the at least one remote device via the low earth orbit satellite and the terrestrial gateway device, the data packet encoding instructions to control the remote machine component and actuate the remote machine component based on input received from a client device.
However, in the same field of endeavor Harter teaches, wherein at least one of the remote devices comprise at least one actuator to control a remote machine component (Harter; [0025] ... The RSPs are the point of interaction or communication between the sensors and electronics that support them and the satellite router 102. The sensors detect and/or measure media, such as a state or characteristic of a gas, aerosol, or air sample, for example, by converting the monitored or detected characteristics of the media into data. Samples are taken at periodic intervals to measure and record a parameter before being converted into analog signals that are then converted into a digital signal... RSPs are autonomously configured in response to the media properties it detects, records, or others responds to and some RSPs are configured in response to client 110 requests or commands) and wherein the method further includes transmitting a data packet from the core server to the at least one remote device via the low earth orbit satellite and the terrestrial gateway device, the data packet encoding instructions to control the remote machine component and actuate the remote machine component based on input received from a client device (Harter; [0024] The satellite router 102 receives transmitted messages from remote sensor (hardware) platforms (RSP) and wirelessly transmits them to a hardware gateway 104. The gateway 104 interconnects wireless and tangible networks such as a local area network to the satellite router 102... A hardware information repository and intelligent server 106 tracks and traces communication with one or more RSPs and hardware clients 110. The information repository and intelligent server 106 captures, stores, and analyzes event data at the unit or lot level as data is collected from a local or a remote global area)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley- Reynolds-Karim to include the above recited limitations as taught by Harter in order to remote monitoring architecture on a global scale (Harter; [0024]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magley as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Huber (Huber hereafter) (US 20200125375 A1).
Regarding claim 10 Magley teaches, The system of claim 9,
Magley fails to explicitly teach, wherein the edge computing management module is configured to receive program code from a client device for inclusion in the edge computing code module library.
However, in the same field of endeavor Huber teaches, wherein the edge computing management module is configured to receive program code from a client device for inclusion in the edge computing code module library. (Huber; [0024] When a client update is required to match a new server version, the required new D4 Client Library can be loaded automatically by the already in place D4 Kernel. The user needs merely to specify to the D4 Kernel the pathname of the new library. Alternatively, a built in rule could tell the D4 Kernel to look in a standard “release directory” on the server system where the latest D4 Kernel would be available. When only a new Client Library is needed, it may be obtained as described above. The user may use an environment variable to specify the location of the new Library,)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Huber in order to accommodate new hardware and software. (Huber; [0025]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magley as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Mehta et al. (Mehta hereafter) (US 20020131404 A1).
Regarding claim 11 Magley-Huber teaches. The system of claim 10,
Magley-Huber fails to explicitly teach, wherein the edge computing management module performs pre-publication verification of program code before inclusion into the edge computing code module library.
However, in the same field of endeavor Mehta teaches, wherein the edge computing management module performs pre-publication verification of program code before inclusion into the edge computing code module library (Mehta; [0092] ... On Java code, the Inspector 704 may also perform a class analysis of the application code to verify that classes in the application
conform to desired standards such as the number, type, and frequency of API calls. In addition, the Inspector 704 applies application filters to detect package and method names, classes, fields or other forms of an API that are suspected to have intrusive, malicious behavior, or that may be unauthorized for use by the requesting subscriber, the target device, or some other target.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Mehta in order to remove unused code from the application. (Mehta; [0093]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magley as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Jain et al. (Jain hereafter) (US 20160072766 A1).
Regarding claim 12 Magley teaches. The system of claim 9,
Magley fails to explicitly teach, wherein the program code in the core server memory is executable by the at least one core server processor to configure a user credit and quota management application that tracks volume and frequency of data accessed by the gateway device in relation to user accounts stored in the core server memory
However, in the same field of endeavor Jain teaches, wherein the program code in the core server memory is executable by the at least one core server processor to configure a user credit and quota management application that tracks volume and frequency of data accessed by the gateway device in relation to user accounts stored in the core server memory (Jain; [0109] the monitoring service 198 and/or monitoring agent 197 may monitor, measure and manage the performance of the delivery of applications via the Citrix Presentation Server. In this example, the monitoring service 198 and/or monitoring agent 197 monitors individual ICA sessions. The monitoring service 198 and/or monitoring agent 197 may measure the total and per session system resource usage, as well as application and networking performance. The monitoring service 198 and/or monitoring agent 197 may identify the active servers for a given user and/or user session... [0110] ... the monitoring service 198 and/or monitoring agent 197 measures and monitors memory usage for the application delivery system 190, such as total memory usage, per user session and/or per process.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Jain in order to monitor and measure performance of a client/server application (Jain; [0108]).
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magley-Malladi as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (Lee hereafter) (US 20180212787 A1).
Regarding claim 14 Magley-Malladi teaches. The system of claim 13,
Magley fails to explicitly teach, wherein each remote device is configured to transmit a data packet encoding the determined environment property to the gateway device.
wherein the satellite communication subsystem implements part of a backhaul network to make the transmitted data packet encoding the determined environment property accessible through a remotely located client device.
wherein the terrestrial gateway device is in communication with multiple remote devices, wherein the terrestrial gateway device acts as an intermediate server between the one or more remote devices and the server system
wherein each remote device comprises at least one sensor to determine an environment property of a local environment of a respective remote device
wherein the terrestrial gateway device is in communication with multiple remote devices, wherein the terrestrial gateway device acts as an intermediate server between the one or more remote devices and the server system
wherein each remote device comprises at least one sensor to determine an environment property of a local environment of a respective remote device
Malladi further teaches, wherein each remote device is configured to transmit a data packet encoding the determined environment property to the gateway device (Malladi; [0162] 1.1. Sensor data reaches the software apparatus through the network interfaces in the gateway device. The software apparatus examines the message headers for patterns indicating known data protocols supported.);
wherein the satellite communication subsystem implements part of a backhaul network to make the transmitted data packet encoding the determined environment property accessible through a remotely located client device (Malladi; [0089] ... The apps can be distributed using an app store 637, which may be provided by the edge platform developer or the customer of the edge platform (which may be referred to as a partner). Through the app store, users can download and share apps with others. The apps can perform analytics and applications 639 including machine learning, remote monitoring, predictive maintenance, or operational intelligence, or any combination of these... [0090] For the apps, there is dynamic app mobility between edge and cloud).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Malladi in order to enable intelligence at the edge (Malladi; [0006]).
Magley-Malladi fails to explicitly teach, wherein the terrestrial gateway device is in communication with multiple remote devices, wherein the terrestrial gateway device acts as an intermediate server between the one or more remote devices and the server system
wherein each remote device comprises at least one sensor to determine an environment property of a local environment of a respective remote device
However, in the same field of endeavor Lee teaches, wherein the terrestrial gateway device is in communication with multiple remote devices, wherein the terrestrial gateway device acts as an intermediate server between the one or more remote devices and the server system (Lee; [0037] The control device 100 may collect data from the end devices 301, 302, and 303 and transmit the collected data or information obtained from the collected data to other devices on the external network (e.g., the server 200 or another gateway device). As such, the control device 100 may play a role as a gateway... [0038] The control device 100 may communicate with at least one server 200 (e.g., a cloud server) via wireless communication network...The communication network may include ... a satellite communication network);
wherein each remote device comprises at least one sensor to determine an environment property of a local environment of a respective remote device (Lee; [0033] The end devices 301, 302, and 303 may collect data using sensors or transmit the collected data to the outside through a wired or wireless communication interface... [0094] ... Sensor data generated by the plurality of sensors in the cargo ship may include vehicle management data, GPS data, cargo data, environmental data and the like);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley-Malladi to include the above recited limitations as taught by Lee in order to provide intelligent services to the end devices (Lee; [0040]).
Regarding claim 15 Magley-Malladi-Lee teaches. The system of claim 14,
Magley-Malladi fails to explicitly teach, wherein each remote device comprises at least one actuator to control a remote machine component
wherein the at least one core server processor is configured to transmit to each remote device data encoding instructions to control the remote machine component
Lee further teaches, wherein each remote device comprises at least one actuator to control a remote machine component (Lee; [0144] In a wireless sensor network (WSN), each of the IoT devices 1110, 1112, 1114, and 1116 may be used as a sink node or a sensor node. A sink node is called a base station, may play a role as a gateway connecting the WSN and an external network (for example, the Internet), may allocate a task to each sensor node, and may collect an event sensed by each sensor node. A sensor node is a node in a WSN capable of processing sensory information and performing a gathering, and a sensor node may be a node capable of performing communication between nodes connected to each other in the WSN.)
wherein the at least one core server processor is configured to transmit to each remote device data encoding instructions to control the remote machine component (Lee; [0152] ... The cloud server 1140 may store information related to at least one of the IoT devices 1110, 1112, 1114, and 1116 and analyze data transmitted from the relevant IoT device based on the stored information. Further, the cloud server 1140 may transmit the analysis result to the relevant IoT device or a user device through the network 1130) (See Fig. 14)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley-Malladi to include the above recited limitations as taught by Lee in order to provide intelligent services to the end devices (Lee; [0040]).
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magley as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Lee.
Regarding claim 18 Magley teaches the method of claim 17,
Magley fails to explicitly teach, wherein the server functions in relation to the multiple remote devices comprise one or more of:
registration of the multiple remote devices with the gateway device
Lee further teaches, wherein the server functions in relation to the multiple remote devices comprise one or more of:
registration of the multiple remote devices with the gateway device (Lee; [0045] For example, the control device 100 may analyze the status of the local network LNT (Hereinafter, referred to as the local status) and negotiate with the server 200 to optimize the local status. The control device 100 may negotiate with the server 200 based on a local status and a local policy and determine an intelligence of the control device 100 or the end devices 301, 302, and 303 by a negotiation. Negotiation targets may vary, and the above-mentioned intelligence, intelligence-related policies and rules may be negotiated);
allocation of a communication frequency to each remote device;
de-duplication of data received from the multiple remote devices; and implementation of a preamble, header and cyclic redundancy checks at a MAC (media access control) layer for wireless communication with the multiple remote devices.
{Office’s Note: Because of the alternative claim language such as “either...or”, only one of the alternative limitations has been analyzed by the examiner}
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Lee in order to provide intelligent services to the end devices (Lee; [0040]).
Regarding claim 19 Magley teaches the method of claim 17,
Magley fails to explicitly teach, wherein the processing threads include a single supervisory or master thread configured to restart a failed processing thread
Lee further teaches, wherein the processing threads include a single supervisory or master thread configured to restart a failed processing thread (Lee; [0041] ... the server 200 may make a rule or a rule-set that defines an intelligence of the end devices 301, 302, and 303 and the control device 100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to create the invention of Magley to include the above recited limitations as taught by Lee in order to provide intelligent services to the end devices (Lee; [0040]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILFRED THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)270-0353. The examiner can normally be reached Mon -Thurs 9:00 am-4:00 pm.
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, Noel R Beharry can be reached at 571-270-5630. 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.
/W. T/Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/LIEM H. NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416