Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/133,090

Systems and Methods for Dynamically Switching Device Configuration Thermal Parameters

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Apr 11, 2023
Examiner
WANG, ZHIPENG
Art Unit
2115
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Zebra Technologies Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
425 granted / 526 resolved
+25.8% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
544
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.6%
-30.4% vs TC avg
§103
48.6%
+8.6% vs TC avg
§102
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
§112
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 526 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-11 are pending. Claims 12-22 were withdrawn. This action is made final. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edwards et al. (hereinafter “Edwards”) (US 20160091938 A1) in view of Casparian et al. (hereinafter “Casparian”) (US 20170168531 A1). As to claims 1 and 7, Edwards teaches a system and method for dynamically switching thermal parameters of a device, comprising: detecting a hardware attachment or detachment event via a detection mechanism of the device ([0072-0073] a passively cooled electronic device (e.g., a tablet) 620 removably inserted into an opening in the dock 610… the electrical interface 614 can be used by a dock detection subsystem in the electronic device 620 to detect when the electronic device 620 is inserted in the dock 610….); storing an initial configuration of the device and the detected hardware attachment or detachment event ([0073-0079] A data interface (if any) provided by the electrical interface 614 can further provide an exchange of data between the dock 610 and the inserted device 620. The exchanged data can include information specifying a type of dock 610, a profile of dock 610, or other information the electronic device 620 can use to determine a context associated with the particular dock 610... The DPTF logic 832 may receive the sensor data, dock detection data, SOC state, fan state, and DPTF participant information as described above for use in managing a state machine in which state depends on device context as developed from these various inputs. The DPTF logic 832 can use this determined device context to select from a plurality policy engines 820 that conform to the current device context…. these policy engines can include an active cooling policy, a passive policy, a critical policy, and an adaptive performance policy…. In a system supporting an adaptive performance policy (AP policy) as described herein, the AP policy is responsible for the setting revised power and skin temperature (T.sub.Skin) limits, based on the device context. Every time the device context changes, the AP policy can be activated to change the system power and thermal parameters, relevant to the context. After the new parameters are set, the active cooling policy, the passive policy and the critical policy as described above continue to be used to manage system thermal issues. The device context (e.g., docked with active cooling) can enable the adaptive performance policy to set higher thresholds for T.sub.Skin and power/performance levels.); generating a table having the stored initial device configuration and the detected hardware attachment or detachment event (Fig. 7 policy engine storing active cooling policy, a passive policy, a critical policy, and an adaptive performance policy, and the DPTF logic 832 receive and process the sensor data, dock detection data, SOC state, fan state, and DPTF participant information….The DPTF logic 832 can use this determined device context to select from a plurality policy engines 820 that conform to the current device context; [0073-0079]); and optimizing a performance of the device by dynamically switching the thermal parameters of the device based on the stored initial device configuration, the detected hardware attachment or detachment event ([0073-0079, 0117] Every time the device context changes, the AP policy can be activated to change the system power and thermal parameters, relevant to the context. After the new parameters are set, the active cooling policy, the passive policy and the critical policy as described above continue to be used to manage system thermal issues. The device context (e.g., docked with active cooling) can enable the adaptive performance policy to set higher thresholds for T.sub.Skin and power/performance levels….The adaptive performance policy can cause the DPTF logic 832 to periodically read and set appropriate power and performance values for the subsystems of the electronic device when the device is subject to a changing thermal environment or variable processing demands…). Edwards teaches a system and method for dynamically switching thermal parameters of a device based on at least the current device context and a plurality policy engines [0075-0079]. Edwards does not explicitly teach using thermal sensor data from detected hardware which is the docking system. However, Casparian teaches a system and method for providing appropriate cooling for portable information handling system using a docking system. Especially, the docking system comprising a thermal sensor to provide thermal sensor data from detected hardware which is the docking system to the portable information handling system to optimize a performance of the portable information handling system by dynamically switching the thermal parameters of the portable information handling system ([0032, 0050, 0057] Such control may be supplemented with leveraging the existing fan curve and chip temperature lookup table found in NVM 107 and the sensed supplemental cooling air temperature (e.g., as sensed by dock temperature sensor 194a and/or by an optional temperature sensor 194b mounted within chassis 179 to sense ambient temperature at an air inlet 161 and report this sensed temperature directly to CPU 105) entering into the air intake vents 161. As further shown, an optional heat sink temperature sensor 194c may be present in one exemplary embodiment (with or without sensor 194b) to sense a real time operating temperature of shared heat sink 189, and to report this sensed shared heat sink temperature to CPU 105 as shown. It will be understood that in one such embodiment cooling dock control application 129 may use this sensed shared heat sink temperature in place of sensed real time CPU operating temperature and/or real time CPU utilization value in the methodologies and techniques described elsewhere herein to control CPU and/or dGPU processing speed and/or overclocking, and/or to control cooling dock fan 178 rotational speed and/or chilling temperature of chilling system 175). It would have been obvious to an ordinary person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Casparian with the teachings of Edwards for the purpose of determining and selecting an optimized processing performance level and an appropriated cooling level to operate the computing device further based on at least the current device context, thermal control policies, and detected thermal sensor data from docking system. As to claim 2, Edwards teaches the processor optimizes the performance of the device by dynamically switching the thermal parameters of the device based on the detected hardware attachment or detachment event and the table while the device is in an operational state and without shutting down or rebooting the device [0070-0083]. As to claim 3, Edwards teaches the processor is further configured to: set, in response to detecting the hardware attachment event, a value indicative of a hardware attachment configuration, select a sub table among the one or more sub tables based on a type of the detected hardware attachment configuration, and set a temperature point associated with the selected sub table for the type of detected hardware attachment configuration [0073-0079]. Casparian also teaches set, in response to detecting the hardware attachment event, a value indicative of a hardware attachment configuration, select a sub table among the one or more sub tables based on a type of the detected hardware attachment configuration, and set a temperature point associated with the selected sub table for the type of detected hardware attachment configuration [0032, 0040-0043, 0049-0050, 0057] As to claim 4, Edwards teaches the hardware attachment configuration is at least one of a docked device configuration and an attached accessory device configuration, the attached accessory being at least one of a mouse, a keyboard, a headset, and a heads-up display [0072-0073]. As to claim 5, Edwards teaches the processor is further configured to: set, in response to detecting the hardware detachment event, a value indicative of a hardware detachment configuration, select a sub table among the one or more sub tables based on a type of the detected hardware detachment configuration, and set a temperature point associated with the selected sub table for the type of detected hardware detachment configuration [using an active cooling policy, a passive policy, a critical policy, and an adaptive performance policy based on current device context when docking system removed, every time the device context changes, the AP policy can be activated to change the system power and thermal parameters, relevant to the context. After the new parameters are set, the active cooling policy, the passive policy and the critical policy as described above continue to be used to manage system thermal issues.] [0072-0079]. As to claim 6, Edwards teaches the hardware detachment configuration is a standalone device configuration, the device being at least one of a mobile phone, a tablet, and a laptop [0072]. As to claim 8, Edwards teaches the processor is further configured to: set, in response to detecting the hardware attachment event, a value indicative of a hardware attachment configuration, select a sub table among the one or more sub tables based on a type of the detected hardware attachment configuration, and set a temperature point associated with the selected sub table for the type of detected hardware attachment configuration [0073-0079]. Casparian also teaches set, in response to detecting the hardware attachment event, a value indicative of a hardware attachment configuration, select a sub table among the one or more sub tables based on a type of the detected hardware attachment configuration, and set a temperature point associated with the selected sub table for the type of detected hardware attachment configuration [0032, 0040-0043, 0049-0050, 0057] As to claim 9, Edwards teaches the hardware attachment configuration is at least one of a docked device configuration and an attached accessory device configuration, the attached accessory being at least one of a mouse, a keyboard, a headset, and a heads-up display [0072-0073]. As to claim 10, Edwards teaches the processor is further configured to: set, in response to detecting the hardware detachment event, a value indicative of a hardware detachment configuration, select a sub table among the one or more sub tables based on a type of the detected hardware detachment configuration, and set a temperature point associated with the selected sub table for the type of detected hardware detachment configuration [using an active cooling policy, a passive policy, a critical policy, and an adaptive performance policy based on current device context when docking system removed] [0072-0079]. As to claim 11, Edwards teaches the hardware detachment configuration is a standalone device configuration, the device being at least one of a mobile phone, a tablet, and a laptop [0072]. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 10/07/2025 have been considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection. 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 ZHIPENG WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5437. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-7. 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, Kamini Shah can be reached at 5712722279. 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. /ZHIPENG WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 11, 2023
Application Filed
May 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 07, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597042
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LIMITING CARBON DIOXIDE FOOTPRINT CAUSED BY INSTALLATION OF SOFTWARE AND FIRMWARE UPDATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597772
CENTRAL PLANT CONTROL SYSTEM WITH ASSET ALLOCATION OVERRIDE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597781
COMPACT POWER TOOL DATA LOGGER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584503
SIDE LOAD CONTROL OF LONG STROKE SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12572124
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETERMINATION OF ANOMALIES IN A CYBER-PHYSICAL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.5%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 526 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month