DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-30 are pending.
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 21, 22, 26, 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lesesky et al. [US 20110234388].
As to claim 1. Lesesky discloses A communications hub for transmitting and receiving communications formed using a plurality of different communication protocols between first and second members of a tractor-trailer over an electrical connection between the first and second members of the tractor-trailer, the electrical connection configured to comply with electrical requirements of the SAE J560 standard as it exists on the filing date of this application, comprising:
a first housing configured for mounting on the first member of the tractor-trailer, [fig. 16, 0088] communications module housing 1635 mounted on a trailer;
a first communication interface supported on the first housing, [fig. 16, 20, 0088] means 1640, and configured for connection with the electrical connection between the first and second members of the tractor-trailer, [fig. 16, 20, 0088, 0097] for electrically connecting the trailer communication module 1630/2030 with the truck communication module 1610 through the power bus 30;
a second communication interface, [fig. 20, 0097] the first one of the plurality of protocol specific transceivers 2015, supported on the first housing, [fig. 16 20], and configured to transmit and receive communications over a first intra-member communication network on the first member of the tractor-trailer, [figs. 16, 20, 0091, 0097] for communicating with subsystems 100, in accordance with a first communication protocol, [0096, 0097] wherein the first one of the plurality of protocols is the first communication protocol;
a first power converter supported within the first housing, [fig. 17, 20, 0091, 0097] a spread spectrum transceiver converts spread spectrum data, which is an analog data, into digital data;
a first power line communication codec supported within the first housing, [fig. 20,0097] spread spectrum transceiver converts digital signals for transmission via the power line and vice versa, [0069] which encodes the data stream and vice versa, which reads on the claimed codec; and
a first controller, [fig. 17, 20, 0091, 0099] microcontroller 1720/2040, supported within the first housing, [figs. 16, 17, 20], and configured to
establish a first inter-member communication network between the first and second members of the tractor-trailer over first and second conductors of the electrical connection, [figs. 15-18, 0092, 0100] control communication between tractor and trailer via power bus 30, and establish communication;
control the first power converter, [0091, 0101], to convert a first power signal transmitted between the first and second members of the tractor-trailer over the first inter-member communication network between a first direct current waveform and a first alternating current waveform, [figs. 15-18, 0091, 0092] a spread spectrum transceiver converts spread spectrum data, which reads on the claimed alternating current waveform, into digital data, which reads on the claimed direct current waveform; and
control the first power line communication codec to encode and decode communications over the first alternating current waveform and exchange communications between the second communication interface and the second member of the tractor-trailer over the first inter-member communication network, [fig. 20, 0096, 0097, 0101] the microprocessor controls the spread spectrum transceiver 2030 that manages the conversion of signal from the trailer subsystems 100 to spread spectrum data signals for transmission via the power line 30.
As to claim 2. Lesesky discloses The communications hub of claim 1, further comprising a third communication interface supported on the first housing and configured to transmit and receive communications over a second intra-member communication network on the first member of the tractor-trailer in accordance with a second communication protocol different from the first communication protocol, [fig. 20, 0094, 0097] trailer communications module 2020 with a plurality of interfaces for communicating with a plurality of trailer subsystems 100 with a protocol specific transceiver 2015; [0096, 0097] wherein the second one of the plurality of protocols is the second communication protocol, and wherein the first controller is further configured to control the first power line communication codec to encode and decode communications over the first alternating current waveform and exchange communications between the third communication interface and the second member of the tractor-trailer over the first inter-member communication network, [fig. 20, 0096, 0097, 0101] the microprocessor controls the spread spectrum transceiver 2030 that manages the conversion of signal from the trailer subsystems 100 to spread spectrum data signals for transmission via the power line 30.
As to claim 21 is rejected using the same prior arts and reasoning as to that of claim 1.
As to claim 22 is rejected using the same prior arts and reasoning as to that of claim 2.
As to claim 26 is rejected using the same prior arts and reasoning as to that of claim 1.
As to claim 27. Lesesky discloses The method of claim 26, further comprising controlling the first power line communication codec to encode and decode communications over the first alternating current waveform and exchange communications between a third communication interface and the second member of the tractor-trailer over the first inter-member communication network, [fig. 20, 0096, 0097, 0101] the microprocessor controls the spread spectrum transceiver 2030 that manages the conversion of signal from the trailer subsystems 100 to spread spectrum data signals for transmission via the power line 30, the third communication interface configured to transmit and receive communications over a second intra-member communication network on the first member of the tractor-trailer in accordance with a second communication protocol different from the first communication protocol, [fig. 20, 0094, 0097] trailer communications module 2020 with a plurality of interfaces for communicating with a plurality of trailer subsystems 100 with a protocol specific transceiver 2015; [0096, 0097] wherein the second one of the plurality of protocols is the second communication protocol.
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 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) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lesesky in view of Fukuda [US 20100080306].
As to claim 7. Lesesky fails to disclose The communications hub of claim 1 wherein the first controller only establishes the first inter-member communication network when the controller either receives a first connection request from the second member of the tractor-trailer over the electrical connection or receives a connection acknowledgment from the second member of the tractor-trailer over the electrical connection in response to a second connection request generated by the first controller.
Fukuda teaches a communication system that implements a PLC, [0001]; wherein a first member of the network receives a request from a second member of the network before establishing the network by pairing to the second device, [0013, 0014].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lesesky with that of Fukuda so that the system can be implemented with a master device to control the operation of the network.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-20 are allowed.
The prior art of record does not disclose nor suggest individually or in combination the claimed communications hub using a plurality of protocols to communicate using the electrical connection of a tractor-trailer having a plurality of power converters and a plurality of PLC codecs supported within a single housing.
Claims 3-6, 8-11, 23-25, 28-30 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6-7, filed 03/02/2026, with respect to claims 3, 28 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 3, 28 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 03/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument 1: The spread spectrum transceiver 2030 does not include a “power converter” within the meaning of the claims. The claimed “power converter” converts a “power signal transmitted between the first and second members of the tractor-trailer”.
Response 1: The specification, [0029], provides explanation of what the claimed power converters represent including “Power converters 68, 70, 72 are provided to convert power signals transmitted between the members of the tractor-trailer 20 over electrical connections 28, 30, 32 between a direct current waveform and an alternating current waveform. Power converters 68, 70, 72 are conventional in the art.”
Lesesky, [0029], describes the spread spectrum transceiver 2030 that performs the same function of converting digital data from the trailer subsystems 100 to an analog signal to be transmitted over the power line 30 to the tractor, and vice versa.
Argument 2: Fukuda does not teach the limitations about the communication hub as claimed in claim 1.
Response 2: In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
The Office Action is not relying on Fukuda to teach the limitations as claimed in claim 1.
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 BENYAM HAILE whose telephone number is (571)272-2080. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 AM - 5:30 PM Mon. - Thur..
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, Steven Lim can be reached at (571)270-1210. 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.
/Benyam Haile/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688