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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 9, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itagaki et al. (2017/0325247) hereinafter “Itagaki” and Montojo et al. (2014/0219217) hereinafter “Montojo”.
As to claim 1, (Currently Amended) Itagaki discloses An information processing device, comprising:
a central processinq unit (CPU) (11) confiqured to:
transmit an acknowledgement (ACK) to a connection device connected by wireless communication, (see [0105]) based on transmission data transmitted from the connection device has received normally;
determine no data body is transmitted to the connection device with the transmission of the [[neqative]] acknowledqement (see [0194]); and
set, based on the determination, transmission power for the transmission of the negative acknowledgement to low power (reduced since no data body to send) lower than normal power, wherein the normal power that is transmission power for transmission of the data body (see [0194]).
Itagaki fails to explicitly recite yet In an analogous art Montojo discloses the processor is configured to
transmit a negative acknowledgement to the connection device, based on the transmission data not received normally (see [0007]: to indicate data should be resent when not received successfully). Before the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Itagaki such that its processor be configured to transmit a negative acknowledgement to the connection device, based on the transmission data not received normally as taught by Montojo for the purpose of enabling signaling to have the data resent. It is considered that such a modification would result in the power savings to any acknowledgement (positive or negative) and thus also would result in the setting of the transmission power to low power for the NAK.
As to claim 2, (Currently Amended) the combination of Itagaki and Montojo discloses The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the CPU is further confiqured to receive the transmission data retransmitted from the connection device, based on one of
the connection device has received the negative acknowledgement for the transmission data, or
the connection device has not received one of the acknowledgement or the negative acknowledgement for the transmission data. (purpose of NAK is to indicate that the data should be resent, see Montojo [0007]) therefore with the combination to claim 1 it would have been further obvious to configure the CPU to receive the transmission data retransmitted from the connection device as it would not make any sense to transmit a NAK and not expect a retransmission.
As to claim 9, (Original) the combination of Itagaki and Montojo discloses The information processing device according to claim 1, Itagaki discloses wherein the wireless communication is short-range wireless communication. See [0239], etc.
As to claims 14-15, it is considered that the apparatus of claim 1 corresponds to and provides for the method / NT-CRM comprising the steps as claimed.
Claim(s) 3-4, 6-8, and 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itagaki and Montojo as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Recker et al. (2018/0270753) hereinafter “Recker”.
As to claim 3, (Currently Amended) the combination of Itagaki and Montojo discloses The information processing device according to claim 2, is silent to yet in an analogous art wherein
the transmission data is transmitted in a first connection interval (204A),
a second connection interval (204B) next to the first connection interval, and
the transmission data is retransmitted in the second connection interval (see Fig. 2B and [0029]-[0030]) based on
the connection device has received the negative acknowledgement for the transmission data, and
the connection device has not received one of the acknowledgement or the negative acknowledgement for the transmission data. Before the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to such that the transmission data is transmitted in a first connection interval (204A), a second connection interval (204B) next to the first connection interval, and
the transmission data is retransmitted in the second connection interval (see Fig. 2B and [0029]-[0030]) based on the connection device has received the negative acknowledgement for the transmission data, and
the connection device has not received one of the acknowledgement or the negative acknowledgement for the transmission data for the purpose of efficiency.
As to claim 4 and 6 (Currently Amended) the combination of Itagaki and Montojo discloses The information processing device according to claim 1, is silent to yet in an analogous art Recker discloses wherein
the CPU is further confiqured to set the transmission power for the transmission of the negative acknowledgement to one of the normal power or the low power (Bluetooth), based on a data transmission method of the wireless communication, and the wireless communication is ISO transmission (claim 6). See [0022],[0024]. Before the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to such that the CPU is further confiqured to set the transmission power for the transmission of the negative acknowledgement to one of the normal power or the low power (Bluetooth), based on a data transmission method of the wireless communication, the wireless communication is ISO transmission (claim 6) for the purpose of making use of the protocols with low power benefits.
As to claim 7-8, (Currently Amended) the combination of Itagaki and Montojo discloses The information processing device according to claim 1, is silent to yet in an analogous art Recker discloses wherein
the CPU is further confiqured to set the transmission power for the transmission of the negative acknowledgement to one of the normal power or the low power (Bluetooth), based on a type of connection of the wireless communication, and designated in advance (claim 8). See [0022],[0024]. Before the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the CPU such that it is further configured to set the transmission power for the transmission of the negative acknowledgement to one of the normal power or the low power (Bluetooth), based on a predetermined (claim 8) connection type of the wireless communication, for the purpose of making use of the protocols with low power benefits.
As to claims 10-12, (Original) the combination of Itagaki and Montojo discloses The information processing device according to claim 1, is silent to yet in an analogous art Recker discloses wherein the wireless communication is short-range wireless communication based on a Bluetooth (claim 10) standard, by a packet having a predetermined specific bit length (claim 11), wherein the CPU communication unit is connected as a slave to the connection device that is a master (claim 12). See [0022],[0023], [0035]-[0044], etc. Before the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Bluetooth (inherently using a specific bit length and slave-master configuration) as the short range communication as taught by Recker for the purpose of utilizing a known, trusted, affordable, secure communication option.
As to claim 13, (Currently Amended) the combination of Itagaki and Montojo discloses The information processing device according to claim 1, is silent to yet in an analogous art Recker discloses wherein the communication unit prohibits (operates under Bluetooth) which applicant admits provides for CPU is further configured to prohibit, based on the transmission power for the transmission of the neqative acknowledgement is set to the low power, the connection device to request CPU to change the transmission power. Before the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Bluetooth (admittedly configured to prohibit) as the short range communication as taught by Recker for the purpose of utilizing a known, trusted, affordable, secure communication option, not to mention a reduction in signaling since it is already set to low power.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 LESTER KINCAID whose telephone number is (571)272-7922. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 7-5.
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, Yuwen Pan can be reached at 571-272-7855. 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.
LESTER G. KINCAID
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2649
/LESTER G KINCAID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649