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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1,12, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1 and 12, claims include, “comprising a a first communication unit” in lines 4-5. The Examiner reads with only one ‘a’. Furthermore, “:” is required after the ‘comprising’.
Regarding claim 15, the claim includes, “further comprising”. “:” is required after the ‘comprising’.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-5, 12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meifang et al. (US 2020/0019176 A1) in view of Nicholas (US 2016/0315860 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Meifang discloses a network node for a vehicle, wherein the network node is a first network node configured to communicate with a second network node and to identify a data transfer rate symmetry (abstract; paragraph [0007]; [0070]; [0066]; [0094]; and so on, illustrating communicating between two nodes for a vehicle), comprising a a first communication unit configured to carry out the following steps: S1: transmitting a first message N1 and storing a first timestamp t1 indicating the transmission time of the first message N1 (fig. 9; paragraph [0111]-[0113]; [0148]; [0154]; [0121], explaining transmitting a data message including first timestamp and storing the first timestamp); S2: transmitting a second message N2 after transmitting the first message N1 and storing a second timestamp t2 indicating the transmission time of the second message N2 (fig. 9; paragraph [0111]; [0113]; [0150]; [0156]; [0121]; and etc., illustrating transmitting second data message including a second timestamp and the timestamp is stored); S3: receiving a third message N3 and storing a seventh timestamp t7 indicating the transmission time of the third message N3 (fig. 9; paragraph [0111]-[0112]; [0149]-[0150]; [0121]; and so on, describing receiving data message including third timestamp and storing the timestamp); S4: receiving a fourth message N4, which was transmitted after the third message N3, and storing an eighth timestamp t8 indicating the transmission time of the fourth message N4 (fig. 9; paragraph [0111]; [0114]-[0115]; [0152]; [0158]; [0121]; and etc., illustrating receiving data message including fourth timestamp and storing the timestamp); and wherein the network node furthermore comprises a first computing unit configured for S5: identifying a data transfer rate symmetry by means of the first t1, second t2, seventh t7, and eighth t8 timestamps (fig. 9; paragraph [0113]-[0115]; [0150]; [0155]; and so on, explaining determining the rate, such as 10 Hz, on the basis of the timestamps).
Meifang doesn’t disclose wherein the messages N1, N2, N3, and N4 have at least approximately an identical data length or are projected onto an approximately identical data length.
Nicholas teaches wherein the messages N1, N2, N3, and N4 have at least approximately an identical data length or are projected onto an approximately identical data length (e.g. paragraph [0032]-[0033]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein the messages N1, N2, N3, and N4 have at least approximately an identical data length or are projected onto an approximately identical data length as taught by Nicholas into Meifang in order to reduce delay and congestion.
Regarding claim 14, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1. The claim is a mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding method, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
Regarding claim 2, Meifang discloses wherein there is a time period d_a1 between the end of transmitting the first message N1 and the beginning of transmitting the second message N2 (e.g. fig. 9; paragraph [0113], such as 100ms of the difference between TD1 and TD2); there is a time period d_a2 between the end of transmitting the third message N3 and the beginning of transmitting the fourth message N4 (e.g. fig. 9; paragraph [0114], such as 100ms difference between SD1 and SD2); identifying the data rate ratio includes calculating the quotient Q from the difference t2−t1 between the first timestamp t1 and the second timestamp t2 and the difference between the seventh timestamp t7 and the eighth timestamp t8: Vdr=(t2−t1)/(t8−t7) taking account of the time periods d_a1 and d_a2 (fig. 9; paragraph [0113]-[0114]; the message rate ratio is a matter of mathematical calculation fact. Specifically, the ratio can be easily found from (TD1-TD2)/(SD1-SD2), which can be T/T=1 as in fig. 9).
Regarding claim 3, Meifang discloses wherein the first communication unit is furthermore configured to receive messages N5 and N6 containing the reception timestamps t3 and t4 of the third message N3 and the fourth message N4; and wherein at least one of the received messages N3, N4 has at least one reception timestamp t3, t4 of the transmitted messages N1, N2, and the first computing unit is configured to calculate a propagation time of the messages N1, N2, N3 and N4, respectively, and/or to calculate a clock offset of a clock that determines the timestamps t3, t4, t5, t6 from the timestamps of one of the transmitted messages N1, N2 and one of the received messages N3, N4 (paragraph [0070]; [0055]; [0076]; [0115]; .[0148]-[0150]; [0156]-[0158])
Regarding claim 4, Meifang discloses wherein recognizing the data rate ratio before calculating the quotient Q comprises the step of determining a clock deviation from the difference deltaC between the difference t2−t1 between the timestamps t1, t2 and the difference t4−t3 between the reception timestamps of the transmitted messages N1, N2, and the data rate ratio is identified taking account of the clock deviation (fig. 9; paragraph [0113]-[0114]; [0070]; [0055]; [0076]; [0115]; .[0148]-[0150]; [0156]-[0158]; and so on).
Regarding claim 5, Meifang discloses wherein the computing unit is configured to determine the clock deviation as a statistical value d_s from additional timestamps of further transmitted messages and the corresponding reception timestamps of the further transmitted messages (fig. 9; paragraph [0113]-[0114]; [0070]; [0055]; [0076]; [0115]; .[0148]-[0150]; [0156]-[0158]; and so on).
Regarding claim 12, Meifang discloses a network arrangement for a vehicle, comprising a first network node configured to communicate with a second network node and to identify a data transfer rate symmetry (abstract; paragraph [0007]; [0070]; [0066]; [0094]; and so on), comprising a a first communication unit configured to carry out the following steps: S1: transmitting a first message N1 and storing a first timestamp t1 indicating the transmission time of the first message N1 (fig. 9; paragraph [0111]-[0113]; [0148]; [0154]; [0121]); S2: transmitting a second message N2 after transmitting the first message N1 and storing a second timestamp t2 indicating the transmission time of the second message N2 (fig. 9; paragraph [0111]; [0113]; [0150]; [0156]; [0121]; and etc.); S3: receiving a third message N3 and storing a seventh timestamp t7 indicating the transmission time of the third message N3 (fig. 9; paragraph [0111]-[0112]; [0149]-[0150]; [0121]; and so on); S4: receiving a fourth message N4, which was transmitted after the third message N3, and storing an eighth timestamp t8 indicating the transmission time of the fourth message N4 (fig. 9; paragraph [0111]; [0114]-[0115]; [0152]; [0158]; [0121]; and etc.); and wherein the network node furthermore comprises a first computing unit configured for S5: identifying a data transfer rate symmetry by means of the first t1, second t2, seventh t7, and eighth t8 timestamps (fig. 9; paragraph [0113]-[0115]; [0150]; [0155]; and so on); and a second network node (100b) comprising a second communication unit (figs. 2 and 9), wherein the second communication unit is configured to communicate with the first communication unit of the first network node, and to receive the message N1 of the first communication unit of the first network node and to generate a reception timestamp t3 (figs. 2 and 9; paragraph [0111]-[0112]; [0149]-[0150]; [0121]; and so on); to receive the message N2 of the first communication unit of the first network node and to generate a reception timestamp t4 (fig. 9; paragraph [0111]; [0114]-[0115]; [0152]; [0158]; [0121]; and etc.); to provide and to transmit the message N3 containing the generated reception timestamp t3 (fig. 9); and to provide and to transmit the message N4 containing the generated reception timestamp t4 (fig. 9).
Meifang doesn’t disclose wherein the messages N1, N2, N3, and N4 have at least approximately an identical data length or are projected onto an approximately identical data length.
Nicholas teaches wherein the messages N1, N2, N3, and N4 have at least approximately an identical data length or are projected onto an approximately identical data length (e.g. paragraph [0032]-[0033]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein the messages N1, N2, N3, and N4 have at least approximately an identical data length or are projected onto an approximately identical data length as taught by Nicholas into Meifang in order to reduce delay and congestion.
Regarding claim 15, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 12. The claim is a mere reformulation of claim 12 in order to define the corresponding method, and the rejection to claim 12 is applied hereto.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meifang in view of Nicholas, and further in view of Tsuruoka (US 2016/0212032 A1).
Regarding claim 6-7, as applied above, Meifang discloses wherein identifying the data rate includes determining that the data transfer rate, and the data transfer rates in the transmission direction and reception direction are equal (fig. 9; paragraph [0113]-[0115]; [0150]; [0155]; and so on). However, Meifang doesn’t disclose inequality includes determining that the data transfer rate in the transmission direction is greater than that in the reception direction if the following holds true: (t2−t1)<((t8−d_S)−(t7−d_S)); the data transfer rate in the transmission direction is less than that in the reception direction if the following holds true: (t2−d_S−t1)>((t8−d_S)−(t7+d_S)); and otherwise the data transfer rates in the transmission direction and reception direction are equal, wherein the first communication unit is configured to repeatedly carry out steps S1 to S4, and the computing unit is configured to calculate the timestamps t1, t2, t7, and t8 used for the identification of a data rate inequality in each case a value averaged over the repetitions from the respective individual timestamps t1, t2, t7 and t8, respectively.
Tsuruoka teaches inequality includes determining that the data transfer rate in the transmission direction is greater than that in the reception direction if the following holds true: (t2−t1)<((t8−d_S)−(t7−d_S)) (figs. 1, 5, 12; paragraph [0123]-[0125]; [0036]-[0042]; [0105]-[0107]; [0141]-[0151]; and so on); the data transfer rate in the transmission direction is less than that in the reception direction if the following holds true: (t2−d_S−t1)>((t8−d_S)−(t7+d_S)); and otherwise the data transfer rates in the transmission direction and reception direction are equal, wherein the first communication unit is configured to repeatedly carry out steps S1 to S4, and the computing unit is configured to calculate the timestamps t1, t2, t7, and t8 used for the identification of a data rate inequality in each case a value averaged over the repetitions from the respective individual timestamps t1, t2, t7 and t8, respectively ((figs. 1, 5, 12; paragraph [0123]-[0125]; [0036]-[0042]; [0105]-[0107]; [0141]-[0151]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have ben obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use inequality includes determining that the data transfer rate in the transmission direction is greater than that in the reception direction if the following holds true: (t2−t1)<((t8−d_S)−(t7−d_S)); the data transfer rate in the transmission direction is less than that in the reception direction if the following holds true: (t2−d_S−t1)>((t8−d_S)−(t7+d_S)); and otherwise the data transfer rates in the transmission direction and reception direction are equal, wherein the first communication unit is configured to repeatedly carry out steps S1 to S4, and the computing unit is configured to calculate the timestamps t1, t2, t7, and t8 used for the identification of a data rate inequality in each case a value averaged over the repetitions from the respective individual timestamps t1, t2, t7 and t8, respectively as taught by Tsuruoka into Meifang in order to reduce error and to improve synchronization.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meifang in view of Nicholas, and further in view of Patil (US 2024/0276412 A1, provisional is considered, where the non-provisional or publication is the same as the provisional).
Regarding claim 8-10, as applied above, Meifang discloses wherein a network node. However, Meifang doesn’t disclose the network node is an electronic control unit (ECU), wherein the transfer protocol is an Ethernet protocol, and wherein the messages N1 and N2 are Ethernet-PDelay_Request messages, and the messages N3 and N4 are Ethernet-PDelay_Response messages.
Patil teaches the network node is an electronic control unit (ECU) (abstract; paragraph [0004]; and so on), wherein the transfer protocol is an Ethernet protocol (paragraph [0011]-0015]; [0019]; [0021]-[0022]), and wherein the messages N1 and N2 are Ethernet-PDelay_Request messages, and the messages N3 and N4 are Ethernet-PDelay_Response messages (paragraph [0011]; [0021]-[0022]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the network node is an electronic control unit (ECU), wherein the transfer protocol is an Ethernet protocol, and wherein the messages N1 and N2 are Ethernet-PDelay_Request messages, and the messages N3 and N4 are Ethernet-PDelay_Response messages as taught by Patil into Meifang in order to reduce delay and overhead.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meifang in view of Nicholas and Patil, and further in view of Swoboda et al. (US 2018/0123688 A1).
Regarding claim 11, as applied above, Meifang disclose a computing unit. However, Meifang doesn’t disclose wherein the computing unit is furthermore configured to check, on the basis of the calculated data transfer rate, whether transfer of current in the transmission direction is operated with sufficiently high frequency to avoid interference, and to adapt the frequency accordingly; and/or to regulate a current supply of the network node.
Swoboda teaches wherein the computing unit is furthermore configured to check, on the basis of the calculated data transfer rate, whether transfer of current in the transmission direction is operated with sufficiently high frequency to avoid interference, and to adapt the frequency accordingly (paragraph [0018]-[0020]; and etc.); and/or to regulate a current supply of the network node (paragraph [0058]; [0033]; [0041]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use wherein the computing unit is furthermore configured to check, on the basis of the calculated data transfer rate, whether transfer of current in the transmission direction is operated with sufficiently high frequency to avoid interference, and to adapt the frequency accordingly; and/or to regulate a current supply of the network node as taught by Swoboda into Meifang in order to improve power consumption and to reduce cost.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIBROM T HAILU whose telephone number is (571)270-1209. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM to 5:30 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, HUY D VU can be reached at (571)272-3155. 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.
/KIBROM T HAILU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461