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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the application filed on 11/03/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-2, 10-11, 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2021/0294767 A1) hereinafter Zhang in view of NPL (“Welcome to Embedded Wizard”, 11/16/2022) hereinafter NPL1 and further in view of Smith et al. (US 2023/0110131 A1) hereinafter Smith.
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses
A method comprising:
receiving a graphical output of a microcontroller unit (MCU) at an interface controller (Zhang [0045] discloses the upper computer/Raspberry Pi MCU to send first data packet to the lower computer through a serial interface control block),
generating, using the interface controller, a packetized data stream based on the received graphical output, (Zhang [0056]-[0057] discloses the lower computer may add control information to the control field of the second data packet. Where each time a data packet is received, the lower computer may add control information thus, wrapping a plurality of data packets.); and
Zhang lacks explicitly
the graphical output being generated based on graphics program code representing one or more graphical elements, wherein the graphical output comprises a real graphical output of the MCU generated based on machine code associated with the graphics program code;
the packetized data stream being generated by wrapping the received graphical output in a plurality of data packets such that the real graphical output is encapsulated in the plurality of data packets that are configured based on data reception parameters of a host machine
transmitting, via a feedback path from the interface controller to the host machine, the packetized data stream to the host machine used to generate the graphics program code.
NPL1 teaches
the graphical output being generated based on graphics program code representing one or more graphical elements (NPL1 [pg. 3, Step 1] illustrates in Step 1 the Application Logic in Chora syntax which generates the Design appearance of the target microcontroller which represents different graphical elements), wherein the graphical output comprises a real graphical output of the MCU generated based on machine code associated with the graphics program code (NPL1 [pg. 5, Step 4-5] Illustrate the output of the MCU in the bottom right image which is based on .bin executable illustrated in Step 4 which is associated with the graphics program code developed using the embedded wizard);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of NPL1 to “the graphical output being generated based on graphics program code representing one or more graphical elements, wherein the graphical output comprises a real graphical output of the MCU generated based on machine code associated with the graphics program code” in order to easily adopt the user experience of smartphones with astonishingly fast animations, gorgeous graphics and smart effects. By using this technology, you will increase the productivity and improve the structure of your project. Embedded Wizard enables you to develop and customize GUI applications for various product platforms, operating system and chip architectures. The technology supports a wide range of target systems including resource constrained microcontrollers (MCUs), microprocessors (MPUs), desktop workstation or even the HTML web browser as target (NPL1 [pg. 1, paragraphs 1-2]).
Smith teaches
the packetized data stream being generated by wrapping the received graphical output in a plurality of data packets such that the real [graphical] output is encapsulated in the plurality of data packets that are configured based on data reception parameters of a host machine (Smith [0581]-[0582] teaches fragmenting payload based on different parameters of communication channels supported by the devices such as transmission rates, priority, etc. Further, the fragments are concatenated with headers that include sequence numbers to form sub-blocks which are packaged into protocol frames for transmission. Where instant specification [0026] recites the reception parameters may be a format or standard associated with a data port such as ethernet or USB supported by the host machine.)
transmitting, via a feedback path from the interface controller to the host machine, the packetized data stream to the host machine used to generate the graphics program code (Smith [2178] teaches a method for fragmenting and storing data in a transmission loop between devices. The method for fragmenting and storing data in a transmission loop between devices includes fragmenting data to be stored into data fragments, encapsulating the data fragments into memory packets, sending the memory packets to another device, receiving the memory packets from the other device, and looping the memory packets back to the other device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Smith to “the packetized data stream being generated by wrapping the received graphical output in a plurality of data packets such that the real [graphical] output is encapsulated in the plurality of data packets that are configured based on data reception parameters of a host machine and transmitting, via a feedback path from the interface controller to the host machine, the packetized data stream to the host machine used to generate the graphics program code” in order to efficiently obtain packetized data from different hardware and continuously update data based on changing needs and desires.
Regarding claim 2, Zhang in view of NPL1 and further in view Smith combination teach
The method of claim 1, wherein the generating of the packetized data stream further comprises:
Zhang lacks explicitly
partitioning the graphical output into a plurality of data payloads; and
encapsulating each of the plurality of data payloads in a data packet.
Smith further teaches
partitioning the graphical output into a plurality of data payloads (Smith [0554] teaches the payload fragmented into multiple payloads); and
encapsulating each of the plurality of data payloads in a data packet (Smith [0581]-[0582] teaches fragmenting payload based on different parameters of communication channels supported by the devices such as transmission rates, priority, etc. Further, the fragments are concatenated with headers that include sequence numbers to form sub-blocks which are packaged into protocol frames for transmission.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination to incorporate the teachings of Smith to “partitioning the graphical output into a plurality of data payloads; and encapsulating each of the plurality of data payloads in a data packet.” in order to efficiently reduce the size of data and enable different formats of being used.
Regarding claim 10, it’s directed to a system having similar limitations cited in claim 1 except for the following. Thus claim 10 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 1 above and the following
host machine comprising processing elements (NPL1 [pg. 1, First image] illustrates host machine on the left).
a test machine comprising a microcontroller unit (MCU) and processing elements (NPL1 [pg. 1, First two paragraphs and First image] illustrates test machine on the right which may be a target system that includes microcontrollers).
Regarding claim 11, it’s directed to a system having similar limitations cited in claim 2. Thus claim 11 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 16, it’s directed to a device having similar limitations cited in claim 1. Thus claim 16 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 17, it’s directed to a device having similar limitations cited in claim 2. Thus claim 17 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 2 above.
Claims 3, 12, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2021/0294767 A1) hereinafter Zhang in view of NPL (“Welcome to Embedded Wizard”, 11/16/2022) hereinafter NPL1 and further in view of Smith et al. (US 2023/0110131 A1) hereinafter Smith and further in view of Rosenberg et al. (US 2024/0086024 A1) hereinafter Rosenberg.
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches The method of claim 2,
the combination lacks explicitly
wherein a format of each data packet is determined based on one or more reception parameters of a host machine.
Rosenberg teaches
wherein a format of each data packet is determined based on one or more reception parameters of a host machine (Rosenberg [claim 2] teaches data structure formatted based on an attribute).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination to incorporate the teachings of Rosenberg to “wherein a format of each data packet is determined based on one or more reception parameters of a host machine” in order to efficiently and accurately format data according to the system the data is being deployed to which prevents system halts and/or attacks and/or wasted computing resources.
Regarding claim 12, it’s directed to a system having similar limitations cited in claim 3. Thus claim 12 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 18, it’s directed to a device having similar limitations cited in claim 3. Thus claim 18 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 3 above.
Claims 4, 13, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2021/0294767 A1) hereinafter Zhang in view of NPL (“Welcome to Embedded Wizard”, 11/16/2022) hereinafter NPL1 and further in view of Smith et al. (US 2023/0110131 A1) hereinafter Smith and further in view of Morris et al. (US 2019/0042213 A1) hereinafter Morris.
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches The method of claim 1 further comprising:
the combination lacks explicitly
generating a user interface based on at least a portion of the graphics program code, associated machine code, and the packetized data stream.
Morris teaches
generating a user interface based on at least a portion of the graphics program code, associated machine code, and the packetized data stream (Morris [0069] teaches presenting information on a display based on video formats/packetized data stream, machine code, byte code, and/or instructions define by various script languages).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination to incorporate the teachings of Morris to “generating a user interface based on at least a portion of the graphics program code, associated machine code, and the packetized data stream” in order to efficiently and accurately display graphics from different hardware devices.
Regarding claim 13, it’s directed to a system having similar limitations cited in claim 4. Thus claim 13 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 19, it’s directed to a device having similar limitations cited in claim 4. Thus claim 19 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 4 above.
Claims 5, 14, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2021/0294767 A1) hereinafter Zhang in view of NPL (“Welcome to Embedded Wizard”, 11/16/2022) hereinafter NPL1 and further in view of Smith et al. (US 2023/0110131 A1) hereinafter Smith and further in view of Morris et al. (US 2019/0042213 A1) hereinafter Morris and further in view of Nelson et al. (US 2019/0340103 A1) hereinafter Nelson.
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches The method of claim 4,
the combination lacks explicitly
wherein the user interface is configured to provide a unified view of the graphics program code, the machine code, the packetized data stream, MCU register values, and one or more IDE features.
Nelson teaches
wherein the user interface is configured to provide a unified view of the graphics program code, the machine code, the packetized data stream, MCU register values, and one or more IDE features (Nelson [0035] teaches user interface 210 displays debugger’s representations of the debuggee program to user graphically which includes source code, [0133] teaches displaying trace file containing trace data including machine-level trace data at the level of native code, [0145] teaches debugger being run and traced to include what value was read from which register, [0270] teaches trace data to include data streams 438, and [0112]-[0113] teaches debugger and live debuggee program or process which is an IDE feature. Nelson [0394] teaches the developer opening the developer and loading the code and trace file. Thus, providing a unified view of the above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination to incorporate the teachings of Nelson to “wherein the user interface is configured to provide a unified view of the graphics program code, the machine code, the packetized data stream, MCU register values, and one or more IDE features.” in order to efficiently reduce the time spent debugging and ease developer view of all the data needed during debugging.
Regarding claim 14, it’s directed to a system having similar limitations cited in claim 5. Thus claim 14 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 5 above.
Regarding claim 20, it’s directed to a device having similar limitations cited in claim 5. Thus claim 20 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 5 above.
Claims 6-8, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2021/0294767 A1) hereinafter Zhang in view of NPL (“Welcome to Embedded Wizard”, 11/16/2022) hereinafter NPL1 and further in view of Smith et al. (US 2023/0110131 A1) hereinafter Smith and further in view of Morris et al. (US 2019/0042213 A1) hereinafter Morris and further in view of Nelson et al. (US 2019/0340103 A1) hereinafter Nelson and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2013/0179029 A1) hereinafter Wang.
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches The method of claim 5 further comprising:
the combination lacks explicitly
generating a graphical representation of a target display device based on the packetized data stream.
Wang teaches
generating a graphical representation of a target display device based on the packetized data stream (Wang [0110] teaches once data packet 600 is received, device 120 may display frame of video at sink device 160 with content of the frame).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination to incorporate the teachings of Wang to “generating a graphical representation of a target display device based on the packetized data stream” in order to efficiently increase content data to be displayed from external sources.
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches The method of claim 6,
the combination lacks explicitly
wherein the target display device is a display device of an automobile.
Wang further teaches
wherein the target display device is a display device of an automobile (Wang Fig. 16 illustrates Dashboard Sink Device 1610 of an Automobile for displaying video payload in Sink Dashboard Application 1650).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination to incorporate the teachings of Wang to “wherein the target display device is a display device of an automobile” in order to efficiently increase content data to be displayed from external sources for automobiles which further increases user satisfaction.
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches The method of claim 5 further comprising:
the combination lacks explicitly
receiving a modification via the user interface.
Wang further teaches
receiving a modification via the user interface (Wang [0053] teaches the user interactive with applications executed on and data store at dashboard sink device 160 including interacting with contact, navigation, e-mail, and other applications. Thus, any input from the user on the dashboard sink device may cause a modification when changing or clicking on the different applications via the user interface).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination to incorporate the teachings of Wang to “receiving a modification via the user interface” in order to increase user satisfaction and increase user control and modification within the user interface.
Regarding claim 15, it’s directed to a system having similar limitations cited in claim 6. Thus claim 15 is also rejected under the same rationale as cited in the rejection of claim 6 above.
Claims 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable overZhang et al. (US 2021/0294767 A1) hereinafter Zhang in view of NPL (“Welcome to Embedded Wizard”, 11/16/2022) hereinafter NPL1 and further in view of Smith et al. (US 2023/0110131 A1) hereinafter Smith and further in view of Daoura et al. (US 11,792,605 B2) hereinafter Daoura.
Regarding claim 9, the combination teaches The method of claim 1 further comprising:
the combination lacks explicitly
transmitting the packetized data stream to a compiler included in the host machine.
Daoura teaches
transmitting the packetized data stream to a compiler included in the host machine (Daoura [col. 28, lines 9-14] teaches device having a packet compiler for received encoded messages).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination to incorporate the teachings of Daoura to “transmitting the packetized data stream to a compiler included in the host machine” in order to optimize code and run it more efficiently which leads to faster execution time and reduced resource usage
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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 and/or relies on additional references to cure the prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Noor Alkhateeb whose telephone number is (313)446-4909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:00AM ET to 5:00PM ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chat do, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-3721. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center or Private PAIR to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center or the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/NOOR ALKHATEEB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2193
Prosecution Insights