DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to claim amendment filed on March 16, 2026.
Claims 2-3, 5-8, 10, 12-13, and 15 are amended.
Claims 1, 4 and 14 are cancelled.
Claim 16 is newly added.
Claims 1-15, 21-24, 35, and 41-55 are pending.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks and amendments (see remarks Pg. 10-11) with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 2-3, 5-13 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been fully considered and are
persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made as
necessitated by the claim amendments.
Claim Interpretation
MPEP §2111.04(II) recites:
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. For example, assume a method claim requires step A if a first condition happens and step B if a second condition happens. If the claimed invention may be practiced without either the first or second condition happening, then neither step A or B is required by the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim. If the claimed invention requires the first condition to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires step A. If the claimed invention requires both the first and second conditions to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires both steps A and B.
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a system (or apparatus or product) claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur. The system claim interpretation differs from a method claim interpretation because the claimed structure must be present in the system regardless of whether the condition is met and the function is actually performed.
See Ex parte Schulhauser, Appeal 2013-007847 (PTAB April 28, 2016) for an analysis of contingent claim limitations in the context of both method claims and system claims. In Schulhauser, both method claims and system claims recited the same contingent step. When analyzing the claimed method as a whole, the PTAB determined that giving the claim its broadest reasonable interpretation, "[i]f the condition for performing a contingent step is not satisfied, the performance recited by the step need not be carried out in order for the claimed method to be performed" (quotation omitted). Schulhauser at 10. When analyzing the claimed system as a whole, the PTAB determined that "[t]he broadest reasonable interpretation of a system claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, still requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur." Schulhauser at 14. Therefore "[t]he Examiner did not need to present evidence of the obviousness of the [ ] method steps of claim 1 that are not required to be performed under a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim (e.g., instances in which the electrocardiac signal data is not within the threshold electrocardiac criteria such that the condition precedent for the determining step and the remaining steps of claim 1 has not been met);" however to render the claimed system obvious, the prior art must teach the structure that performs the function of the contingent step along with the other recited claim limitations. Schulhauser at 9, 14.
Claim 15 is a method claim that includes contingent limitation. In accordance with MPEP § 2111.04(II), conditional limitations within method claims will be treated as not being required to be performed under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI).
Claim 15 recites “when performing wireless communication … slave communication devices;”.
As the limitation includes an “when” condition, this is considered to introduce a conditional limitation. Therefore, the Office considers the BRI of the claim to include a scenario where “not performing wireless communication … slave communication devices;”. This limitation does not require the condition to occur, and the claim is required to do nothing when the condition doesn’t occur. The BRI of the claim includes that the condition does not occur, as result, the contingent limitations of claims 15 are not included in the BRI of those claims.
Claim 15 further recites “when the abnormality-determined position is consistent”.
As the limitation includes an “when” condition, this is considered to introduce a conditional limitation. Therefore, the Office considers the BRI of the claim to include a scenario where “the abnormality-determined position is not consistent … communication abnormality,”. This limitation does not require the condition to occur, and the claim is required to do nothing when the condition doesn’t occur.
Claim 15 further recites “when one of the plurality of slave communication devices is determined to have an abnormality,”.
As the limitation includes an “when” condition, this is considered to introduce a conditional limitation. Therefore, the Office considers the BRI of the claim to include a scenario where “when one of the plurality of slave communication devices is not determined to have an abnormality,”. This limitation does not require the condition to occur, and the claim is required to do nothing when the condition doesn’t occur.
The BRI of the claim includes that the condition does not occur, as result, the contingent limitations of claim 15 are not included in the BRI of those claims.
Claim 16 is a method claim that includes contingent limitation. In accordance with MPEP § 2111.04(II), conditional limitations within method claims will be treated as not being required to be performed under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI).
Claim 16 recites “when performing wireless communication … slave communication devices;”.
As the limitation includes an “when” condition, this is considered to introduce a conditional limitation. Therefore, the Office considers the BRI of the claim to include a scenario where “not performing wireless communication … slave communication devices;”. This limitation does not require the condition to occur, and the claim is required to do nothing when the condition doesn’t occur. The BRI of the claim includes that the condition does not occur, as result, the contingent limitations of claims 15 are not included in the BRI of those claims.
Claim 16 further recites “when the abnormality-determined position is consistent”.
As the limitation includes an “when” condition, this is considered to introduce a conditional limitation. Therefore, the Office considers the BRI of the claim to include a scenario where “the abnormality-determined position is not consistent … communication abnormality,”. This limitation does not require the condition to occur, and the claim is required to do nothing when the condition doesn’t occur.
Claim 16 further recites “when the abnormal position determined”.
As the limitation includes an “when” condition, this is considered to introduce a conditional limitation. Therefore, the Office considers the BRI of the claim to include a scenario where “when the abnormal position is not determined”. This limitation does not require the condition to occur, and the claim is required to do nothing when the condition doesn’t occur.
The BRI of the claim includes that the condition does not occur, as result, the contingent limitations of claim 16 are not included in the BRI of those claims.
Any prior art rejection below might address the identified limitation in prior art rejections; however, those limitations cannot be relied upon to overcome prior art rejections because they are not required in the BRI of the claims.
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.
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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 3, 5-12 and 15-16, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagata, US 9722899 B2, (hereinafter Nagata) in view of OTSUKI et al., US 20210368364 A1, (hereinafter OTSUKI) and in further view of Yanagida, US 10863418 B2, (hereinafter
Yanagida) and of Yuan et al., US 20170339005 A1, (hereinafter Yuan).
Regarding claim 6 and 15, Nagata teaches a communication system, comprising:
at least two master communication device;
a plurality of slave communication devices,
wherein each of the at least two master communication device is capable of wirelessly communicating with each of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Fig. 2, e.g., element, wireless communication base stations 68, wireless communication terminals 70, Col. 3, lines 15-20, e.g., wireless links are formed between wireless communication base stations 68 and respective wireless communication terminals 70 as illustrated in FIG. 2, and wireless communication is performed between the wireless communication base stations 68 and the respective wireless communication terminals 70. Note that, implicitly implied as Master and Slave by “wireless communication base stations 68 and the respective wireless communication terminals 70”),
each of the at least two master communication device includes at least one first processor programmed to obtain information indicative of communication characteristics related to wireless communication while performing the wireless communication with each of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Fig. 2, e.g., element, The wireless communication monitoring server 30, the wireless communication base stations 68, wireless communication terminals 70; see Col. 4, lines 4-26, e.g., The wireless communication monitoring server 30 includes a CPU 32, memory 34, a nonvolatile storage section 36, a display section 38, an input section 40, and a wireless interface (I/F) section 42.The wireless communication monitoring server 30 is included in a computer system 64, and is connected to a wired network 66 through the communication I/F section 42. The computer system 64 includes the plural wireless communication base stations 68 connected to the wired network 66, and the plural wireless communication terminals 70 that perform wireless communication with one of the wireless communication base stations 68. The wireless communication monitoring server 30 receives the parameters that evaluate the performance of the individual wireless links (the received signal strength indicator (RSSI) and the packet error rate (PER)) from the individual wireless communication base stations 68 over the wired network 66; Col. 9, lines 55-63, e.g.,
(48) Explanation has been given in which the wireless communication monitoring server 30 is caused to function as the interruption determination device according to technology disclosed herein. However, technology disclosed herein is not limited thereto, and the wireless communication base stations 68 or the wireless communication terminals 70 may be caused to function as the interruption determination device according to technology disclosed herein.), and
at least one second processor programmed for each of the at least two master communication devices, to: record a combination of the at least one master communication device and at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices having a communication abnormality when performing wireless communication between the at least one master communication device communicates and each of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Fig. 1, e.g., element characteristic curve storage section 14; Col. 3, lines 27-40, e.g., Plural characteristic curves of packet error rate against radio wave reception strength are pre-computed based on the assumption that interference power is maintained at mutually different values, and stored in the characteristic curve storage section 14 as characteristic curves of packet error rate against radio wave reception strength for wireless links); and
instruct the master communication device to perform wireless communication with at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Col. 3, lines 16-20, e.g., wireless links are formed between wireless communication base stations 68 and respective wireless communication terminals 70 as illustrated in FIG. 2, and wireless communication is performed between the wireless communication base stations 68 and the respective wireless communication terminals 70. Col. 4, lines 27-33, e.g., An interruption cause determination program 50 that causes the wireless communication monitoring server 30 to function as the interruption cause determination device 10 is stored in the storage section 36 that serves as a recording medium),
determine, during performing the wireless communication, whether the wireless communication between the master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices has been performed normally or abnormally based on the obtained communication characteristics (see Col. 5, lines 1-25, e.g., At step 100 of the wireless communication interruption cause determination processing, the acquisition section 12 acquires the received signal strength indicator (RSSI) and the packet error rate (PER) of a wireless link formed between a freely selected wireless communication base station 68 and a freely selected wireless communication terminal 70. Next, at step 102, the acquisition section 12 stores the acquired radio wave reception strength and the packet error rate acquired at step 100 in the storage section 36, in association with the link ID allocated to the corresponding wireless link and the current time. Next, at step 104, the characteristic estimation section 16 determines whether or not the packet error rate acquired by the acquisition section 12 at step 100 is the threshold value or greater. When negative determination is made at step 104, processing returns to step 100 since determination can be made that no interruption is occurring in the corresponding wireless link, and the acquisition section 12 acquires the radio wave reception strength and the packet error rate of another of the formed wireless links. In this manner, when interruption is not occurring in any of the wireless links, the acquisition section 12 repeats the acquisition of the radio wave reception strength and the packet error rate of the wireless link at intervals of a fixed period of time), and
determine, as an abnormality-determined (see Col. 3-4, lines 61-68; 1-13, e.g., The cause determination section 18 then determines the cause of the interruption based on a positional relationship of a point corresponding to a combination of the radio wave reception strength at the second point in time and the packet error rate for the wireless link in which the packet error rate has reached the threshold value or greater with respect to the characteristic curve selected by the characteristic estimation section 16. The output section 20 then outputs the cause of the interruption determined by the cause determination section 18.)
finalize the abnormality-determined (see Col. 3-4, lines 61-68; 1-13, e.g., The output section 20 then outputs the cause of the interruption determined by the cause determination section 18. Col. 4, lines 29-33, e.g., An interruption cause determination program 50 that causes the wireless communication monitoring server 30 to function as the interruption cause determination device 10 is stored in the storage section 36 that serves as a recording medium. Col. 10, lines 64-67, e.g., Explanation has been given in of a mode in which the interruption cause determination program 50 is pre-stored (installed) in the storage section 36. However, the interruption cause determination program of technology disclosed herein may be provided in a mode recorded on a non-transitory recording medium such as a CD-ROM or a DVD-ROM.),
however, it does not explicitly teach, a position where an abnormality is occurring based on a normal/abnormal determination result of the wireless communication between the master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices, position as an abnormal position where the abnormality is occurring when the abnormality-determined position is consistent with the recorded combination of the master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices having a communication abnormality, and
where the abnormality is occurring being determined from among
(a) the master communication device
(b) the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices, and
(c) communication propagation paths between the master communication device and the plurality of slave communication devices, and
wherein when one of the plurality of slave communication devices is determined to have an abnormality in wireless communication with one of the at least two master communication devices and the one of the plurality of slave communication devices is determined to have an abnormality in wireless communication with another one of the at least two master communication devices
OTSUKI teaches a position where an abnormality is occurring based on a normal/abnormal determination result of the wireless communication between the master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices, position as an abnormal position where the abnormality is occurring when the abnormality-determined position is consistent with the recorded combination of the master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices having a communication abnormality (see ¶ [0014], e.g., comparing the first comparison result and the second comparison result, and determining a location where an abnormality occurred in accordance with a result of the comparison of the first comparison result and the second comparison result, the location being determined from among the wireless base station, the first wireless terminal, the second wireless terminal, and a wireless propagation environment between the wireless base station and the first wireless terminal and between the wireless base station and the second wireless terminal. ¶ [0040], e.g., In FIG. 4, in the case where Sap1−Ssta1>α, the wireless performance information (throughput) of the STA 21 is lower than that of the AP 10, and the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines that a failure occurred at the STA 21. In the case where Ssta1−Sap1>α, the wireless performance information (throughput) of the AP 10 is lower than that of the STA 21, and the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines that a failure occurred at the AP 10. In the case where |Sap1−Ssta1|≤α, the wireless performance information (throughput) of the AP 10 and the wireless performance information of the STA 21 are comparable with each other, and the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines that both are normal. This similarly applies to the comparison of the wireless performance information of the STA 22 and the AP 10, and the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines the location of a failure in accordance with nine combinations (1) to (9)), and
where an abnormality is occurring from among (b) the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices (see ¶ [0042] (2) Here, AP 10 normal+STA 21 normal” and “AP 10 normal+STA 22 failure”, and therefore the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines that a failure occurred at the receiver of the STA 22.), and
(c) communication propagation paths between the master communication devices and the plurality of slave communication devices (see ¶ [0045] (5) Here, “AP 10 normal+STA 21 normal” and “AP 10 normal+STA 22 normal”, and the AP 10s and the STAs 21 and 22 are all normal, and therefore if an abnormality has occurred in this case, the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines that the abnormality occurred in the wireless propagation environment between the AP 10 and the STA 21 or 22).
Yanagida teaches, where an abnormality is occurring being determined from among (a) the master communication devices (see Col. 13, lines 13-37, e.g., the managing unit 2 periodically transmits an inquiry about a current state to the master units. The master units transmit current status information of the wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30 to the managing unit 2 in response to the inquiry. When a response from the master unit has not been received within a predetermined time after the inquiry has been transmitted, the managing unit 2 determines that an abnormality has occurred in the wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30.).
Yuan teaches, wherein when one of the plurality of slave communication devices is determined to have an abnormality in wireless communication with one of the at least two master communication devices and the one of the plurality of slave communication devices is determined to have an abnormality in wireless communication with another one of the at least two master communication devices see ¶ [0011], e.g., the first distributed cluster includes a first Master node and a first Slave node … a first reference node and a first secondary node that serves as a backup of the first Master node, and the method includes receiving, by the first Master node, a heartbeat message sent by the first secondary node, where the heartbeat message includes third indication information that is used to indicate that the first secondary node is disconnected from the first Slave node, determining, by the first Master node according to the third indication information, that the first secondary node is disconnected from the first Slave node, detecting, by the first Master node, whether a heartbeat message sent by the first Slave node to the first Master node is interrupted, determining, by the first Master node, that the first Master node is also disconnected from the first Slave node when it is detected that the heartbeat message sent by the first Slave node to the first Master node is interrupted, and determining, by the first Master node, that the first Slave node that is disconnected from both the first Master node and the first secondary node is faulty.).
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 determination of abnormal wireless communication between the at least two master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices of Nagata to incorporate the teachings of OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan to include position where an abnormality is occurring based on a normal/abnormal determination result of the wireless communication between the master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices. Doing so would facilitate in achieving determining a location where an abnormality occurred and also from among the various communication devices as suggested by OTSUKI (see ¶ [0015], e.g., determining a location where an abnormality occurred in accordance with a result of the comparison of the first comparison result and the second comparison result, the location being determined from among the wireless base station, the first wireless terminal, the second wireless terminal, and a wireless propagation environment between the wireless base station and the first wireless terminal and between the wireless base station and the second wireless terminal).
Regarding claim 3, Nagata as combined with OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan teaches the limitations of Claim 6.
Nagata as improved by OTSUKI Yanagida and Yuan does not teach but Yanagida teaches, wherein at least one of (a) one of the at least two devices and (b) the plurality of slave communication devices is mounted in a vehicle (see Fig. 8, e.g., element 101; Col. 16, lines 1-3, e.g., An example in which the communication system 100 according to this embodiment is mounted in a vehicle 101 will be described below with reference to FIG. 8; Col. 4-5, lines 64-67; 1-3, e.g., The door ECU 11 and the units 12, 13, 14, and 15 perform wireless communication with each other. The door ECU 11 transmits a command to the units 12, 13, 14, and 15 or acquires states of the units 12, 13, 14, and 15 by wireless communication. In the first wireless subsystem 10, a master unit is the door ECU 11 and the other units 12, 13, 14, and 15 are slave units.).
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 master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices of Nagata and OTSUKI to incorporate the teachings of Yanagida to include at least one of the at least one master communication device and the plurality of slave communication devices to be mounted in a vehicle. Doing so would facilitate in achieving can improved stability of wireless communication in a vehicle as suggested by Yanagida (see, Col. 17, lines 41-48, e.g., The communication system 100 according to this embodiment includes a plurality of communication devices that perform wireless communication in the vehicle 101 on the basis of a common communication standard, the monitoring unit 2a, and the communication status improving unit 2b. Accordingly, the communication system 100 according to this embodiment can improve stability of wireless communication in a vehicle.).
Regarding claim 5, Nagata as combined with OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan teaches the limitations of Claim 4.
Nagata as improved by OTSUKI does not teach but Yanagida teaches, wherein
when (a) wireless communication between (i) one of the at least two master communication devices and (ii) the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices is determined as abnormal, and (b) wireless communication between (i) another of the at least two master communication devices and (ii) the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices is determined as normal, the at least one second processor determines that the abnormal position is in the one of the at least two master communication devices (see Col. 13, lines 43-65, e.g., In Step S320, the managing unit 2 transmits an abnormality signal. The abnormality signal is a signal indicating an abnormality in the wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30. The abnormality signal includes, for example, information indicating in which subsystem among the wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30 an abnormality has occurred and a type of the occurring abnormality. The managing unit 2 transmits the abnormality signal by wired communication. In the safe mode, the managing unit 2 continues to monitor the wireless communication of the wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30 while substituting the abnormal master unit. When an abnormality has occurred in a master unit, the slave units belonging to the same wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30 as the master unit perform appropriate operations such as system standby or communication with the managing unit 2.).
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 abnormal finalization unit of Nagata and OTSUKI to incorporate the teachings of Yanagida to include the abnormal finalization unit to determine that the abnormal position is in the one of the at least two master communication devices. Doing so would facilitate in achieving substituting the abnormal master unit as suggested by Yanagida (see Col. 13, lines 56-65, In Step S330, the managing unit 2 performs a safe mode. A safe mode is a wireless communication mode in which an abnormal master unit is substituted by the managing unit 2. In the safe mode, the managing unit 2 continues to monitor the wireless communication of the wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30 while substituting the abnormal master unit. When an abnormality has occurred in a master unit, the slave units belonging to the same wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30 as the master unit perform appropriate operations such as system standby or communication with the managing unit 2.).
Regarding claim 7, Nagata as combined with OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan teaches the limitations of Claim 6.
Nagata does not teach but OTSUKI teaches, wherein
the at least one second processor determines that the abnormal position is in the communication propagation paths between the at least two master communication devices and the plurality of slave communication devices when (see ¶ [0045] (5) Here, AP 10 normal+STA 21 normal” and “AP 10 normal+STA 22 normal”, and the AP 10s and the STAs 21 and 22 are all normal, and therefore if an abnormality has occurred in this case, the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines that the abnormality occurred in the wireless propagation environment between the AP 10 and the STA 21 or 22.)
(a) an abnormality is determined to occur in all wireless communications between one of the at least two master communication devices and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices (see ¶ [0042] (2) Here, “AP 10 normal+STA 21 normal” and “AP 10 normal+STA 22 failure”, and therefore the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines that a failure occurred at the receiver of the STA 22.),
however, it does not explicitly teach, (b) an abnormality is determined to occur in all wireless communications between another of the at least two master communication devices and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices.
Yanagida teaches, (b) an abnormality is determined to occur in all wireless communications between another of the at least two master communication devices and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices (Col. 13, lines 31-37, e.g., The third condition is that wireless communication is not performed in the wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30. When a wireless signal of a channel allocated to the wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30 is not detected over a predetermined time, the managing unit 2 determines that an abnormality has occurred in the wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30 to which the channel has been allocated.).
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 identifying abnormality occurring of Nagata to incorporate the teachings of OTSUKI and Yanagida to include identifying abnormality occurring from among communication devices. Doing so would facilitate in achieving determining the location of a failure in accordance with various combinations of communication devices as suggested by OTSUKI (see, ¶ [0040], e.g., This similarly applies to the comparison of the wireless performance information of the STA 22 and the AP 10, and the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines the location of a failure in accordance with nine combinations (1) to (9)).
Regarding claim 8, Nagata as combined with OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan teaches the limitations of Claim 6.
Nagata further teaches, wherein the at least one first processor obtains first communication characteristics information and second communication characteristics information that is different from the first communication characteristics information (see Col. 5, lines 50-65, e.g., Thus, at the next step 108, the characteristic estimation section 16 computes a straight line representing average changes (trends) in the packet error rate and the radio wave reception strength in the time period spanning from the first point in time to the second point in time in order to eliminate errors due to employing instantaneous values of the packet error rate and the radio wave reception strength.),
when an abnormal position cannot be identified from a determination result of whether an abnormality occurs in wireless communications between each of the at least two master communication devices and at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices using the first communication characteristics information, the at least one second processor attempts to identify the abnormal position based on a determination result of whether an abnormality occurs in wireless communications between each of the at least two of master communication devices and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices using the second communication characteristics information (see Col. 5, lines 50-65, e.g., FIG. 4B illustrates an example of the straight line computed at step 108. Reference numerals “72” in FIG. 4A and FIG. 4B indicate examples of the interruption determination threshold value. Reference numeral “74” in FIG. 4A indicates an example of the boundary at which the interruption determination result changes. Reference numeral “76” in FIG. 4B indicates an example of an average change (trend) of data for past radio wave reception strengths; Col. 5-6, lines 66-67; 1-11, e.g., In the next step 110, the characteristic estimation section 16 determines whether or not the gradient of the straight line computed at step 108 is a constant value or greater. Processing transitions to step 114 when the determination of step 110 is affirmative, and processing transitions to step 112 when the determination of step 110 is negative. At step 112, the characteristic estimation section 16 sets a longer interval of time from the first point in time to the second point in time, and processing returns to step 108. The computation durations for the straight lines representing the average changes (trends) in the packet error rate and the radio wave reception strength are thereby extended at step 108, and the straight lines are recomputed.).
Regarding claim 9, Nagata as combined with OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan teaches the limitations of Claim 8.
Nagata further teaches, wherein the first communication characteristics information is a received signal strength indicator indicative of a reception strength of wireless communication, and the second communication characteristics information is a packet error rate or a bit error rate in wireless communication between the master communication device and the slave communication device (see Fig. 1, e.g., element 10, acquisition section 12; Col. 3, lines 27-40, e.g., The acquisition section 12 acquires for each individual wireless link the received signal strength indicator (RSSI) and the packet error rate (PER), which are parameters for evaluating the performance of a wireless link. Each individual wireless link is identified by a link ID allocated there to; Fig. 2, e.g., element the wireless communication monitoring server 30, the wireless communication base stations 68, wireless communication terminals 70; Col. 4, lines 4-26, e.g., The computer system 64 includes the plural wireless communication base stations 68 connected to the wired network 66, and the plural wireless communication terminals 70 that perform wireless communication with one of the wireless communication base stations 68. The wireless communication monitoring server 30 receives the parameters that evaluate the performance of the individual wireless links (the received signal strength indicator (RSSI) and the packet error rate (PER)) from the individual wireless communication base stations 68 over the wired network 66).
Regarding claim 10, Nagata as combined with OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan teaches the limitations of Claim 6.
Nagata further teaches, wherein the at least two devices are capable of performing wireless communication with each of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Col. 3, lines 15-19, e.g., wireless links are formed between wireless communication base stations 68 and respective wireless communication terminals 70 as illustrated in FIG. 2),
the communication system further comprising:
a storage unit storing, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, multiple reference communication characteristics related to wireless communication, the reference communication characteristics being characteristics that were obtained when the at least two devices communicated with each of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Col. 3, lines 33-60, e.g., Plural characteristic curves of packet error rate against radio wave reception strength are pre-computed based on the assumption that interference power is maintained at mutually different values, and stored in the characteristic curve storage section 14 as characteristic curves of packet error rate against radio wave reception strength for wireless links.); and
the at least one second processor determines, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, an abnormality in wireless communication between the at least two devices and each of the plurality of slave communication devices based on strength of correlation between:
(a) an overall trend of the multiple communication characteristics across the multiple frequency channels obtained by the at least one first processor regarding wireless communication between the at least two devices and each of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Col. 5, lines 44-65, e.g., As illustrated in FIG. 4A, the instantaneous values of the packet error rate and the radio wave reception strength read from the storage section 36 at step 106 fluctuate on a small scale in time series thereof, due to effects such as fading. Although the packet error rate is plotted in FIG. 4A, small scale fluctuations due to effects such as fading also arise in the radio wave reception strength. Thus, at the next step 108, the characteristic estimation section 16 computes a straight line representing average changes (trends) in the packet error rate and the radio wave reception strength in the time period spanning from the first point in time to the second point in time in order to eliminate errors due to employing instantaneous values of the packet error rate and the radio wave reception strength. FIG. 4B illustrates an example of the straight line computed at step 108. Reference numerals “72” in FIG. 4A and FIG. 4B indicate examples of the interruption determination threshold value.); and
(b) an overall trend of the multiple reference communication characteristics that are stored in the storage unit for each of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Col. 5, lines 44-65, e.g., Reference numeral “74” in FIG. 4A indicates an example of the boundary at which the interruption determination result changes. Reference numeral “76” in FIG. 4B indicates an example of an average change (trend) of data for past radio wave reception strengths.),
however, it does not explicitly teach, wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels.
Yanagida teaches, wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels (see Col. 3, lines 50-56, e.g., the managing unit 2 performs management and control of allocation of frequency channels or communication timings such that communications of a plurality of wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30 do not interfere or collide with each other. Accordingly, simplification of a setting operation at the time of initial setting or addition of an optional communication device is realized.).
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 wireless communication between the communication devices of Nagata to incorporate the teachings of Yanagida to include wireless communication between the communication devices over the multiple frequency channels. Doing so would facilitate in achieving improved communication status of the wireless communication between the communication devices and interference or collision in wireless communication between the wireless systems can be avoided as suggested by Yanagida (see, Col. 2, lines 2-10, e.g., in the communication managing device, each of the communication devices other than the communication managing device belongs to one of a plurality of wireless subsystems having different communication bands to be used, and the communication status improving unit improves the communication status of the wireless; Col. 8, lines 7-15, e.g., The communication management information includes allocation of frequency channels (communication bands) and communication timings. The frequency channels which are allocated to the wireless systems 10, 20, and 30 are determined such that interference or collision in wireless communication between the wireless systems can be avoided. communication between the communication devices other than the communication managing device by changing allocation of communication bands to the wireless subsystems.).
Regarding claim 11, Nagata as combined with OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan teaches the limitations of Claim 10.
Nagata further teaches, wherein the at least one second processor is configured to update the multiple reference communication characteristics stored, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, in the storage unit (see Col. 5, lines 13-25, e.g., Next, at step 104, the characteristic estimation section 16 determines whether or not the packet error rate acquired by the acquisition section 12 at step 100 is the threshold value or greater. When negative determination is made at step 104, processing returns to step 100 since determination can be made that no interruption is occurring in the corresponding wireless link, and the acquisition section 12 acquires the radio wave reception strength and the packet error rate of another of the formed wireless links. In this manner, when interruption is not occurring in any of the wireless links, the acquisition section 12 repeats the acquisition of the radio wave reception strength and the packet error rate of the wireless link at intervals of a fixed period of time; Col. 3, lines 27-39, e.g., Plural characteristic curves of packet error rate against radio wave reception strength are pre-computed based on the assumption that interference power is maintained at mutually different values, and stored in the characteristic curve storage section 14 as characteristic curves of packet error rate against radio wave reception strength for wireless links.).
Regarding claim 12, Nagata as combined with OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan teaches the limitations of Claim 11.
Nagata further teaches, wherein the at least one second processor updates the multiple reference communication characteristics stored in the storage unit using
(a) reference communication characteristics obtained from a server external to the communication system
(b) the multiple communication characteristics that were obtained by the two master communication devices communicated with each of the plurality of slave communication devices over the multiple frequency channels (see Col. 5, lines 13-25, e.g., Next, at step 104, the characteristic estimation section 16 determines whether or not the packet error rate acquired by the acquisition section 12 at step 100 is the threshold value or greater. When negative determination is made at step 104, processing returns to step 100 since determination can be made that no interruption is occurring in the corresponding wireless link, and the acquisition section 12 acquires the radio wave reception strength and the packet error rate of another of the formed wireless links. In this manner, when interruption is not occurring in any of the wireless links, the acquisition section 12 repeats the acquisition of the radio wave reception strength and the packet error rate of the wireless link at intervals of a fixed period of time; Col. 3, lines 27-39, e.g., Plural characteristic curves of packet error rate against radio wave reception strength are pre-computed based on the assumption that interference power is maintained at mutually different values, and stored in the characteristic curve storage section 14 as characteristic curves of packet error rate against radio wave reception strength for wireless links.),
however, it does not explicitly teach, wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels.
Yanagida teaches, wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels (see Col. 3, lines 50-56, e.g., the managing unit 2 performs management and control of allocation of frequency channels or communication timings such that communications of a plurality of wireless subsystems 10, 20, and 30 do not interfere or collide with each other. Accordingly, simplification of a setting operation at the time of initial setting or addition of an optional communication device is realized.).
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 wireless communication between the communication devices of Nagata to incorporate the teachings of Yanagida to include wireless communication between the communication devices over the multiple frequency channels. Doing so would facilitate in achieving improved communication status of the wireless communication between the communication devices and interference or collision in wireless communication between the wireless systems can be avoided as suggested by Yanagida (see, Col. 2, lines 2-10, e.g., in the communication managing device, each of the communication devices other than the communication managing device belongs to one of a plurality of wireless subsystems having different communication bands to be used, and the communication status improving unit improves the communication status of the wireless; Col. 8, lines 7-15, e.g., The communication management information includes allocation of frequency channels (communication bands) and communication timings. The frequency channels which are allocated to the wireless systems 10, 20, and 30 are determined such that interference or collision in wireless communication between the wireless systems can be avoided. communication between the communication devices other than the communication managing device by changing allocation of communication bands to the wireless subsystems.
Regarding claim 16, Nagata teaches A method for a communication system including:
at least one master communication device; and
a plurality of slave communication devices,
wherein the at least one master communication device is capable of wirelessly communicating with each of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Fig. 2, e.g., element, wireless communication base stations 68, wireless communication terminals 70, Col. 3, lines 15-20, e.g., wireless links are formed between wireless communication base stations 68 and respective wireless communication terminals 70 as illustrated in FIG. 2, and wireless communication is performed between the wireless communication base stations 68 and the respective wireless communication terminals 70. Note that, implicitly implied as Master and Slave by “wireless communication base stations 68 and the respective wireless communication terminals 70”),
the at least one master communication device includes at least one first processor programmed to obtain information indicative of communication characteristics related to wireless communication while performing the wireless communication with each of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Fig. 2, e.g., element, The wireless communication monitoring server 30, the wireless communication base stations 68, wireless communication terminals 70; see Col. 4, lines 4-26, e.g., The wireless communication monitoring server 30 includes a CPU 32, memory 34, a nonvolatile storage section 36, a display section 38, an input section 40, and a wireless interface (I/F) section 42.The wireless communication monitoring server 30 is included in a computer system 64, and is connected to a wired network 66 through the communication I/F section 42. The computer system 64 includes the plural wireless communication base stations 68 connected to the wired network 66, and the plural wireless communication terminals 70 that perform wireless communication with one of the wireless communication base stations 68. The wireless communication monitoring server 30 receives the parameters that evaluate the performance of the individual wireless links (the received signal strength indicator (RSSI) and the packet error rate (PER)) from the individual wireless communication base stations 68 over the wired network 66; Col. 9, lines 55-63, e.g.,
(48) Explanation has been given in which the wireless communication monitoring server 30 is caused to function as the interruption determination device according to technology disclosed herein. However, technology disclosed herein is not limited thereto, and the wireless communication base stations 68 or the wireless communication terminals 70 may be caused to function as the interruption determination device according to technology disclosed herein.),
the method comprising: recording a combination of the at least one master communication device and at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices having a communication abnormality when performing wireless communication between the at least one master communication device communicates and each of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Fig. 1, e.g., element characteristic curve storage section 14; Col. 3, lines 27-40, e.g., Plural characteristic curves of packet error rate against radio wave reception strength are pre-computed based on the assumption that interference power is maintained at mutually different values, and stored in the characteristic curve storage section 14 as characteristic curves of packet error rate against radio wave reception strength for wireless links);
instructing the at least one master communication device to perform wireless communication with at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices (see Col. 3, lines 16-20, e.g., wireless links are formed between wireless communication base stations 68 and respective wireless communication terminals 70 as illustrated in FIG. 2, and wireless communication is performed between the wireless communication base stations 68 and the respective wireless communication terminals 70. Col. 4, lines 27-33, e.g., An interruption cause determination program 50 that causes the wireless communication monitoring server 30 to function as the interruption cause determination device 10 is stored in the storage section 36 that serves as a recording medium);
determining, during performing the wireless communication, whether the wireless communication between the at least one master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices has been performed normally or abnormally based on the obtained communication characteristics (see Col. 5, lines 1-25, e.g., At step 100 of the wireless communication interruption cause determination processing, the acquisition section 12 acquires the received signal strength indicator (RSSI) and the packet error rate (PER) of a wireless link formed between a freely selected wireless communication base station 68 and a freely selected wireless communication terminal 70. Next, at step 102, the acquisition section 12 stores the acquired radio wave reception strength and the packet error rate acquired at step 100 in the storage section 36, in association with the link ID allocated to the corresponding wireless link and the current time. Next, at step 104, the characteristic estimation section 16 determines whether or not the packet error rate acquired by the acquisition section 12 at step 100 is the threshold value or greater. When negative determination is made at step 104, processing returns to step 100 since determination can be made that no interruption is occurring in the corresponding wireless link, and the acquisition section 12 acquires the radio wave reception strength and the packet error rate of another of the formed wireless links. In this manner, when interruption is not occurring in any of the wireless links, the acquisition section 12 repeats the acquisition of the radio wave reception strength and the packet error rate of the wireless link at intervals of a fixed period of time);
determining, as an abnormality-determined (see Col. 3-4, lines 61-68; 1-13, e.g., The cause determination section 18 then determines the cause of the interruption based on a positional relationship of a point corresponding to a combination of the radio wave reception strength at the second point in time and the packet error rate for the wireless link in which the packet error rate has reached the threshold value or greater with respect to the characteristic curve selected by the characteristic estimation section 16. The output section 20 then outputs the cause of the interruption determined by the cause determination section 18.); and
finalizing the abnormality-determined (see Col. 3-4, lines 61-68; 1-13, e.g., The output section 20 then outputs the cause of the interruption determined by the cause determination section 18. Col. 4, lines 29-33, e.g., An interruption cause determination program 50 that causes the wireless communication monitoring server 30 to function as the interruption cause determination device 10 is stored in the storage section 36 that serves as a recording medium. Col. 10, lines 64-67, e.g., Explanation has been given in of a mode in which the interruption cause determination program 50 is pre-stored (installed) in the storage section 36. However, the interruption cause determination program of technology disclosed herein may be provided in a mode recorded on a non-transitory recording medium such as a CD-ROM or a DVD-ROM.),
wherein when the abnormal position determined based on a determination result of whether wireless communication is normal or abnormal between the at least one master communication device and at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices is not consistent with the combination, recorded in the recorder, of the at least one master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices having a communication abnormality, the at least one second processor determines that an abnormality occurs over the entire communication system,
however, it does not explicitly teach, a position where an abnormality is occurring based on a normal/abnormal determination result of the wireless communication between the at least one master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices and position as an abnormal position where the abnormality is occurring when the abnormality-determined position is consistent with the combination of the at least one master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices having a communication abnormality.
OTSUKI teaches a position where an abnormality is occurring based on a normal/abnormal determination result of the wireless communication between the at least one master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices and position as an abnormal position where the abnormality is occurring when the abnormality-determined position is consistent with the combination of the at least one master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices having a communication abnormality (see ¶ [0014], e.g., comparing the first comparison result and the second comparison result, and determining a location where an abnormality occurred in accordance with a result of the comparison of the first comparison result and the second comparison result, the location being determined from among the wireless base station, the first wireless terminal, the second wireless terminal, and a wireless propagation environment between the wireless base station and the first wireless terminal and between the wireless base station and the second wireless terminal. ¶ [0040], e.g., In FIG. 4, in the case where Sap1−Ssta1>α, the wireless performance information (throughput) of the STA 21 is lower than that of the AP 10, and the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines that a failure occurred at the STA 21. In the case where Ssta1−Sap1>α, the wireless performance information (throughput) of the AP 10 is lower than that of the STA 21, and the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines that a failure occurred at the AP 10. In the case where |Sap1−Ssta1|≤α, the wireless performance information (throughput) of the AP 10 and the wireless performance information of the STA 21 are comparable with each other, and the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines that both are normal. This similarly applies to the comparison of the wireless performance information of the STA 22 and the AP 10, and the wireless performance measurement device 30 determines the location of a failure in accordance with nine combinations (1) to (9)).
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 determination of abnormal wireless communication between the at least one master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices of Nagata to incorporate the teachings of OTSUKI to include position where an abnormality is occurring based on a normal/abnormal determination result of the wireless communication between the at least one master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices. Doing so would facilitate in achieving determining a location where an abnormality occurred and also from among the various communication devices as suggested by OTSUKI (see ¶ [0015], e.g., determining a location where an abnormality occurred in accordance with a result of the comparison of the first comparison result and the second comparison result, the location being determined from among the wireless base station, the first wireless terminal, the second wireless terminal, and a wireless propagation environment between the wireless base station and the first wireless terminal and between the wireless base station and the second wireless terminal).
Claim(s) 2, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagata, in view of OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan and in further view of XIA et al., WO 2022078267 A1, (hereinafter XIA).
Regarding claim 2, Nagata as combined with OTSUKI, Yanagida and Yuan teaches the limitations of Claim 6.
Nagata as improved by OTSUKI does not teach but XIA teaches, wherein at least one of (a) one of the at least two devices (b) the plurality of slave communication devices is arranged at a fixed position (see Fig. 3, element, positioning information generating device, Bluetooth master module, Bluetooth slave modules, Pg. 11, paragraph 6, e.g., An embodiment of the present application provides a vehicle. As shown in FIG. 3, the vehicle includes a positioning information generating device, a Bluetooth master module, a plurality of Bluetooth slave modules, and a body. The positioning information generating device and the Bluetooth master module are fixed on the body, and the plurality of Bluetooth slave modules are respectively fixed at different installation positions of the body).
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 arrangement of master communication device and the at least one of the plurality of slave communication devices of Nagata and OTSUKI to incorporate the teachings of XIA to include the at least one master communication device and the plurality of slave communication devices arranged at a fixed position. Doing so would facilitate in achieving advance wiring harness at the installation position and convenient of installing the Bluetooth slave module as suggested by XIA (see Pg. 3, Paragraph 3, e.g., The wiring harness connector can be pre-fixed at the installation position of the Bluetooth slave module, and the position setting pins of the wiring harness connector can be connected to the corresponding level signal pins in advance. When installing the Bluetooth slave module, you only need to connect the Bluetooth. The position detection pin of the slave module is connected to the corresponding position docking pin on the corresponding wiring harness connector, so that the level setting of the position detection pin of the Bluetooth slave module can be realized, which is very convenient).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 is allowed.
Claim 15 and 16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the contingent limitations under the claim Interpretation
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 110830324 B, issued to Al
US 20180160389 A1 issued to Yerramalli et al.
US 20230115667 A1 issued to YOSHIKAWA
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to POONAM SHARMA whose telephone number is (571)272-6579. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru 8:30-5:30 pm, ET.
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, Kevin Bates can be reached at (571) 272-3980. 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.
/POONAM SHARMA/Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/KEVIN T BATES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights