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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-11are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and if the claim objections are addressed, and if the independent claims over 112 rejections.
Priority
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application. In particular, the Examiner is unable to find subject matter support in the following foreign application(s): JP2022-086239. With regard to foreign application, JP2022-086239, the Examiner is unable to locate a suitable English translation of the document. An English translation of JP2022-086239 is required to obtain the priority date associated with said application number.
Thus, the current benefit accords to the filling date of the application on 05/23/2023.
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Claim Interpretations
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function. Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Claim limitation, In the claims 1-12 cited
in claim 1-10 cites “a communication characteristics obtainer obtaining…; an abnormality determination unit determining”; “an abnormal position determination unit performing an abnormal position determining process…”, “wherein when the abnormal position determination unit determines …, the abnormality determination unit performs…” ” an update unit updating the reference communication characteristics stored…”, have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because they use a generic placeholder “unit” coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: discloses in fig. 2 and [0044] discloses management device 10, the master communication device 20, and the slave communication device 30 comprise microcontrollers 1, 21, 31 , respectively, a microcontroller including a CPU as a processor, a ROM and a RAM as memories, wherein microcontroller comprises these unit, for example,[0052] discloses the microcontroller 11 includes The abnormal position determination unit 13
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action. If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011). 3
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-13, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the communication system further comprises: a storage unit storing, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, multiple reference communication characteristics related to wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels,
the reference communication characteristics being characteristics that were obtained when the at least one master communication device communicated with each of the plurality of slave communication devices over the multiple frequency channels; and an abnormality determination unit determining, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, an abnormality in wireless communication between the at least one master communication device 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 communication characteristics obtainer regarding wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels between the at least one master communication device and each of the plurality of slave communication devices; and
(b) an overall trend of the multiple reference communication characteristics across the multiple frequency channels that are stored in the storage unit for each of the plurality of slave communication devices”, where in fig. 1 and [0034] discloses the communication system 100 includes a management device 10, first and second master communication devices 20A and 20B, and first to fifth slave communication devices 30A to 30E.
It is not clear which device is doing claim limitations, which renders the scope of claim indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda US 2006/0056492 A1 in view of Nagata, US 9722899 B2.
Regarding claims 1,12 and 13; Honda US 2006/0056492 A1 discloses
1. A communication system (fig. 1, fig. 1 and [0020] the communication system) comprising:
12. A communication system comprising 13. A method for a communication system including:
at least one master communication device; and a plurality of slave communication devices (fig. 2 discloses communication system comprises wireless communication monitoring server 30 , wireless communication base stations 68 ( i.e. master device) and wireless communication terminals 70 (i.e. slave devices),
wherein the at least one master communication device and the plurality of slave communication devices are arranged at fixed positions (fig. 2 discloses communication system comprises wireless communication monitoring server 30 , wireless communication base stations 68 ( i.e. master device) and wireless communication terminals 70 (i.e. slave devices),
the at least one master communication device is capable of wirelessly communicating with each of the plurality of slave communication devices over multiple frequency channels, [0021] The host 100 is a device that controls communication between the master 200 and the plurality of slaves 300 a-300 g. The master 200 is a wireless communication device that communicates with the slaves 300 a-300 g based on control from the host 100. The slaves 300 a-300 g are wireless communication devices that communicate with the master 200 based on control from the master 200, wherein (fig. 3 and [0228] discloses the master 200 and the slave are communicating via available channels),
the at least one master communication device includes a communication characteristics obtainer obtaining, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, multiple communication characteristics related to wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels while performing wireless communication with each of the plurality of slave communication devices ([0037] master 200 receives receive data (RXD), RSSI information, and channel (CH) information from the slaves 300 a-300 g).
Honda does not explicitly disclose the communication system further comprises: a storage unit storing, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, multiple reference communication characteristics related to wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels, the reference communication characteristics being characteristics that were obtained when the at least one master communication device communicated with each of the plurality of slave communication devices over the multiple frequency channels; and an abnormality determination unit determining, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, an abnormality in wireless communication between the at least one master communication device 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 communication characteristics obtainer regarding wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels between the at least one master communication device and each of the plurality of slave communication devices; and
(b) an overall trend of the multiple reference communication characteristics across the multiple frequency channels that are stored in the storage unit for each of the plurality of slave communication devices.
Nagata, US 9722899 B2 discloses the communication system further comprises: a storage unit storing, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, multiple reference communication characteristics related to wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels, the reference communication characteristics being characteristics that were obtained when the at least one master communication device communicated with each of the plurality of slave communication devices over the multiple frequency channels (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
an abnormality determination unit determining, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, an abnormality in wireless communication between the at least one master communication device 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 communication characteristics obtainer regarding wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels between the at least one master communication device 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 across the multiple frequency channels 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).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Honda ,by incorporating the communication system further comprises: a storage unit storing, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, multiple reference communication characteristics related to wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels, the reference communication characteristics being characteristics that were obtained when the at least one master communication device communicated with each of the plurality of slave communication devices over the multiple frequency channels; and an abnormality determination unit determining, for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, an abnormality in wireless communication between the at least one master communication device 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 communication characteristics obtainer regarding wireless communication over the multiple frequency channels between the at least one master communication device and each of the plurality of slave communication devices; and (b) an overall trend of the multiple reference communication characteristics across the multiple frequency channels that are stored in the storage unit for each of the plurality of slave communication devices, as taught by Nagata,, in order to determine abnormality in wireless communication between the master communication device and each of the plurality of slave communication devices (Nagata (see Col. 5, lines 44-65)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDELTIF AJID whose telephone number is (571)272-7749. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am -5 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, Joseph Avellino can be reached at (571)272-3905. 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.
/ABDELTIF AJID/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478