DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having application No 18/364,296 filed on 11/12/2025 is presented for examination by the examiner.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-12, 19 and 20 have been considered. However, Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments and would like to provide a further clarification regarding the interpretation of the cited references.
In response to the argument on page 6 of Applicant’s Remark, “in response to the target device being identified as the OOB MCU, the two or more packets comprise a number of packets greater than if the target device were identified as the EC”. In fact, Examiner interprets the “the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on the UWB channel or link between the devices in which the frames are sent to the peripheral device, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on a non-UWB channel, such as on a BLUETOOTH channel, a Wi-Fi channel, or other out-of-band (OOB) channel”. according to Aldana’s disclosure.
As stated in Aldana’s – Column24, line 35-45, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on the UWB channel or link between the devices in which the frames are sent to the peripheral device, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on a non-UWB channel, such as on a BLUETOOTH channel, a Wi-Fi channel, or other out-of-band (OOB) channel.
whereas the Examiner wants to provide further clarification of the cited claim limitation, whereas the Aldana’s is directed to “Column 27, 15-35, the first UWB device split the payload into a first portion of the payload and a second portion of the payload, where the first portion is a greater/smaller size (wherein the payload portion frame includes the packets in each portion is greater or smaller) than the second portion frame is transmitted to the second UWB device, the first UWB device split multiple segments of the frame into several respective portions, the first UWB device split both the STS and the header into a first STS portion and first header portion for including in the first frame, and a second STS portion and a second header portion for including in the second frame, the first UWB device split the payload and SYNC into a first payload portion and a first SYNC portion for including in the first frame, and a second payload portion and a second SYNC portion for including in the second frame. Wherein Examiner is not cleared by the language of the claim limitation “the number of packets greater than” which is not clear the number of packets greater than? From the size of the buffer or something else. Please clarify the language of the limitation of the claim.
In response to the argument on page 7 of Applicant’s Remark, “in response to the target device being identified as the EC, the two or more packets comprise a number of packets fewer than if the target device were identified as the OOB MCU”. In fact, Examiner interprets the “the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on the UWB channel between the devices in which the frames are sent to the peripheral device, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on a non-UWB channel, such as on a BLUETOOTH channel, a Wi-Fi channel, out-of-band (OOB) channel”. according to Aldana’s disclosure.
As stated in Aldana’s – Column24, line 35-45, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on the UWB channel or link between the devices in which the frames are sent to the peripheral device, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on a non-UWB channel, such as on a BLUETOOTH channel, a Wi-Fi channel, or other out-of-band (OOB) channel.
whereas the Examiner wants to provide further clarification of the cited claim limitation, whereas the Aldana’s is directed to “Column 27, 15-35, the first UWB device split the payload into a first portion of the payload and a second portion of the payload, where the first portion is a greater/smaller size (wherein the payload portion frame includes the packets in each portion is greater or smaller(fewer)) than the second portion frame is transmitted to the second UWB device, the first UWB device split multiple segments of the frame into several respective portions, the first UWB device split both the STS and the header into a first STS portion and first header portion for including in the first frame, and a second STS portion and a second header portion for including in the second frame, the first UWB device split the payload and SYNC into a first payload portion and a first SYNC portion for including in the first frame, and a second payload portion and a second SYNC portion for including in the second frame. Wherein Examiner is not cleared by the language of the claim limitation “the number of packets greater than” which is not clear the number of packets fewer than? From the size of the buffer or something else. Please clarify the language of the limitation of the claim.
Therefore, Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant's arguments.
Thus, Butcher’s and Aldana’s disclosure still covers the limitations of claims 1-2 and 19-20. Therefore, Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant's arguments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-7, 10-12 and 19-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Butcher et al. (U.S 20160202964, Jul. 14, 2016) in view of Aldana et al. (US 12388489, Aug. 12, 2025).
Regarding Claim 1, Butcher discloses an Information Handling System (IHS), comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, the memory having program instructions stored thereon that, upon execution by the processor (page 3, par (0016), line 1-10, instruction metadata payload that includes locator information be used by the software to find and retrieve the firmware update payload that the software can apply the firmware updates of the information handling system (HIS)),
cause the IHS to identify a target device of a payload (page 6, par (0040), line 1-10, the target device to retrieve the identified binary firmware image from the firmware update package, and to complete firmware update on the target device of system an information handling System (HIS)),
wherein the target device comprises an Out-of-Band (OOB) Microcontroller Unit (MCU) or an Embedded Controller (EC) integrated into or coupled to a heterogeneous computing platform of a client IHS (page 4, par (0028), line 1-10, information handling system (HIS) includes a remote access controller that includes at least one out-of-band (OOB) processor and associated embedded memory having a custom UEFI capsule stored thereon).
Butcher discloses all aspects of the claimed invention, except based at least in part upon the target device, split the payload across two or more packets.
Aldana is the same field of invention teaches based at least in part upon the target device, split the payload across two or more packets (Column 1, line 1-10, determining to split the STS into the first portion and the second portion of the STS, is responsive to a size of a payload (split the Payload) for transmission to the second UWB device(target device) or a metric corresponding to a connection between the first UWB device and the second UWB device(target device)).
Butcher and Aldana l analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of access to a service device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the based at least in part upon the target device, split the payload across two or more packets the teaching of Butcher to include the determining to split the STS into the first portion and the second portion of the STS, is responsive to a size of a payload the teaching of Aldana because it is providing an optimized range along with a reduction in power consumption, at the expense of possibly higher complexity at the receiver.
Regarding Claim 2, Butcher discloses the heterogeneous computing platform comprises: a System-On-Chip (SoC), a Field-Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), or an Application- Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) (page 4, par (0030), line 1-10, an information handling system (HIS) provided with one or more processing devices that perform the functions of processing device, processing
device, remote access controller, and other optional processing devices, such processing devices include, central processing units (CPUs), embedded controllers, microcontrollers, application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), etc.).
Regarding Claim 3, Butcher discloses the heterogeneous computing platform comprises a Reduced Instruction Set Computer (RISC) processor and a plurality of devices coupled to an interconnect (page 4, par (0030), line 1-10, an information handling system (HIS) provided with one or more processing devices that perform the functions of processing device, processing device, remote access controller, and other optional processing devices, such processing devices include, central processing units (CPUs)).
Regarding Claim 4, Butcher discloses the plurality of devices comprises at least one of: a Graphical Processing Unit (GPU), an audio Digital Signal Processor (aDSP), a sensor hub, a Neural Processing Unit (NPU), a Tensor Processing Unit (TPU), a Neural Network Processor (NNP), an Intelligence Processing Unit (IPU), an Image Signal Processor (ISP), or a Video Processing Unit (VPU) (page 4, par (0029), line 1-10, system include one or more host processing devices, one or more buses or communication media, video/graphics hardware, storage, system memory (e.g., RAM), local input/output (I/O) , provides a mechanism for the various components of system to communicate and couple with one another).
Regarding Claim 5, Butcher discloses the interconnect comprises at least one of an Advanced Microcontroller Bus Architecture (AMBA) bus, a QuickPath Interconnect (QP1) bus, or a HyperTransport (HT) bus(page 6, par (0041), line 1-10, the information handling system include one or more storage devices, one or more communications ports for communicating with external devices as well as various input and output (I/O) devices, the information handling system include one or more buses(wherein QP1 bus) operable to transmit communications between the various hardware components).
Regarding Claim 6, Butcher discloses all aspects of the claimed invention, except in response to the target device being identified as the OOB MCU, the two or more packets comprise a number of packets greater than if the target device were identified as the EC.
Aldana is the same field of invention teaches in response to the target device being identified as the OOB MCU, the two or more packets comprise a number of packets greater than if the target device were identified as the EC (Column24, line 35-45, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on the UWB channel or link between the devices in which the frames are sent to the peripheral device, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on a non-UWB channel, such as on a BLUETOOTH channel, a Wi-Fi channel, or other out-of-band (OOB) channel).
Regarding Claim 7, Butcher discloses all aspects of the claimed invention, except in response to the target device being identified as the EC, the two or more packets comprise a number of packets fewer than if the target device were identified as the OOB MCU.
Aldana is the same field of invention teaches in response to the target device being identified as the EC, the two or more packets comprise a number of packets fewer than if the target device were identified as the OOB MCU (Column24, line 35-45, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on the UWB channel between the devices in which the frames are sent to the peripheral device, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on a non-UWB channel, such as on a BLUETOOTH channel, a Wi-Fi channel, out-of-band (OOB) channel).
Regarding Claim 10, Butcher discloses all aspects of the claimed invention, except the two or more packets comprise opaque OOB packets.
Aldana is the same field of invention teaches the two or more packets comprise opaque OOB packets (Column241, line 35-45, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on the UWB channel between the devices in which the frames are sent to the other out-of-band (OOB) channel).
Regarding Claim 11, Butcher discloses all aspects of the claimed invention, except the program instructions, upon execution by the processor, cause the IHS to transmit the two or more packets to the client IHS as part of an OOB packet sniffing operation.
Aldana is the same field of invention teaches the program instructions, upon execution by the processor, cause the IHS to transmit the two or more packets to the client IHS as part of an OOB packet sniffing operation (Column241, line 35-45, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on the UWB channel between the devices in which the frames are sent to the peripheral device, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on a non-UWB channel, such as on a BLUETOOTH channel, a Wi-Fi channel, out-of-band (OOB) channel).
Regarding Claim 12, Butcher discloses at least one of the OOB MCU or the EC is configured to store the two or more packets in a memory or storage device external to the OOB MCU or EC (page 4, par (0028), line 1-10, information handling system (HIS) includes a remote access controller that includes at least one out-of-band (OOB) processor and associated embedded memory having a custom UEFI capsule stored thereon).
Regarding Claim 19, Butcher discloses a method, comprising determining whether a payload targets an Out-of-Band (OOB) Microcontroller Unit (MCU) integrated into a heterogeneous computing platform of a client IHS, or an Embedded Controller (EC) integrated into or coupled to the heterogeneous computing platform of the client IHS(page 4, par (0028), line 1-10, information handling system (HIS) includes a remote access controller that includes at least one out-of-band (OOB) processor and associated embedded memory having a custom UEFI capsule stored thereon).
Butcher discloses all aspects of the claimed invention, except based at least in part upon the determination, splitting the payload across a first plurality of OOB packets or a second plurality of OOB packets.
Aldana is the same field of invention teaches based at least in part upon the determination, splitting the payload across a first plurality of OOB packets or a second plurality of OOB packets (Column 1, line 1-10, determining to split the STS into the first portion and the second portion of the STS, is responsive to a size of a payload (split the Payload) for transmission to the second UWB device(target device) or a metric corresponding to a connection between the first UWB device and the second UWB device(target device)).
Butcher and Aldana l analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of access to a service device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the based at least in part upon the target device, split the payload across two or more packets the teaching of Butcher to include the determining to split the STS into the first portion and the second portion of the STS, is responsive to a size of a payload the teaching of Aldana because it is providing an optimized range along with a reduction in power consumption, at the expense of possibly higher complexity at the receiver.
Regarding Claim 20, Butcher discloses all aspects of the claimed invention, except a first size of each packet of the first plurality of OOB packets is selected based, at least in part, upon a buffer size of the OOB MCU, or wherein a second size of each packet of the second plurality of OOB packets is selected based, at least in part, upon a buffer size of the EC.
Aldana is the same field of invention teaches a first size of each packet of the first plurality of OOB packets is selected based, at least in part, upon a buffer size of the OOB MCU, or wherein a second size of each packet of the second plurality of OOB packets is selected based, at least in part, upon a buffer size of the EC (Column24, line 35-45, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on the UWB channel or link between the devices in which the frames are sent to the peripheral device, the frame splitting determination engine configured to provide the segment splitting scheme to the peripheral device on a non-UWB channel, such as on a BLUETOOTH channel, a Wi-Fi channel, or other out-of-band (OOB) channel).
Examiner Notice
Claim 1 would be allowable if (i) claims 8 or 9 are incorporated into the independent claim 1.
Claim 13 would be allowable if (i) claims 8 or 9 are incorporated into the independent claim 15.
Claim 20 would be allowable if (i) claims 8 or 9 are incorporated into the independent claim 20.
The claim 6-7 have the conditional limitation “the number of packets greater than” and “the number of packets fewer than” which is not clear the number of packets fewer than or greater than? From the size of the buffer or something else”, please clarify the language features from the limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IQBAL ZAIDI whose telephone number is (571)270-3943. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon to Thu 8.a.m to 6.p.m..
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ricky Q Ngo can be reached on 57-272-3139. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/IQBAL ZAIDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464