DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is responsive to communication filed on 11/07/2023. Claims 1-8 are pending for examination.
Examiner’s Note
2. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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 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.
4. Claims 1, 3, 4, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2022/0392278 A1) in view of Lieder (US 2016/0080168 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 7 and 8, Choi teaches an information processor (diagnosing device 200), comprising:
processing circuitry, wherein:
the processing circuitry (process {includes control unit to process—[0040]} of extraction of diagnosing device—[0145]—obvious, the 200 has a control unit/processor) is configured to extract, from multiple types of data frames (data identification information and diagnosis data) transmitted through a communication bus (Fig. 8; [0140], diagnosing device 200 receives diagnosis information{includes data identification information and diagnosis data—[0143]}, transmitted from diagnosis information generating apparatus 100 through a communication bus.), a specific data frame(diagnosis data) having a data length that can be shortened ([0142]) based on data frame type (classification) ( [0145], process {includes control unit to process—[0040]} of extracting data identification information and diagnosis data included in communication packet, the diagnosing device 200 accurately classify an N.sup.th {i.e. shortened/smaller data length} diagnosis data and an (N+1).sup.th data identification information by using classification information. )(Hence, the 200 has a control unit to extract a diagnosis data having shortened data length based on data type/classification, from data identification information and diagnosis data transmitted through a communication bus.),
Choi does not teach each of the data frames including a data field and a data length code indicating a data length of the data field; and the processing circuitry is configured to reconstruct the specific data frame as a new data frame having a shorter data length by updating the data length code included in the specific data frame to indicate the shorter data length.
However, in an analogous art, Lieder teaches each of the data frames including a data field and a data length code (DLC) (see Fig. 2; [0014]) indicating a data length of the data field ([0041]; [0193], DLC indicating zero-length data field.); and
the processing circuitry (controller 6) is configured to reconstruct (regenerate) the specific data frame (substitute frame 22 ) as a new data frame(competing frame) having a shorter (zero) data length ([0195], CAN controller 6, after generation of a substitute frame 22 has been completed, the generator generates{i.e. regenerates} a competing frame on RRXD which includes an arbitration field, followed by a zero-length {data field—[0193]} indicating DLC field.) by updating (setting/appending) the data length code(DLC) included in the specific data frame (substitute frame 22 ) to indicate the shorter(zero) data length ([0193], a substitute frame 22 is generated on RXXD by appending a DLC field indicating a zero-length data field.) (Hence, the controller reconstructs substitute frame 22 as a competing frame having shorter data length by setting DLC included in the substitute frame 22 to indicate the shorter data length.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Lieder and apply them on the teaching of Choi to provide controller area network flexible data rate (CAN FD) ( Lieder; [0001]).
Regarding claim 3, Choi further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to extract, as the specific data frame ( diagnosis data), a data frame([0145], process {includes control unit to process—[0040]} of extracting data identification information and diagnosis data included in communication packet.) including no message authentication code(MAC) (See Fig. 4; wherein diagnosis data includes no MAC.).
Regarding claim 4, Choi further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to extract, as the specific data frame(diagnosis data), a data frame( [0145], process {includes control unit to process—[0040]} of extracting data identification information and diagnosis data included in communication packet.) that is not transferred through end-to-end communication (Fig. 8; [0140], diagnosing device 200 receives diagnosis information {includes data identification information and diagnosis data—[0143]}, transmitted from diagnosis information generating apparatus 100 through a communication bus.).
5. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2022/0392278 A1) in view of Lieder (US 2016/0080168 A1), further in view of Natori (US 2023/0327907 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Choi- Lieder does not teach wherein the processing circuitry is configured to update the data length code included in the specific data frame ([0056]) such that a maximum filling factor of data stored in the data field does not exceed 100%.
However, in an analogous art, Natori teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to update the data length code(DLC) included in the specific data frame([0056]) such that a maximum filling factor of data stored in the data field does not exceed 100% (second fixed length) ([0070], when exceeds a first fixed length predefined for the FD frame, the amount of data is adjusted by setting the padding data to have an increased data length or by storing another CAN frame so that the total amount of data in the data field becomes a second fixed length.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Natori and apply them on the teaching of Choi - Lieder to provide to improve the data efficiency (Natori; [0056]).
6. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2022/0392278 A1) in view of Lieder (US 2016/0080168 A1), further in view of Meng (US 2022/0150176 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Choi further teaches the processing circuitry is configured to extract the specific data frame (diagnosis data) from the second data frame when the specific data frame cannot be extracted from the first data frame ([0145], process {includes control unit to process—[0040]} of extracting data identification information {1st data frame-considered} and diagnosis data{2nd data frame-considered} included in communication packet,).
Choi- Lieder does not teach wherein: the multiple types of the data frames include a first data frame transmitted in a first cycle, and a second data frame, differing from the first data frame, transmitted in a second cycle that is longer than the first cycle;
However, in an analogous art, Meng teaches wherein: the multiple types of the data frames include
a first data frame (packets-i.e. 1st packet) transmitted in a first cycle ( [0114], Cycle labels (namely, first cycle label) carried in packets{1st} in this cycle received by second device.), and
a second data frame (packets-i.e. 2nd packet), differing from the first data frame (packets-i.e. 1st packet), transmitted in a second cycle ([0114], Cycle labels (namely, first cycle label) carried in packets {2nd} in this cycle received by second device. When sending the packets{2nd} in this cycle, the second device modifies all the cycle labels in the packets{2nd} to 1 (namely, second cycle label) ) that is longer than the first cycle([0011]; [0088]); and
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Meng and apply them on the teaching of Choi- Lieder to resolve a congestion problem during packet sending (Meng; [0006]).
7. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2022/0392278 A1) in view of Lieder (US 2016/0080168 A1), in view of Meng (US 2022/0150176 A1), further in view of Hasegawa (US 2016/0352639 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Choi- Lieder- Meng does not teach wherein: when a predicted communication load on the communication bus is greater than or equal to a threshold value after the processing circuitry extracts the specific data frame from the first data frame and updates the data length code of every one of the specific data frame extracted from the first data frame, the processing circuitry is configured to extract the specific data frame from the second data frame.
However, in an analogous art, Hasegawa teaches wherein:
when a predicted communication load on the communication bus is greater(exceed) than or equal to a threshold value after the processing circuitry extracts the specific data frame from the first data frame (flow control frame FC) and updates(setting) the data length code(DLC) of every one of the specific data frame extracted from the first data frame (flow control frame FC), the processing circuitry is configured to extract the specific data frame from the second data frame (consecutive frame CF)([0108]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Hasegawa and apply them on the teaching of Choi- Lieder- Meng for the improvement of the efficiency of communication of each of the nodes (Hasegawa; [0108]).
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEHEDI S ALEY whose telephone number is (571)270-0439. The examiner can normally be reached Mon, Thus, Fri: 9-5. 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, Jeffrey M Rutkowski can be reached at 571-270-01215. 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.
/MEHEDI S ALEY/Examiner, Art Unit 2415
/JEFFREY M RUTKOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2415