Detailed Action
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Acknowledgements
2. Applicant’s arguments/remarks, filed on 07/10/2026, are acknowledged. Amended claims 1, 5-6, 10-11, and 13-14, cancelled claims 2-3 and 9 are acknowledged. Claims 1, 4-8, and 10-14 remain pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments filed 07/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant, on pg. 9, states, Yushiya in view of Madhyastha and Roberts do not teach or suggest the aforementioned features recited in independent claim 1; in which considered individually or in proper combination, cannot render claims 1, 11, 13, and 14 prima facie obvious.
4. The examiner, respectfully, disagrees. The referenced prior arts, either perform a similar function as the instantly claimed invention, else disclose inventions which relate (Information Technology) to a portion of technology as limited by the instant application.
Further, there are no particular functions, of the secondary references, that have been argued by the Applicant, so to describe a lack of motivation to combine the secondary references with the primary reference, so not to render the instantly claimed claims unpatentable (because it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to do so).
Further, see claim mappings, in accordance with amended subject matter.
Information Disclosure Statement
5. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/04/20267 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
6. Claims 1 and 10 are 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.
Claims 4 and 10 recite the limitation "the predetermined information" (line 2 of claim 4; line 2 of claim 10) . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
8. Claims 1, 4-5 and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Yushiya (US 2021/0385429 A1) in view of Madhyastha et al. (US 2018/0307474
A1; Further referred to as Madhyastha) and further view of Roberts (US 7,428,209 B1).
9. Regarding claim 1, a communication control apparatus (…Yushiya teaches an image
acquisition apparatus, in [0020], Fig. 1…) comprising:
a generation unit configured to generate an image packet (…wherein [0027] teaches
camera adapters 120 convert captured image data obtained by image capturing performed by an associated camera 112 into a packet and transmit the packet.…);
a receiving unit configured to receive an image packet (…[0035] teaches reception
processing unit 332 which reads out a packet temporarily stored by a reception data storing unit 331 and performs reception processing on the packet based on header information about the packet; wherein units 331 and 332 are part of a camera adapter, as depicted in Fig. 3. Hence, a receiving unit may be camera adapter 120e…);
a first sending unit configured to
cause a first image packet obtained by deleting last packet information from the image packet received by the receiving unit to be sent by a first communication interface included in a plurality of communication interfaces to a downstream communication apparatus (…wherein [0036] teaches a transmission processing unit 333 which receives a packet transmitted from an upstream adjacent camera adapter and subjected to reception processing by the reception processing unit 332, and performs processing required for transmitting the packet. [0042] further teaches “Time to Live” field of the header format wherein the value of the field is decremented by 1 each time a packet of the header passes through a sequential transmission camera adapter. As such, by enabling a flag of a sequential transmission of a packet to be transferred and decrementing the “Time to Live” field by one, the camera adapter recognizes a packet to be transmitted, in this case to a receiving sequential camera adapter.
A first sending unit may be a camera adapter of the network as depicted in Fig. 1 (e.g. camera adapter 120f). Further, [0030] teaches ports 322 and 323 which may be viewed as a plurality of communication interfaces…);
a second sending unit configured to
cause a second image packet including the last packet information and generated by the generation unit to be sent by the first communication interface at timing that is based on reception of the last packet information included in the image packet received by the receiving unit (…wherein a second sending unit may be a camera adapter 120e, which in addition to receiving a packet transmitted from an upstream adjacent camera adapter, also receives transmission data generated by a data generation unit 321 from image data captured by an associated camera. As such, a camera adapter generates image packets of an associated camera (second image packet) and also receives and transmits image packets from an adjacent camera adapter (first image packet).
Further, [0035] teaches header information included in a packet, where different elements of the header indicate where and whereto the packet is going and how data of the packet is handled. For example, [0042] teaches that an initial value which is in common between all of the cascade-connected camera adapters 120 is set to a “Time to Live” field of the header format (Fig. 4). Or [0043] teaches sequential transmission camera adapter determines timing at which to start transmission of a sequential transmission packet generated from image data captured by the associated camera, based on the value of bit 18 of the “Flags” field included in the header of a packet received from an upstream adjacent camera adapter…); and
a control unit performs processing of packets which the camera adapter 120 transmits and receives (…Yushiya, in [0033], teaches that the transmission and reception processing unit…).
Yushiya doesn’t further teach the control unit
configured to, in a case where the first communication interface has become unable to perform sending during sending of the second image packet from the first communication interface, cause a communication packet including the last packet information and not including image data to be sent by a second communication interface included in the plurality of communication interfaces to the downstream communication apparatus (…however, Madhyastha, in [0017], teaches a stacking system 112, that may be coupled to an uplink (110) and downlink (114) devices wherein link aggregation may be used to interconnect two devices with two or more links between them to provide redundancy when one of the links fail (wherein header information of a packet contains metadata and routing instructions without actual payload data, as taught by Yushiya in Fig. 4, encapsulated header information from a first device is generated and sent along another header of the sending device)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention that a stacking system as taught by
Madhyastha could have been employed as part of the transmission and reception
processing of Yushiya’s teaching, thus to provide a mechanism to provide redundancy in
a case where one communication link fails a secondary link can still transmit or receive
data from an uplink or downlink device…).
Madhyastha does not further specify the above limited stacking system of link
aggregation based on
based on detection of the absence of transmission acknowledgment or a timeout of a send start timer (…Roberts, further in columns 17-18 with regards to Fig. 13, teaches under “Failure Egress Line Card”, a mechanism to detect and recover from a failure in a network of data/packet transmission.
In further detail, as a packet 800, at a switching-fabric-module (SFM) 408c,
received from an ingress line card 202b, is further being routed to an egress line card
202d, the unit 408c may detect a link failure.
It is well known in the art that a way that this may be done is through I2C-timeout;
wherein such a condition, in part, is due to a failure to transmit due to an issue to
communicate a start condition for data/packet transmission.
Eventually, failed to send packet 800 is sent back to the ingress card 202b, as a
previously failed packet to route and an alternate route to the previous egress line 202d
is determined. Thus, as shown in Fig. 13, an alternate switching fabric (206b) and egress
line card 202c is used to route through a router 102…), and
based on determination that the last packet information included in the second image packet has not been successfully communicated to the downstream communication apparatus (…In column 14 (lines 8-30), with regards to Fig.10, Roberts teaches that OPM 304b of ingress line card 202b receives packet 800, it ascertains from RET field 810 that the packet 800 is a returned packet, thereby determining that a previous routing path had failed to successfully send the packet.
As stated above, Yushiya, in [0035], teaches header information included in a
packet, wherein the header and different elements of the header may comply to be viewed as a predetermined information. Similarly, Roberts teaches fields of data that accompany the packet 800 in the process of its transmission. As such the RET field 810 (which is predetermined and resettable in the process of the packet’s transmission can be related to the predetermined information that is part of the header information
included in a packet (as taught by Yushiya)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a router and its corresponding line cards (communication interfaces), as taught by Roberts, could have been implemented in
the teaching of Madhyastha’s stacking system 112 so to provide alternate routing of data
packets due to a failure of an egress line card (communication interface) within a router,
through a secondary egress line, without a redundant backup of a secondary router…).
10. Regarding claim 4, Yushiya in view of Madhyastha and further view of Roberts teaches
the communication control apparatus according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein
the predetermined information is included in a last image packet included in a packet group including one or more image packets which are communicated as a series of image
packets (…wherein Yushiya, in [0044], teaches the “Flags” field (of the header of Fig. 4)
which is used as a last fragment flag, indicating if a subsequent fragmented packet
exists or not…).
11. Regarding claim 5, Yushiya in view of Madhyastha and further view of Roberts teaches the communication control apparatus according to claim 4 (see claim 4 above), wherein
the last packet information is last packet information indicating that an image packet including the last packet information is the last image packet (…wherein the “Flags” field indicates if a subsequent fragmented packet exists or not; e.g., [0044] teaches a last fragment flag being 1 indicates that no subsequent fragmented packet exists…).
12. Regarding claim 10, Yushiya in view of Madhyastha and further view of Roberts teaches the communication control apparatus according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein
the control unit causes a packet including the predetermined information and having a minimum size in the second communication interface to be sent as the communication packet (…wherein Yushiya teaches, in [0035-0036], teaches header information that is the basis receiving and transmitting data…).
13. Regarding claim 11, claim 11 is rejected for reasons related to claim 1.
14. Regarding claim 12, Yushiya in view of Madhyastha and further view of Roberts teaches
a communication system comprising
a plurality of communication apparatuses each corresponding to the communication
apparatus according to claim 11 (see claim 11 above), the plurality of communication
apparatuses being connected in daisy chain (…wherein Yushiya, in [0020], teaches camera
adapters 120a-120f are cascaded in a daisy chain connection…).
15. Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is rejected for reasons related to claim 1.
16. Regarding claim 14, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by a computer (…wherein Yushiya, in [0110-0111], teaches ROM 812 and additional components of a computer system which
may perform the execution of computer programs…), cause the computer to perform a communication control method comprising:
generating an image packet (…Yushiya, in [0022], teaches camera adapter 112 which, among other things, generates image packets from image data captured by an associated camera …);
receiving an image packet (…wherein Yushiya, in [0022], teaches the camera adapter 112 which performs reception processing on image packets…);
causing a first image packet obtained by deleting last packet information from the image packet to be sent by a first communication interface included in a plurality of communication interfaces to a downstream communication apparatus (…wherein [0036] teaches a transmission processing unit 333 which receives a packet transmitted from an upstream adjacent camera adapter and subjected to reception processing by the reception processing unit 332, and performs processing required for transmitting the packet. [0042] further teaches “Time to Live” field of the header format wherein the value of the field is decremented by 1 each time a packet of the header passes through a sequential transmission camera adapter. As such, by enabling a flag of a sequential transmission of a packet to be transferred and decrementing the “Time to Live” field by one, the camera adapter recognizes a packet to be transmitted, in this case to a receiving sequential camera adapter.
A first sending unit may be a camera adapter of the network as depicted in Fig. 1 (e.g. camera adapter 120f). Further, [0030] teaches ports 322 and 323 which may be viewed as a plurality of communication interfaces…);
causing a generated second image packet including the last packet information to be sent by the first communication interface at timing that is based on reception of the last packet information included in the image packet received (…wherein a second sending unit may be a camera adapter 120e, which in addition to receiving a packet transmitted from an upstream adjacent camera adapter, also receives transmission data generated by a data generation unit 321 from image data captured by an associated camera. As such, a camera adapter generates image packets of an associated camera (second image packet) and also receives and transmits image packets from an adjacent camera adapter (first image packet).
Further, [0035] teaches header information included in a packet, where different elements of the header indicate where and whereto the packet is going and how data of the packet is handled. For example, [0042] teaches that an initial value which is in common between all of the cascade-connected camera adapters 120 is set to a “Time to Live” field of the header format (Fig. 4). Or [0043] teaches sequential transmission camera adapter determines timing at which to start transmission of a sequential transmission packet generated from image data captured by the associated camera, based on the value of bit 18 of the “Flags” field included in the header of a packet received from an upstream adjacent camera adapter…).
Yushiya doesn’t further teach
configured to, in a case where the first communication interface has become unable to perform sending during sending of the second image packet from the first communication interface, cause a communication packet including the last packet information and not including image data to be sent by a second communication interface included in the plurality of communication interfaces to the downstream communication apparatus (…however, Madhyastha, in [0017], teaches a stacking system 112, that may be coupled to an uplink (110) and downlink (114) devices wherein link aggregation may be used to interconnect two devices with two or more links between them to provide redundancy when one of the links fail (wherein header information of a packet contains metadata and routing instructions without actual payload data, as taught by Yushiya in Fig. 4, encapsulated header information from a first device is generated and sent along another header of the sending device)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention that a stacking system as taught by
Madhyastha could have been employed as part of the transmission and reception
processing of Yushiya’s teaching, thus to provide a mechanism to provide redundancy in
a case where one communication link fails a secondary link can still transmit or receive
data from an uplink or downlink device…).
Madhyastha does not further specify the above limited stacking system of link
aggregation based on
based on detection of the absence of transmission acknowledgment or a timeout of a send start timer (…Roberts, further in columns 17-18 with regards to Fig. 13, teaches under “Failure Egress Line Card”, a mechanism to detect and recover from a failure in a network of data/packet transmission.
In further detail, as a packet 800, at a switching-fabric-module (SFM) 408c,
received from an ingress line card 202b, is further being routed to an egress line card
202d, the unit 408c may detect a link failure.
It is well known in the art that a way that this may be done is through I2C-timeout;
wherein such a condition, in part, is due to a failure to transmit due to an issue to
communicate a start condition for data/packet transmission.
Eventually, failed to send packet 800 is sent back to the ingress card 202b, as a
previously failed packet to route and an alternate route to the previous egress line 202d
is determined. Thus, as shown in Fig. 13, an alternate switching fabric (206b) and egress
line card 202c is used to route through a router 102…), and
based on determination that the last packet information included in the second image packet has not been successfully communicated to the downstream communication apparatus (…In column 14 (lines 8-30), with regards to Fig.10, Roberts teaches that OPM 304b of ingress line card 202b receives packet 800, it ascertains from RET field 810 that the packet 800 is a returned packet, thereby determining that a previous routing path had failed to successfully send the packet.
As stated above, Yushiya, in [0035], teaches header information included in a
packet, wherein different elements of the header may comply to be viewed as
predetermined information. Similarly, Roberts teaches fields of data that
accompany the packet 800 in the process of its transmission. As such the RET field 810
(which is predetermined and resettable in the process of the packet’s transmission can
be related to the predetermined information that is part of the header information
included in a packet (as taught by Yushiya)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a router and its corresponding line cards (communication interfaces), as taught by Roberts, could have been implemented in
the teaching of Madhyastha’s stacking system 112 so to provide alternate routing of data
packets due to a failure of an egress line card (communication interface) within a router,
through a secondary egress line, without a redundant backup of a secondary router…).
17. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yushiya (US
2021/0385429 A1) in view of Madhyastha et al. (US 2018/0307474 A1; further referred
to as Madhyastha) and Roberts (US 7,428,209 B1) and further view of Yushiya et al.
(US 2019/0228565 A1; further referred to as Yushiya I).
18. Regarding claim 6, Yushiya in view of Madhyastha and further view of Roberts teaches
the communication control apparatus according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above).
The combined reference does not further teach wherein in a case where a specific
condition is satisfied even before reception of the last packet information, the second
sending unit causes sending of the second image packet to be started.
However, Yushiya I teaches a similar image processing system of daisy-chained
network cameras wherein in a case where a specific condition is satisfied even before reception
of the last packet information, the second sending unit causes sending of the second image
packet to be started (…wherein, Yushiya I, in [0097] (with reference to Fig. 6), teaches a
transmission processing unit 424 determines whether an image data from a previous
stage has been received within a predetermined amount of time (S603). If not, unit 431
generates the background image that could not be received. In this scenario, a locally
generated image is viewed as the second image packet.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, that conditions of timing can be set, thus to
maintain a process of continues image flow, within a chain of image generating devices,
even if there arose a particular reason for a plausible interruption of data flow…).
19. Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yushiya (US
2021/0385429 A1) in view of Madhyastha et al. (US 2018/0307474 A1; further referred
to as Madhyastha) and Roberts (US 7,428,209 B1) and further view of Yano et al. (US
2020/0322591 A1; further referred to as Yano).
20. Regarding claim 7, Yushiya in view of Madhyastha and further view of Roberts teaches
the communication control apparatus according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above).
The combined reference does not further teach wherein
the control unit determined that even a sending inability state of the first communication interface having occurred after completion of inputting of an image packet to the first communication interface is a sending inability state having occurred during sending of the image packet, as long as before a specific time passes after the completion of inputting (…however, Yano, in [0341], teaches the determination whether data transmission may be performed (thus determining a boundary for the ability or disability to transmit image data), based on an amount of data exceeding a threshold value of an output data amount specified in advance. As such, it may be said that the flow of data, within time, directly corresponds to the amount of data that is transmitted. Further, as depicted in Fig. 30 at step (S06705), the systems obtains policy at time when output data amount is exceeded and consequently selects a process determine what action to perform on the data.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, that a threshold amount for data amount
can be set, relative to the time of data amount that is transmitted, so to further determine
the synchronization of data transmission in accordance with a corresponding image
processing method…).
21. Regarding claim 8, Yushiya in view of Madhyastha and further view of Roberts teaches
the communication control apparatus according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein
each of the first sending unit and the second sending unit inputs an image packet to the
first communication interface, thus causing the image packet to be sent from the first
communication interface (…wherein Yushiya, in [0032], teaches ports 322 and 323 whereby
camera adapters in cascade connection transmit packets which are both generated at a
local camera adapter as well as transferred from a previous camera adapter…).
However, Yushiya in view of Madhyastha and further view of Roberts doesn’t further
teach wherein,
in a case where the first communication interface has become unable to perform
sending during sending of the first image packet or the second image packet, the control unit
inputs, to the second communication interface, image packets beginning with an image packet
following an image packet already input to the first communication interface, thus causing the
communication packet to be sent (…however, Yano, in [0341], teaches the determination
whether data transmission may be performed (thus determining a boundary for the
ability or disability to transmit image data), based on an amount of data exceeding a
threshold value of an output data amount specified in advance. As such, it may be said
that the flow of data, within time, directly corresponds to the amount of data that is
transmitted. Thus, as depicted further, in Fig. 30, at step (S06705) the systems obtains
policy at time when output data amount is exceeded and consequently selects a process
determine what action to perform on the data.
Further, Madhyastha, in [0017], teaches a stacking system 112, that may be
coupled to an uplink (110) and downlink device (114) devices wherein link aggregation
may be used to interconnect two devices with two or more links between them to provide
redundancy when one of the links fail.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention that a backup or redundant mechanism of
continued package transmission can be employed as taught by Madhyastha wherein as
taught by Yano, the determination can be made to set a condition/policy whereby image
packets may be sent without missing data and effectively process and output data as
purposed for the system…).
Conclusion
22. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SURAFEL YILMAKASSAYE whose telephone number is (703)756-1910. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, TWYLER HASKINS can be reached at (571)272-7406. 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.
/SURAFEL YILMAKASSAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 2639
/TWYLER L HASKINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2639
