DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "power switch" in lines 7-8. It is unclear to the examiner, whether the power switch recited in line 7-8 is the same or a different power switch recited in line 6 of clam 1.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1,3,5-11,13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallenstein et al. (Pub No. Us 2005/0257041) (Wallenstein) in view of McDonough (Pub NO. US 2007/0126288).
Regarding Claim 1 Wallenstein teaches: a device control unit [Fig.1, item 112, Fig.5, item 112, the remote reboot device corresponds to a device control unit] including: a central processing unit [[0023] The remote reboot device includes a server system responsible for performing the operations of the remote reboot device. The server system may include a processor and associated memory for storing a program operable on the processor to perform the desired functions.] communicatively coupled to a plurality of ports; [[0024] emote reboot device includes a plurality of reset modules connected to the server system. Each of the reset modules is connected by appropriate wiring to the reset pins 118 of one of the computer systems] a plurality of device connection cables each connected to a respective port on one end and to a port on each controlled device;[Fig.1, item 114,116 and 117, [0024] Each of the reset modules is connected by appropriate wiring to the reset pins 118 of one of the computer systems] a power switching cable connected to the port on the controlled device on one end and to a power switch [Fig.4, item 420, Reset switch] in the controlled device on the second end; [[0036] A multiplexer is used to connect wiring from the reset switch and a reset module of the remote reset device to the reset pins. Preferably, the multiplexer would be housed in the computer system. According to an embodiment of the invention, the multiplexer is attached to a PCI board connector. A PCI board is not required, but the PCI board connector attaches to the chassis of the computer system. The circuitry of the multiplexer is such that operation of either of the reset switch and the remote reboot device causes the reset pins to be shorted and a reboot to occur.] wherein, the central processing unit sends commands to the power switch in the controlled device to change the powered state of the controlled device. [Abstract, [0024] [0036]-[0038] he remote reboot device sends appropriate signals to the reset pins to perform the reboot operation]
Regrading Claim 1 Wallenstein does not teach: an optically isolated switch connected between the power switching cable and power switch in the controlled device.
However, McDonough teaches an optically isolated switch connected between the power switching cable and power switch in the controlled device. [Fig.2, [0026]-[0029] he switches are optically isolated from the load, meaning that there is no physical connection between the switches and the load. The input section of the switch controller continuously reads the state of the switches. This information is then optically sent to the output, which turns the load on or off, depending on the state of the switches]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to which this invention pertains before the effective filing date of the invention to use the optical switch of McDonough in Wallenstein’s system to reboot the remote device.
A person with ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated to use the optical switch in Wallenstein’s system to enhance durability and reliability and increase system stability (known advantages of optical switch)
Regarding Claim 3 McDonough teaches an optical isolated circuit between each port and the central processing unit. [Fig.2, [0026]-[0029] he switches are optically isolated from the load, meaning that there is no physical connection between the switches and the load. The input section of the switch controller continuously reads the state of the switches. This information is then optically sent to the output, which turns the load on or off, depending on the state of the switches]
Regarding Claim 5 Wallenstein teaches: the command is to mimic the pressing of a power button on and off on the controlled device. [Abstract, [0024] [0036]-[0038] he remote reboot device sends appropriate signals to the reset pins to perform the reboot operation]
Regarding Claim 6 Wallenstein teaches: each command is sent to the device control unit via an external device. [Fig.1, item 100, [0026] The remote reboot device is controllable from a second location 100 spaced from the first location 115 where the computer systems 117 are located.]
Regarding Claim 7 Wallenstein teaches: the command is to power the device off for a period of time and then to power the device on. [[0034] [0038] power pins are shorted for the minimum time, the computer system logic board sends a signal to the computer power supply to terminate supply of power to the system]
Regarding Claim 8 Wallenstein teaches: the command is to perform a hard reset of the device. [Abstract, [0024] [0036]-[0038] he remote reboot device sends appropriate signals to the reset pins to perform the reboot operation]
Regarding Claim 9 Wallenstein teaches: the external device is connected to the device control unit via a communication cable. [Fig.1, item 100, [0026] The remote reboot device is controllable from a second location 100 spaced from the first location 115 where the computer systems 117 are located.]
Regarding Claim 10 Wallenstein teaches: the external device communicates with the device control unit wirelessly. [Fig.1 item 108, [0025] network]
Regarding Claim 11 Wallenstein discloses: a method of controlling an external device [Fig.1, item 117, computer system] via a device control unit [Fig.1, item 112] having software in memory [[0023] The remote reboot device includes a server system responsible for performing the operations of the remote reboot device. The server system may include a processor and associated memory for storing a program operable on the processor to perform the desired functions.] that performs the steps of: receiving a command from an external device;[Abstract, [0024] [0036]-[0038] he remote reboot device sends appropriate signals to the reset pins to perform the reboot operation]] determining the type of command to execute;[Abstract, [0024] [0036]-[0038] he remote reboot device sends appropriate signals to the reset pins to perform the reboot operation, reboot command]] retrieving a control sequence based on the received and determined command; [[0034] [0038] power pins are shorted for the minimum time, the computer system logic board sends a signal to the computer power supply to terminate supply of power to the system] transmitting the control sequence via a first port on the device control unit to a second port on the external device[[0024] remote reboot device includes a plurality of reset modules connected to the server system. Each of the reset modules is connected by appropriate wiring to the reset pins 118 of one of the computer systems] and a cable connected between the second port and a power switch on the external device. [Fig.4, item 420, Reset switch] in the controlled device on the second end; [[0036] A multiplexer is used to connect wiring from the reset switch and a reset module of the remote reset device to the reset pins. Preferably, the multiplexer would be housed in the computer system. According to an embodiment of the invention, the multiplexer is attached to a PCI board connector. A PCI board is not required, but the PCI board connector attaches to the chassis of the computer system. The circuitry of the multiplexer is such that operation of either of the reset switch and the remote reboot device causes the reset pins to be shorted and a reboot to occur.]
Regrading Claim 11 Wallenstein does not teach: an optical switch positioned between the cable and the power switch.
However, McDonough teaches an optical switch positioned between the cable and the power switch. [Fig.2, [0026]-[0029] he switches are optically isolated from the load, meaning that there is no physical connection between the switches and the load. The input section of the switch controller continuously reads the state of the switches. This information is then optically sent to the output, which turns the load on or off, depending on the state of the switches]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to which this invention pertains before the effective filing date of the invention to use the optical switch of McDonough in Wallenstein’s system to reboot the remote device.
A person with ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated to use the optical switch in Wallenstein’s system to enhance durability and reliability and increase system stability (known advantages of optical switch)
Claim 13 is having similar limitations to that of the apparatus of claim 3.Accordingly, claim 13 is rejected under a similar rational as that of claim 3 above.
Claim 15 is having similar limitations to that of the apparatus of claim 5.Accordingly, claim 15 is rejected under a similar rational as that of claim 5 above.
Claim 16 is having similar limitations to that of the apparatus of claim 6.Accordingly, claim 16 is rejected under a similar rational as that of claim 6 above.
Claim 17 is having similar limitations to that of the apparatus of claim 7.Accordingly, claim 17 is rejected under a similar rational as that of claim 7 above.
Claim 18 is having similar limitations to that of the apparatus of claim 8.Accordingly, claim 18 is rejected under a similar rational as that of claim 8 above.
Claim 19 is having similar limitations to that of the apparatus of claim 9.Accordingly, claim 19 is rejected under a similar rational as that of claim 9 above.
Claim 20 is having similar limitations to that of the apparatus of claim 10.Accordingly, claim 20 is rejected under a similar rational as that of claim 10 above.
Claims 2, 4 ,12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallenstein et al. (Pub No. Us 2005/0257041) (Wallenstein) in view of in view of McDonough (Pub NO. US 2007/0126288) further in view of Aybay (Patent NO. US 9,269,307)
Regarding Claim 2 the combination of Wallenstein and McDonough does not teach an activity indicator unit that indicates an activity on an associated one of the plurality of ports.
However, Aybay teaches an activity indicator unit that indicates an activity on an associated one of the plurality of ports. [col.9, lines 15-25, light source 340A and the light source 340B are each configured to produce multiple different light outputs, each light output having a characteristic corresponding to a level of activity and/or a status of the network port 322]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to which this invention pertains before the effective filing date of the invention to use the Status indicator LED lights of Aybay’s system to show the status of Wallenstein’s ports to provide a quick visual check for ports status and make it easy for the system admin to troubleshoot any issue with the ports.
Regarding Claim 4 Aybay teaches the activity indicator unit is a light. [col.9, lines 15-25, light source 340A and the light source 340B]
Claim 12 is having similar limitations to that of the apparatus of claim 2.Accordingly, claim 12 is rejected under a similar rational as that of claim 2 above.
Regarding Claim 14 Aybay teaches the activity indicator unit is a light. col.9, lines 15-25, light source 340A and the light source 340B]
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1-20 under USC 102 and 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 in view of newly found prior art refinance.
Conclusion
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 ZAHID CHOUDHURY whose telephone number is (571)270-5153. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Andrew Jung can be reached at (571) 270-3779. 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.
/ZAHID CHOUDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2175