DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . In virtue of the Response filed on 01/02/2026, in which claims 1-18 are presented for examination, wherein claims 1, 5, 7 are amended, 1 is recited in independent form and the remaining, pending claims depend therefrom.
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, without importing limitations from the specification. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is only limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked and is otherwise given the broadest reasonable interpretation. The Examiner has not identified any language in the claims which invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, therefore the claim limitations are given the broadest reasonable interpretation without importing limitations from the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection address the limitations argued by the Applicant as not being met by the previous rejection. As to the limitation “based on the prediction of collision, request that the first central device adjust a transmission schedule of the first set of audio packets or request that the second central device adjust a transmission schedule of the second set of audio packets, the second master device” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 may not disclose the limitation. To address the limitation, attention is directed to d4 which discloses in Fig. 2 that a Tx collision management unit 230 may be configured to manage and/or schedule subscriptions' utilization of a shared Tx resource, such as by adjusting a first subscription's transmission schedule to avoid a second subscription's scheduled transmissions during a Tx collision event. In some embodiments, the Tx collision management unit 230 may be implemented within the general-purpose processor 206. In some embodiments, the Tx collision management unit 230 may be implemented as a separate hardware component (i.e., separate from the general-purpose processor 206). In some embodiments, the Tx collision management unit 230 may be implemented as a software application stored within the memory 214 and executed by the general-purpose processor 206 (see d4 para. 0052) which renders the limitation obvious in view of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4. Furthermore D4, is employed in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), and contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve performance (see d4 para. 0028). The Teaching of d4 is read in light of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, in d4, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art such that one would be motivated to combine the disclosure to achieve a known result. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 with the teaching of d4 in order to achieve the advantages of improved performance (see d4 para. 0028) as wet forth as a result of use of the techniques of d4. The techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (resource scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success without undue experimentation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Amendments to claims 1, 5, 7 are sufficient to overcome the previously held rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph
.
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 (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 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 1-8, 11-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WIPO Publication WO-2022252917 to Xu et al (hereinafter d1) in view of United States Patent Application Publication US-20190387382 to Wojcieszak et al (hereinafter d2) in view of United States Patent Application Publication US-20220272512 to Gu et al (hereinafter d3) in view of United States Patent Application Publication US-20160050686 to Krishnamoorthi et al (hereinafter d4).
Regarding claim 1, as to the limitations “A peripheral device, comprising: a radio receiver configured to…processor” d1 discloses a slave device (i.e. peripheral device) (see d1 Fig. 1 element 120 with a receiver and processor (see d1 Fig. 1, page 2 line 40 –page 3 line 11);
As to the limitation “receive a first set of audio packets transmitted over a first wireless link from a first central device, and receive a second set of audio packets transmitted over a second wireless link by the second central device; and a processor configured to predict a collision between the first set of audio packets and the second set of audio packets based on a set of transmission scheduling parameters” d1 discloses that in some embodiments, the master device 110 may be a smart phone, a tablet computer, a wearable device, a personal computer, etc., and the slave device 120 may be a smart speaker, a Bluetooth headset, a TV, a smart phone, and the like (see d1 page 3, first paragraph); which in combination with d1 disclosure that as shown in FIG. 1, a first Bluetooth link is established between the slave device 120 and the first master device 111, and a second Bluetooth link is established with the second master device 112, and the slave device 120. The first Bluetooth link performs data transmission with the first master device 111, and the slave device 120 performs data transmission with the second master device 112 through the second Bluetooth link; d1 discloses Fig. 4 wherein at step 404, the slave device determines the first scheduling interval and the sending timing offset as the first link parameters; d1 also discloses Step 410, the second master device sends a link establishment request including second link parameters to the slave device; and at Step 412, the slave device performs scheduling conflict detection on the second Bluetooth link and the first Bluetooth link based on the second link parameter and the first link parameter (see d1 Fig. 4 pages 7 and 8);
In the event d1 is disqualified as prior art, or deemed not teach a particular limitation, in order to provide the most complete and effective examination, attention is directed to d2 which, in a similar field of endeavor of wireless communication suggests a peripheral device (see d2 Fig. 2), which is known to comprise at least a radio receiver and processor (see d2 para. 0055-0062) which are used to control a device to perform actions. D2 also suggests receive a first set of audio packets transmitted over a first wireless link from a first central device, and receive a second set of audio packets transmitted over a second wireless link by the second central device (see d2 para. 0012); in connection with use of a processor configured to predict a collision between the first set of audio packets and the second set of audio packets based on a set of transmission scheduling parameters (see d2 Fig. 8 para. 0206, 0211).
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
The disclosure of d1, d2, as set forth above disclose many of the limitations in question and may meet all the limitations under a broadest reasonable interpretation, however, in order to provide the most complete and effective examination, attention is directed to d3 which, in a similar field of endeavor of wireless communication suggests a Bluetooth device set in which BLE is utilized (see d3 para. 0031) for The Bluetooth host device comprises a host-side communication circuit and a processing circuit. The processing circuit is coupled with the host-side communication circuit and is arranged to operably control the host-side communication circuit. The Bluetooth device set comprises at least a first member device and a second member device. The first member device comprises a first audio processing circuit, a first communication circuit, and a first control circuit. The first audio processing circuit is coupled with a first audio receiving circuit to operably convert the voice captured by the first audio receiving circuit into a first audio signal. The first communication circuit is arranged to operably communicate wirelessly with the host-side communication circuit. The first control circuit is coupled with the first communication circuit and the first audio processing circuit, and is arranged to operably control the first communication circuit and the first audio processing circuit. The second member device comprises a second audio processing circuit, a second communication circuit, a second communication circuit, and a second control circuit. The second audio processing circuit is coupled with a second audio receiving circuit, arranged to operably convert the voice captured by the second audio receiving circuit into a second audio signal. The second communication circuit is arranged to operably communicate wirelessly with the host-side communication circuit. The second control circuit is coupled with the second communication circuit and the second audio processing circuit, and is arranged to operably control the second communication circuit and the second audio processing circuit. The processing circuit is also arranged to operably establish a first isochronous streaming channel with the first member device via the host-side communication circuit, and a second isochronous streaming channel with the second member device via the host-side communication circuit. The processing circuit is also arranged to utilize the host-side communication circuit to transmit a first instruction to the first member device and a second instruction to the second member device. The first communication circuit is also arranged to operably receive the first instruction, and the first control circuit is also arranged to follow the first instruction to configure the first member device to operate in a first mode. When the first member device operates in the first mode, the first control circuit is arranged to utilize the first communication circuit to transmit the first audio signal to the Bluetooth host device over the first isochronous streaming channel. The second communication circuit is also arranged to operably receive the second instruction, and the second control circuit is also arranged to follow the second instruction to configure the second member device to operate in a second mode. Wherein, when the first member device operates in the first mode, the second member device operates in the second mode, and when the second member device operates in the second mode, the second communication circuit does not transmit the second audio signal to the Bluetooth host device (see d3 para. 0008). D3 also discloses use of ISO parameters (see d3 para. 0008-0009, 0099).
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
As to the limitation “based on the prediction of collision, request that the first central device adjust a transmission schedule of the first set of audio packets or request that the second central device adjust a transmission schedule of the second set of audio packets, the second master device” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 may not disclose the limitation. Attention is directed to d4 which discloses in Fig. 2 that a Tx collision management unit 230 may be configured to manage and/or schedule subscriptions' utilization of a shared Tx resource, such as by adjusting a first subscription's transmission schedule to avoid a second subscription's scheduled transmissions during a Tx collision event. In some embodiments, the Tx collision management unit 230 may be implemented within the general-purpose processor 206. In some embodiments, the Tx collision management unit 230 may be implemented as a separate hardware component (i.e., separate from the general-purpose processor 206). In some embodiments, the Tx collision management unit 230 may be implemented as a software application stored within the memory 214 and executed by the general-purpose processor 206 (see d4 para. 0052) which renders the limitation obvious in view of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4.
Furthermore D4, is employed in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), and contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve performance (see d4 para. 0028). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in d4, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 with the teaching of d4 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. As the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (resource scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 2, as to the limitation “The device of claim 1: wherein the first and second sets of audio packets are Bluetooth LE audio packets” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest BLE (see d1 page 2 last paragraph-page 3 first paragraph; d2 para. 0008, 0205, among many others, d3 para. 0031) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 3, as to the limitation “The device of claim 1: wherein the first central device is configured to initially schedule when the first set of audio packets are transmitted over the first wireless link; and wherein the second central device is configured to initially schedule when the second set of audio packets are transmitted over the second wireless link” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest scheduling the first set of audio packets are transmitted over the first wireless link and the second central to initially schedule when the second set of audio packets are transmitted over the second wireless link (see d1 page 7; d2 para. 206, 0211) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 4, as to the limitation “The device of claim 1: wherein the set of transmission scheduling parameters includes a first set of transmission scheduling parameters received from the first central device and a second set of transmission scheduling parameters received from the second central device” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest scheduling parameters for each link (see d1 page 7; d2 para. 0013, 0049, 0206, 0211) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 5, as to the limitation “The device of claim 4: wherein the processor is further configured to request that the first central device adjust the transmission schedule of the first radio set of audio packets and request that the second central device adjust the transmission schedule of the second set of audio packets” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest updating one or both of the two sets of transmission scheduling parameters (see d1 page 3; d2 para. 0206, 0211) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Furthermore D4, is employed in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), and contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve performance (see d4 para. 0028). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in d4, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 with the teaching of d4 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. As the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (resource scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 6, as to the limitation “The device of claim 5: wherein at least one of the first central device and the second central device is configured to update one or both of the sets of transmission scheduling parameters based on the request from the peripheral device” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest updating one or both of the sets of transmission scheduling parameters based on the request from the peripheral device (see d1 page 3; d2 para. 0206, 0211), which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 7, as to the limitation “The device of claim 4: wherein at least one of the two sets of transmission scheduling parameters are a set of ISO parameters” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest ISO parameters (see d1 page 7, Fig. 4 step 404, page 7; d2 para. 0205; d3 para. 0066, 0071-0073) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 8, as to the limitation “The device of claim 7: wherein the ISO parameters include an ISO interval defining a time interval between audio packet transmissions” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest ISO interval defining a time interval between audio packet transmissions (see d2 para. 0205-0207) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 11, as to the limitation “The device of claim 1: wherein the processor is a priority encoder or a link controller” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest and encoder (see d2 para. 0095) using priority (i.e. priority encoder) (see d1 page 7, Fig. 4 step 404, page 7; d2 para. 0119, 0143) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 12, as to the limitation “The device of claim 1: wherein the first wireless link is a gaming link and the second wireless link is a phone link” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest various types of links implemented on either the first or second including gaming and phone (see d2 para. 0009, 0033-0034, 0107-0108, 0149, 0157, 0201) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 13, as to the limitation “The device of claim 4: wherein the processor is configured to predict the collision based on the first and second sets of transmission scheduling parameters before the first set of audio packets are first transmitted by the first central device” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest predicting the collision based on the first and second sets of transmission scheduling parameters before the first set of audio packets are first transmitted by the first central device (see d2 Fig. 8 para. 0206, 0211) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 14, as to the limitation “The device of claim 13: wherein the processor is further configured to predict the collision before the second set of audio packets are first transmitted by the second central device” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest predicting the collision before the second set of audio packets are first transmitted by the second central device (see d2 Fig. 8 para. 0206, 0211) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 15, as to the limitation “The device of claim 1: wherein the peripheral device is a headset” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest implementation as a headset (see d2 Fig. 1 also suggested by d1 and d3 in various locations) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 16, as to the limitation “The device of claim 15: wherein the first central device is a dongle” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest a dongle (see d2 Fig. 1 also suggested by d1 and d3 in various locations) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 17, as to the limitation “The device of claim 16: wherein the second central device is a smartphone” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest smartphone (see d2 Fig. 1 also suggested by d1 and d3 in various locations) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 18, as to the limitation “The device of claim 1: wherein the peripheral device is at least one of a wireless earbud and/or a wireless speaker” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 in view of d4 suggest earbud or speaker (see d2 Fig. 1 also suggested by d1 and d3 in various locations) which renders the limitation obvious from the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 in view of d3.
D2, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve user experience (see d2 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
D3, in similar field of endeavor (wireless communication), also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including providing Bluetooth communication system capable of avoiding voice interruption (see d3 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved user experience. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (BLE scheduling) for similar purposes (improved performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 10 are 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.
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 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN SCOTT TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)270-3189. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon. - Thurs. 9:00-4:00.
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, JINSONG HU can be reached on 5712723965. 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.
/NATHAN S TAYLOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643