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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/09/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-11 and 17-18 are pending.
Claims 1, 5, 8-11, and 17 have been amended.
Claims 12-16 have been canceled.
Claim 18 is new.
Response to Amendment
Objections to the claims: Applicant’s amendment to the claims overcomes the objection of record. The objections to the claims have been withdrawn.
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. §112(b): Applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the 112(b) rejections of record. However, the claim amendments have necessitated 112(b) rejections that are presented in this action below.
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. §101: Applicant’s amendments to the claims do not overcome the rejections under 101. The 101 rejections are maintained.
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. §103: Applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the rejections of record. The 103 rejections have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. §101: Applicant's arguments filed 03/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “Claims 1-11 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Applicant traverses the rejection.
Claim 1 recites "mediation by the proxy unit," which is an active operation that performs signal processing.
In addition, the operation of "mediating" communications, such as by a "proxy unit that mediates exchanges with a DNS server" or an "authentication proxy unit", is a function specific to particular network devices and cannot practically be performed in the human mind.
For example, claim 1 recites that the monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection, the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in-vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server; and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server. These features cannot practically be performed in the human mind.
As such, by limiting the features not to general-purpose computer processing but to specific communication relationships of a device mounted on a vehicle, any alleged abstract idea is integrated into a "practical application."”
Examiner respectfully disagrees, as "mediation by the proxy unit," is not specified as being in the abstract grouping of mental process including observation, evaluations, judgements, and opinions but is analyzed as an additional element as detailed below in this action, and therefore a consideration is made in whether the additional element integrates the judicial exception (abstract idea) into a practical application not whether the feature can be performed in the human mind or by a human with the aid of pen and paper. Further, the additional elements pertaining to "mediation by the proxy unit," amount to mere data gathering which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity and therefore does not integrate the abstract idea(s) into a practical application.
Examiner respectfully disagrees that the features are limited to specific communication relationships of a device mounted on a vehicle as the proxy units are described at a high level of generality and amount to computers or other machinery invoked merely as a tool to perform an existing process, for example to receive, store, or transmit data which would not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Further, a claim that purports to improve computer capabilities or to improve an existing technology may integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more (see at least MPEP§ 2106.5(f), MPEP§ 2106.04(d)(1), and MPEP§ 2106.05(a)). Therefore the 101 rejections are maintained.
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. §103:Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks Made in Amendments pages 14-20, filed 03/09/2026, with respect to claims 1, 9, 10, 11, and their dependents have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1, 9, 10, 11, and their dependents have been withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1-11 and 17-18 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.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites the limitation "the in-vehicle network" in lines 25-26 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as there is no prior mention of an in-vehicle network in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a collection server" in lines 31-32 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as there is a prior mention of a collection server in lines 20, 27, and 29 of the claim, therefore it is unclear whether the collection server in lines 31-32 is the same as that mentioned in lines 20, 27, and 29. For examination purposes, the collection server in lines 31-32 is the same as that mentioned in lines 20, 27, and 29.
Claims 2-8 and 17-18 which are dependent claims of claim 1 inherit its deficiencies and are therefore also rejected.
Regarding claims 9-11, claims 9-11 are rejected on similar grounds as that detailed above with regards to the limitation "the in-vehicle network" in claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-11 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1. A vehicle device configured to be used for a vehicle, the device comprising at least one of (i) a circuit and (ii) a processor with a memory storing computer program code executable by the processor, the at least one of the circuit and the processor configured to cause the vehicle device to serve as:
a monitoring unit configured to
recognize a status of an exchange in a communication establishment process that is an end-to-end communication process between an in-vehicle electronic control unit (in-vehicle ECU) mounted on the vehicle and a connection destination on a network outside the vehicle,
centrally manage a log of the exchange, and
detect a failure in the communication establishment process, wherein the monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection, the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in- vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server: and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server; and
a log output unit configured to output a log estimated to be related to the failure among the log centrally managed by the monitoring unit when the monitoring unit has detected the failure;
wherein
the in-vehicle ECU is communicably connected to the vehicle device via the in- vehicle network,
the vehicle device is wirelessly connected to the collection server and the DNS server via the network outside the vehicle, and
the collection server is communicably connected to the DNS server via the network outside the vehicle, and
the log output unit outputs, via wireless communication, the estimated log to a collection server that exists outside of the vehicle, the collection server is different from the connection destination on the network outside the vehicle
Claim 9. A server configured to be used on a network outside a vehicle, the server comprising at least one of (i) a circuit and (ii) a processor with a memory storing computer program code executable by the processor, the at least one of the circuit and the processor configured to cause the server to serve as:
a log acquisition unit configured to acquire a log output from an in-vehicle electronic control unit (in-vehicle ECU) used for the vehicle, wherein the in-vehicle ECUcentrally manage the log that is information of an exchange in a communication establishment process that is an end-to-end communication process between an in-vehicle device mounted on the vehicle and a connection destination on the network outside of the vehicle to output the log estimated to be related to a failure in the communication establishment process among the centrally managed log;
a log storage configured to store the log acquired by the log acquisition unit from the in-vehicle ECU
a rule setting unit configured to set a detection rule for designating a cause identification log that is the log estimated to enable identification of a cause of the failure; and
a setting transmission unit configured to transmit the detection rule set by the rule setting unit to the in-vehicle ECU
wherein
the vehicle device includes at least one of (i) a different circuit and (ii) a different processor with a different memory storing different computer program code executable by the different processor, the at least one of the different circuit and the different processor configured to cause the vehicle device to serve as a monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection,
the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in-vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server; and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units,
the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from the server,
the in-vehicle ECU is communicably connected to the vehicle device via the in- vehicle network,
the vehicle device is wirelessly connected to the server and the DNS server via the network outside the vehicle,
the server is communicably connected to the DNS server via the network outside the vehicle, and
log acquisition unit is configured to acquire, via wireless communication, the log estimated to enable identification of the cause of the failure, the server is different from the connection destination on the network outside of the vehicle
Claim 10. A communication management method executed by at least one processor, the method comprising:
centrally managing a log that is information of an exchange in a communication establishment process that is an end-to-end communication process between an in- vehicle electronic control unit (in-vehicle ECU) mounted on a vehicle and a connection destination on a network outside of the vehicle;
detecting a failure in the communication establishment process with a monitoring unit that includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection, the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in- vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server; and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server; and
outputting a log estimated to be related to the failure among the log managed by a monitoring process when having detected the failure, via wireless communication, to [[a]]the collection server that exists outside of the vehicle, the collection server being different from the connection destination on the network outside of the vehicle
wherein:
the in-vehicle ECU is communicably connected to a vehicle device via the in- vehicle network;
the vehicle device is wirelessly connected to the collection server and the DNS server via the network outside the vehicle; and
the collection server is communicably connected to the DNS server via the network outside the vehicle.
Claim 11. A communication management method executed by at least one processor, the method comprising:
acquiring a log output from an in-vehicle electronic control unit (in-vehicle ECU) used for a vehicle, wherein the in-vehicle ECU recognize and centrally manage the log that is a status of an exchange in a communication establishment process that is an end-to-end communication process between an in-vehicle device mounted on the vehicle and a connection destination on a network outside of the vehicle to output the log estimated to be related to a failure in the communication establishment process among the centrally managed log;
storing the acquired log from the in-vehicle ECU;
setting a detection rule for designating a cause identification log that is the log estimated to enable identification of a cause of the failure for each failure cause in the communication establishment process; and
transmitting the set detection rule to the in-vehicle ECU [[.]];
wherein:
the vehicle device includes at least one of (i) a different circuit and (ii) a different processor with a different memory storing different computer program code executable by the different processor, the at least one of the different circuit and the different processor configured to cause the vehicle device to serve as a monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection;
the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in-vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server; and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units;
the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from the server,
the in-vehicle ECU is communicably connected to the vehicle device via the in- vehicle network;
the vehicle device is wirelessly connected to the server and the DNS server via the network outside the vehicle;
the server is communicably connected to the DNS server via the network outside the vehicle; and
the in-vehicle ECU
101 Analysis - Step 1: Statutory category – Yes
The claims recite a vehicle device, a server, and communication management method(s) including at least one step. The claim falls within one of the four statutory categories (see at least MPEP 2106.03).
101 Analysis - Step 2A Prong one evaluation: Judicial Exception – Yes – Mental processes
In Step 2A, Prong one of the 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance (PEG), a claim is to be analyzed to determine whether it recites subject matter that falls within one of the following groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) mental processes, and/or c) certain methods of organizing human activity.
The Office submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitutes judicial exceptions in terms of “mental processes” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the limitations can be “performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper” (see at least MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Claim 1 recites limitations “recognize a status of an exchange in a communication establishment process that is an end-to-end communication process between an in-vehicle electronic control unit (in-vehicle ECU) mounted on the vehicle and a connection destination on a network outside the vehicle”, “centrally manage a log of the exchange”, and “detect a failure in the communication establishment process”, claim 9 recites limitations “centrally manage the log” and “set a detection rule for designating a cause identification log that is the log estimated to enable identification of a cause of the failure”, claim 10 recites limitations “centrally managing a log” and “detecting a failure in the communication establishment process”, claim 11 recites limitations “recognize and centrally manage the log” and “setting a detection rule for designating a cause identification log that is the log estimated to enable identification of a cause of the failure for each failure cause in the communication establishment process”. These limitations, as drafted, are simple processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of “by the processor”. That is, other than reciting “by the processor” nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “by the processor” language, the claim encompasses a person observing and managing logs and/or data and further determining a failure in communication based on the logs and/or data (i.e., looking at data collected and forming a simple judgement). The claims also encompass a person setting rules to enable identification of a cause of failure. The mere nominal recitation of by a processor does not take the claim limitations out of the mental process grouping.
Thus, the claim recites a mental process.
101 Analysis - Step 2A Prong two evaluation: Practical Application – No
In Step 2A, Prong two of the 2019 PEG, a claim is to be evaluated whether, as a whole, it integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application. As noted in MPEP 2106.04(d), it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements such as: merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
The Office submits that the foregoing underlined limitation(s) recite additional elements that do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application.
The claims 1 and 10 recite additional elements or steps pertaining to “mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection”, “a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in- vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server”, “an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination”, and “retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server” which are recited at a high generality (i.e. as a general means of gathering log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units for use in the evaluating (detecting) step) and amounts to mere data gathering which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity and “a log output unit configured to output a log estimated to be related to the failure among the log centrally managed by the monitoring unit when the monitoring unit has detected the failure” and “the log output unit outputs, via wireless communication, the estimated log to a collection server that exists outside of the vehicle, the collection server is different from the connection destination on the network outside the vehicle” which are recited at a high generality (i.e. as a general means of outputting a log estimated to be related to the failure among the log centrally managed by the monitoring unit when the monitoring unit has detected the failure from the evaluating (detecting) step), and amounts to mere post solution outputting, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claims 9 and 11 recite additional elements or steps pertaining to “acquiring a log output from an in-vehicle electronic control unit (in-vehicle ECU) used for a vehicle”, “storing the acquired log from the in-vehicle ECU”, “transmitting the set detection rule to the in-vehicle ECU ”, “the vehicle device includes at least one of (i) a different circuit and (ii) a different processor with a different memory storing different computer program code executable by the different processor, the at least one of the different circuit and the different processor configured to cause the vehicle device to serve as a monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection”, “the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in-vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server”, “an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination”, and “the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units” which are recited at a high generality (i.e. as a general means of gathering log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units for use in the evaluating (detecting) step) and amounts to mere data gathering which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity and “the in-vehicle ECU ” which are recited at a high generality (i.e. as a general means of outputting a log estimated to be related to the failure among the log centrally managed by the monitoring unit when the monitoring unit has detected the failure from the evaluating (detecting) step), and amounts to mere post solution outputting, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity.
The “vehicle device” and “server” merely describes how to generally “apply” the otherwise mental judgements using a generic or general-purpose vehicle control environment and/or server, i.e. a computer. The vehicle device and server are recited at a high level of generality and merely automate the evaluating (detecting) step.
Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis - Step 2B evaluation: Inventive concept – No
In Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, a claim is to be evaluated as to whether the claim, as a whole, amounts to significantly more than the recited exception, i.e., whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, adds an inventive concept to the claim (see at least MPEP 2106.05).
As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claim amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception on a generic computer cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
Under the 2019 PEG, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B. Here, the mediating, acquiring, storing, transmitting, and retaining steps and the outputting steps were considered to be insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A, and thus they are re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. The specification does not provide any indication that the vehicle device and/or server are anything other than a conventional computer within a vehicle and outside of a vehicle respectively. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). Further, the Federal Circuit in Trading Techs. Int’l v. IBG LLC, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2019), and Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Co., 850 F.3d 1315, 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2017), for example, indicated that the mere displaying (outputting) of data is a well understood, routine, and conventional function. Accordingly, a conclusion that the collecting step is well-understood, routine, conventional activity is supported under Berkheimer.
Thus, the claim is ineligible.
Dependent Claims
Dependent claims 2-8 and 17-18 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claim(s) to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of the dependent claims are directed toward additional aspects of the judicial exception and/or well-understood, routine and conventional additional elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application such as further acquiring, extracting, and mediating limitations that are recited at a high level of generality and amount to mere data gathering as detailed above and further displaying and/or outputting steps that amount to mere displaying (outputting) of data as detailed above. Therefore, dependent claims 2-8 and 17-18 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of Claims 1, 9, 10, and 11.
Therefore, claims 1-11 and 17-18 are ineligible under 35 USC §101.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 1-11 and 17-18 are allowable over the prior art of record. The closest prior art of record does not teach or suggest limitations pertaining to “the monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection, the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in- vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server: and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server” among other limitations.
The closest prior art of record Tsuchida et al. (US2017/0099177A1), Matsumoto (US2018/0027005A1), Yano (US2023/0334915A1), Ritz et al. (US2004/0225381A1), and Sasaki (US2019/0156593A1) hereinafter Tsuchida, Matsumoto, Yano, Ritz, and Sasaki respectively, do not teach or suggest the claimed invention recited in claims 1, 9, 10, and 11. Tsuchida, Matsumoto, Yano, Ritz, and Sasaki do no teach or suggest “the monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection, the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in- vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server: and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server”.
Tsuchida teaches an in-vehicle terminal and a mobile terminal that receives a request and a first identifier for identifying the request and store the first identifier in a buffer, the mobile terminal sends the request to a server, which stores the first identifier in a buffer when the request includes the first identifier and generates a second identifier when the request does not include the first identifier. When an event occurs, the mobile terminal generates and stores a message and a message code related to the second identifier together with the second identifier, transfers a response including the first identifier, the message and the message code to the mobile terminal when the first identifier exists in the buffer, and transfers a response including the message and the message code to the mobile terminal when the first identifier does not exist in the buffer. The mobile terminal displays the message and the message code (see at least Tsuchida, Abstract) but does not teach the monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection, the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in- vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server: and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server.
Matsumoto teaches an association degree computation unit that computes a same period probability between respective types of events that occurred during a same period, based on occurrence times of log data, and computes an association degree between the respective types, using the same period probability. A corresponding type identification unit identifies the types corresponding to each other, using the association degree computed by the association degree computation unit. The log association unit generates synthesized log data that makes association between the log data of the corresponding types identified by the corresponding event identification unit and with the occurrence times thereof included in the same period (see at least Matsumoto, Abstract) but does not teach the monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection, the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in- vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server: and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server.
Yano teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a vehicle log collection program that causes a computer serving as an in-vehicle device to function as a reception unit configured to receive designation of identification information identifying first application software for use in a vehicle having a first storage unit and a second storage unit; an acquisition unit configured to acquire correspondence information indicating that the first application software is associated with at least one of second application software that is for use in the vehicle and different from the first application software or a service for use in the vehicle; and a transmission processing unit configured to acquire first log information that is stored in the first storage unit and is on the first application software corresponding to the identification information from the first storage unit, and transmit the first log information to a device installed outside the vehicle (see at least Yano, Abstract) but does not teach the monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection, the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in- vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server: and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server.
Ritz teaches a system and method for programmatically diagnosing the root cause of a problem in a computing system. In one embodiment, the method includes monitoring events generated by appropriate instrumentation within an operating system, logging at least a subset of the events to a log file, and detecting one or more error conditions. In response thereto, a diagnostics module is invoked. The diagnostics module queries the log file for events relevant to diagnosis of the problem and identifies the root cause by evaluating the results of the query. Once the root cause of the problem is diagnosed, a resolution module corresponding to that root cause may be invoked to programmatically resolve the problem (see at least Ritz, [0011]) but does not teach the monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection, the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in- vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server: and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server.
Sasaki teaches an information processing method that is provided to reduce an amount of data to be monitored in an onboard system of a vehicle. In the method, detection results that indicate whether an abnormality is included in communication data on an onboard network are obtained, and a first log transmission instruction is generated to cause periodic transmission of a first log from the onboard system to a server device. The first log is a log of the communication data. A second log transmission instruction is generated to cause transmission of a second log from the onboard system to the server device in a case of the detection results indicating the abnormality is included in the communication data. The second log is a log of the communication data and includes an amount of data generated per unit time that is greater than the first log (see at least Sasaki, Abstract) but does not teach the monitoring unit includes a plurality of proxy units configured to mediate the exchange in the communication establishment process of the end-to-end communication connection, the plurality of proxy units include: a name resolution proxy unit configured to mediate an exchange of name resolution information between the in- vehicle ECU and a domain name system (DNS) server: and an authentication proxy unit configured to mediate the exchange of authentication between the in-vehicle ECU and the connection destination, the monitoring unit centrally manages the exchange by retaining the log of the exchange mediated by the plurality of proxy units, and the DNS server is located outside of the vehicle and is different from a collection server.
This indication of allowable subject matter assumes the 112(b) and 101 rejections will be overcome by amendments.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA N RORIE whose telephone number is (571)272-6962. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (out of office every other Friday) 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Jelani Smith can be reached at 571-270-3969. 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.
/A.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/JELANI A SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights