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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/22/2023 has been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Interpretation - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
3. Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office Action.
Claim limitations of claim 9 have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder coupled with functional language:
“detection unit … to detect”;
“acquisition unit … to acquire”; and
“generation unit … to generate”.
Claim limitations of claim 10 have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder coupled with functional language:
“provisioning unit … to provide”;
“detection unit … to detect”;
“acquisition unit … to acquire”;
“generation unit … to generate”.
“detection unit … to detect”; and
“control unit … to control”.
Claim limitations of claim 11 have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder coupled with functional language:
“control unit … to control”.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim(s) 9-11 have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Regarding claim 9, a review of the specification shows that there is
corresponding structure for:
“detection unit … to detect” in the form of “detection unit 25 … can be realized in turn based on a code which is stored in a memory and can be executed by a processor” (paragraph 0089, and Fig. 2: 2nd Detection Unit 25);
“acquisition unit … to acquire” in the form of “acquisition unit 23 can comprise at least one sensor and/or be realized by a code which is stored in a memory and can be executed by a processor” (paragraph 0087, and Fig. 2: Acquisition Unit 23); and
“generation unit … to generate” in the form of “generation unit 24 can …
be realized based on a code which is stored in a memory and can be executed by a processor” (paragraph 0087, and Generation Unit 24) described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation.
Regarding claim 10, a review of the specification shows that there is
corresponding structure for:
“provisioning unit … to provide” in the form of
provisioning unit 29 can be a receiver that is designed so as to receive corresponding data (paragraph 0096, and Fig. 2: Provisioning unit 29);
“detection unit … to detect” in the form of “detection unit 25 … can be realized in turn based on a code which is stored in a memory and can be executed by a processor” (paragraph 0089, and Fig. 2: 2nd Detection Unit 25);
“acquisition unit … to acquire” in the form of “acquisition unit 23 can comprise at least one sensor and/or be realized by a code which is stored in a memory and can be executed by a processor” (paragraph 0087, and Fig. 2: Acquisition Unit 23);
“generation unit … to generate” in the form of “generation unit 24 can … be realized based on a code which is stored in a memory and can be executed by a processor” (paragraph 0087, and Fig. 2: Generation Unit 24);
“detection unit … to detect” in the form of “detection unit 25 … can be
realized in turn based on a code which is stored in a memory and can be executed by a processor” (paragraph 0089, and Fig. 2: 2nd Detection Unit 25); and
“control unit … to control” in the form of “control unit 31 can … be realized in turn, for example, based on a code which is stored in a memory and can be executed by a processor” (paragraph 0096, and Fig. 2: Control Unit 31) described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation.
Regarding claim 11, a review of the specification shows that there is
corresponding structure for “control unit … to control” in the form of “control unit 31 can … be realized in turn, for example, based on a code which is stored in a memory and can be executed by a processor” (paragraph 0096, and Fig. 2: Control Unit 31) described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation.
If Applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the Examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, Applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office Action.
If Applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuki Yamaguchi (JP 5382804 B2), hereinafter Yamaguchi, in view of GRAYSON et al. (US 20130163463 A1), hereinafter GRAYSON, further in view of Shimizu et al. (US 20110250920 A1), hereinafter Shimizu.
Regarding claim 1, Yamaguchi discloses a method for generating a
prioritization of communications in an environment, wherein the environment comprises multiple communication units, and wherein the multiple communication units communicate on different frequencies, the method comprising the steps of:
((see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) “In a wireless communication device including at least two wireless units and a control unit that controls them, and each wireless unit can operate at different frequencies under the control of the control unit, Each of the at least two radio units, has a function of detecting a specific priority radio wave radar and a data communication function, The control unit is configured to determine whether or not the specific priority radio wave is generated by performing detection of the specific priority radio wave for a plurality of channels with respect to a plurality of channels with respect to the idle radio state among the at least two radio units”).
However, Yamaguchi does not disclose detecting multiple communication units in a particular vicinity; and acquiring, for each of the detected multiple communication units respectively, status information relating to the corresponding communication unit.
In the same field of endeavor, GRAYSON discloses detecting multiple communication units in a particular vicinity, ([0019], [0017] “When a mobile device enters this region with parallel communication networks, the mobile device can detect two parallel communication networks […] [0089] The UE 134 described above can communicate with a plurality of radio access networks using a plurality of access technologies and with wired communication networks. […] The UE 134 can receive updates and other information from these applications on the network”); and
acquiring, for each of the detected multiple communication units respectively, status information relating to the corresponding communication unit, ([0019], [0017] “When a mobile device enters this region with parallel communication networks, the mobile device can detect two parallel communication networks […] [0089] The UE 134 described above can communicate with a plurality of radio access networks using a plurality of access technologies and with wired communication networks. […] The UE 134 can receive updates and
other information from these applications on the network”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) to include the region with parallel communication networks, disclosed by GRAYSON. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to confirm the existence, and particulars of multiple communication units in the given area of coverage, thus perform prioritization accordingly, GRAYSON ([0019], [0017], [0089]).
However, Yamaguchi, as modified by GRAYSON does not disclose
generating a prioritization of communications of the detected multiple communication units based on the status information of all of the detected multiple communication units.
In the same field of endeavor, Shimizu discloses generating a prioritization of
communications of the detected multiple communication units based on the status information of all of the detected multiple communication units, ([0071]- [0073], ([0007] “a mobile terminal mounted with plural communication devices holds a communication device allocation priority table corresponding to each of the plural communication devices […] The communication device allocation priorities are determined according to combinations of application types and the operating states of applications. The mobile terminal allocates the communication device to an application in accordance with the priorities recorded in the allocation priority table. The communication device allocation priorities recorded in the communication device allocation priority table are updated according to the operating states of applications and the availability of alternative communication devices”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON to include the devices application types and the operating states, disclosed by Shimizu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so prioritization of the communication devices is determined based upon the devices’ respective statuses, Shimizu ([0071]- [0073], ([0007]).
Regarding claim 2, as applied to claim 1 above, Shimizu, as included in the combination of Yamaguchi and GRAYSON, further discloses wherein the method further comprises the steps of: detecting whether there is a new communication unit in the vicinity; and updating the prioritization based on the new communication unit when there is a new communication unit in the environment, (Shimizu [0071]- [0073], [0007] ““a mobile terminal mounted with plural communication devices holds a communication device allocation priority table corresponding to each of the plural communication devices […] The communication device allocation priorities are determined according to combinations of application types and the operating states of applications. The mobile terminal allocates the communication device to an application in accordance with the priorities recorded in the allocation priority table. The communication device allocation priorities recorded in the communication device allocation priority table are updated according to the operating states of applications and the availability of alternative communication devices”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON to include the alternative communication devices, disclosed by Shimizu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so prioritization updates account for all communication devices present, Shimizu ([0071]- [0073], ([0007]).
Regarding claim 6, as applied to claim 1 above, Shimizu, as included in the combination of Yamaguchi and GRAYSON, further discloses wherein the environment is a motor vehicle, (Shimizu [0055,[0028] - [0029] [0010] “a mobile terminal, for example, a car navigation system mounted with plural wireless communication means such as Wi-Fi (registered trademark), WiMAX (registered trademark), UWB (registered trademark), and Bluetooth (registered trademark) devices does not impede the operations of applications which make use of communication devices and can effectively utilize communication devices not being used by applications. [0076] Note that the present invention is not limited to a vehicle-mounted terminal”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON to include the car navigation system, disclosed by Shimizu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to establish a suitable mobile communication environment, Shimizu ([0055], [0028] - [0029], [0010]).
Regarding claim 9, Yamaguchi discloses a system for generating a prioritization of communications in an environment, wherein the environment comprises multiple communication units, and wherein the multiple communication units communicate on different frequencies, wherein the system comprises: at least one detection unit which is designed so as to detect multiple communication units in the environment, ((see page 7 of the translated document [claims])“In a wireless communication device including at least two wireless units and a control unit that controls them, and each wireless unit can operate at different frequencies under the control of the control unit, Each of the at least two radio units, has a function of detecting a specific priority radio wave radar and a data communication function, The control unit is configured to determine whether or not the specific priority radio wave is generated by performing detection of the specific priority radio wave for a plurality of channels with respect to a plurality of channels with respect to the idle radio state among the at least two radio units”).
However, Yamaguchi does not disclose at least one acquisition unit which is
designed so as to acquire, for each of the detected multiple communication units
respectively, status information relating to the corresponding communication unit.
In the same field of endeavor, GRAYSON discloses at least one acquisition unit which is designed so as to acquire, for each of the detected multiple communication units respectively, status information relating to the corresponding communication unit, ([0019], [0017] “When a mobile device enters this region with parallel communication networks, the mobile device can detect two parallel communication networks […] [0089] The UE 134 described above can communicate with a plurality of radio access networks using a plurality of access technologies and with wired communication networks. […] The UE 134 can receive updates and other information from these applications on the network”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) to include the received updates and other information, disclosed by GRAYSON. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so the UE receives the latest updates of the respective networks and can perform prioritization accordingly, GRAYSON ([0089]).
However, Yamaguchi, as modified by GRAYSON does not disclose a generation unit which is designed so as to generate a prioritization of communications of the detected multiple communication units based on the status information of all of the detected multiple communication units.
In the same field of endeavor, Shimizu discloses a generation unit which is
designed so as to generate a prioritization of communications of the detected multiple communication units based on the status information of all of the detected multiple communication units, ([0071]- [0073], ([0007] “a mobile terminal mounted with plural communication devices holds a communication device allocation priority table corresponding to each of the plural communication devices […] The communication device allocation priorities are determined according to combinations of application types and the operating states of applications. The mobile terminal allocates the communication device to an application in accordance with the priorities recorded in the allocation priority table. The communication device allocation priorities recorded in the communication device allocation priority table are updated according to the operating states of applications and the availability of alternative communication devices”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON to include the devices application types and the operating states, disclosed by Shimizu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so prioritization of the communication devices is determined based upon the devices’ respective statuses, Shimizu ([0071]- [0073], ([0007]).
Regarding claim 12, Yamaguchi discloses a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium (see page 3, paragraph 6 of the translated document [storage unit 316]) having stored thereon program instructions which, when the program instructions are executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the acts of generating a prioritization of communications of multiple communication units in an environment by: (see page 7 of the translated document [claims])“In a wireless communication device including at least two wireless units and a control unit that controls them, and each wireless unit can operate at different frequencies under the control of the control unit, Each of the at least two radio units, has a function of detecting a specific priority radio wave radar and a data communication function, The control unit is configured to determine whether or not the specific priority radio wave is generated by performing detection of the specific priority radio wave for a plurality of channels with respect to a plurality of channels with respect to the idle radio state among the at least two radio units”).
However, Yamaguchi does not disclose detecting multiple communication units in a particular vicinity; acquiring, for each of the detected multiple communication units respectively, status information relating to the corresponding communication unit.
In the same field of endeavor, GRAYSON discloses detecting multiple communication units in a particular vicinity, ([0019], [0017] “When a mobile device enters this region with parallel communication networks, the mobile device can detect two parallel communication networks […] [0089] The UE 134 described above can communicate with a plurality of radio access networks using a plurality of access technologies and with wired communication networks. […] The UE 134 can receive updates and other information from these applications on the network”);
acquiring, for each of the detected multiple communication units respectively, status information relating to the corresponding communication unit, ([0019], [0017] “When a mobile device enters this region with parallel communication networks, the mobile device can detect two parallel communication networks […] [0089] The UE 134 described above can communicate with a plurality of radio access networks using a plurality of access technologies and with wired communication networks. […] The UE 134 can receive updates and other information from these applications on the network”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) to include the region with parallel communication networks, disclosed by GRAYSON. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to confirm the existence, and particulars of multiple communication units in the given area of coverage, thus perform prioritization accordingly, GRAYSON ([0019], [0017], [0089]).
However, Yamaguchi, as modified by GRAYSON does not disclose generating a prioritization of communications of the detected multiple communication units based on the status information of all of the detected multiple communication units.
In the same field of endeavor, Shimizu discloses generating a prioritization of
communications of the detected multiple communication units based on the status information of all of the detected multiple communication units, ([0071]- [0073], ([0007] “a mobile terminal mounted with plural communication devices holds a communication device allocation priority table corresponding to each of the plural communication devices […] The communication device allocation priorities are determined according to combinations of application types and the operating states of applications. The mobile terminal allocates the communication device to an application in accordance with the priorities recorded in the allocation priority table. The communication device allocation priorities recorded in the communication device allocation priority table are updated according to the operating states of applications and the availability of alternative communication devices”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON to include the devices application types and the operating states, disclosed by Shimizu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so prioritization of the communication devices is determined based upon the devices’ respective statuses, Shimizu ([0071]- [0073], ([0007]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuki
Yamaguchi (JP 5382804 B2), hereinafter Yamaguchi, in view of GRAYSON et al. (US 20130163463 A1), hereinafter GRAYSON, further in view of Shimizu et al. (US 20110250920 A1), hereinafter Shimizu, and further in view of Toru Nakata (US 20090064250 A1), hereinafter Nakata.
Regarding claim 3, as applied to claim 1 above, Yamaguchi as modified by GRAYSON and Shimizu does not disclose wherein the method further comprises the steps of: detecting whether external interference is present; and updating the prioritization based on external interference when external interference is present.
In the same field of endeavor, Nakata discloses wherein the method further comprises the steps of: detecting whether external interference is present; and updating the prioritization based on external interference when external interference is present, ([0058] “in wireless communications, factors such as conditions of buildings and the interference with external radio waves have different influences on the transmission quality depending on the frequency […] Therefore, the wireless terminal 203 updates the ranking of the frequencies and the transmission quality on every arrival of the error rate information from the access point 201. It is assumed here that the frequency f1 has the highest transmission quality when the communication is desired, followed by the frequency f2 and then the frequency f3, with an increasing packet loss rate”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON and Shimizu to include factors such as interference with external radio waves, disclosed by Nakata. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so all influential factors impacting the quality of the transmission are accounted for when performing prioritization, Nakata ([0058]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuki Yamaguchi (JP 5382804 B2), hereinafter Yamaguchi, in view of GRAYSON et al. (US 20130163463 A1), hereinafter GRAYSON, further in view of Shimizu et al. (US 20110250920 A1), hereinafter Shimizu, and further in view of Renaldi et al. (US 20180091935 A1), hereinafter Renaldi.
Regarding claim 4, as applied to claim 1 above, Yamaguchi as modified by GRAYSON and Shimizu does not disclose wherein the status information comprises one or more of general information about the corresponding communication unit, information about a status of the corresponding communication unit, information about a current position of the corresponding communication unit, or information about a current position of the environment.
In the same field of endeavor, Renaldi discloses wherein the status information comprises one or more of general information about the corresponding communication unit, information about a status of the corresponding communication unit, information about a current position of the corresponding communication unit, or information about a current position of the environment, ([0037][0022] “Each wireless location device 42 may be implemented utilizing one or more of a portion of a global positioning system (GPS) satellite constellation, a portion of a private location service, a wireless local area network (WLAN) access point, a Bluetooth (BT) beacon and/or communication unit, and a radiofrequency identifier (RFID) tag and/or transceiver [0033] […] The four primary functions include determining an approach to the synchronizing of the status information (e.g., determining a location synchronization approach, determining a location determination approach), generating the status information (e.g., generating status information based on manually created, sensor context created, and/or machine learned rules; generating status information from a triggered response (e.g., motion detection, sharp barometer changes, etc.); determining a current location of the user device 12; and generating location synchronization information as the status information to include the current location), identifying a communication path to communicate the status information from the user device 12 to the subscriber device 22, and communicating the status information from the user device 12 to the subscriber device 22 utilizing the communication path”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON and Shimizu to include the status information (which contains the current location of the user device 12), disclosed by Renaldi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so prioritization is utmost optimized, Renaldi ([0033]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuki Yamaguchi (JP 5382804 B2), hereinafter Yamaguchi, in view of GRAYSON et al. (US 20130163463 A1), hereinafter GRAYSON, further in view of Shimizu et al. (US 20110250920 A1), hereinafter Shimizu, and further in view of Kumar et al. (US 20190176862 A1), hereinafter Kumar.
Regarding claim 5, as applied to claim 1 above, Yamaguchi as modified by GRAYSON and Shimizu does not disclose, wherein the multiple communication units comprise sensors and/or an infotainment system of a motor vehicle and/or a unit for making telephone calls and/or a unit for exchanging data with external units.
In the same field of endeavor, Kumar discloses wherein the multiple communication units comprise sensors and/or an infotainment system of a motor vehicle and/or a unit for making telephone calls and/or a unit for exchanging data with external units, ([0405] “Interface 4470 includes one or more components that provide an interface for communicating with vehicle component(s) 4480. For example, interface 4470 may include a serial interface (e.g., RS232 or RS422), a network interface (e.g., Ethernet interface, a coaxial interface), a wireless interface (e.g., cellular interface, such as a code division multiple access (CDMA) interface or a Global System of Mobile Communications (GSM) interface; a WiFi interface; a personal area network interface, such as an 802.15 interface), a controller area network (CAN) interface (e.g., a vehicle bus), a sensor interface, or the like. In some implementations, interface 4470 may be a device driver for vehicle component 4480.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON and Shimizu to include the sensor interface, disclosed by Kumar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so as to equip the communication devices with means to exchange data with remote entities, Kumar ([0405]).
Claims 7, 8, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuki Yamaguchi (JP 5382804 B2), hereinafter Yamaguchi, in view of GRAYSON et al. (US 20130163463 A1), hereinafter GRAYSON, further in view of Shimizu et al. (US 20110250920 A1), hereinafter Shimizu, further in view of David James Durham Holtschneider (US 20060046719 A1), hereinafter Holtschneider, and further in view of Behnamfar et al. (US 20140226502 A1), hereinafter Behnamfar.
Regarding claim 7, Yamaguchi discloses a method for controlling communications in an environment, wherein the environment comprises multiple communication units, and wherein the multiple communication units communicate on different frequencies, the method comprising the steps of: generating a prioritization of communications of the multiple communication units in the environment, wherein the generating comprises: (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) “In a wireless communication device including at least two wireless units and a control unit that controls them, and each wireless unit can operate at different frequencies under the control of the control unit, Each of the at least two radio units, has a function of detecting a specific priority radio wave radar and a data communication function, The control unit is configured to determine whether or not the specific priority radio wave is generated by performing detection of the specific priority radio wave for a plurality of channels with respect to a plurality of channels with respect to the idle radio state among the at least two radio units.”).
However, Yamaguchi does not disclose generating a prioritization of communications of the multiple communication units in the environment, wherein the generating comprises: detecting multiple communication units in a particular vicinity; and acquiring, for each of the detected multiple communication units respectively, status information relating to the corresponding communication unit.
In the same field of endeavor, GRAYSON discloses generating a prioritization of communications of the multiple communication units in the environment, wherein the generating comprises: detecting multiple communication units in a particular vicinity, ([0019], [0017] “When a mobile device enters this region with parallel communication networks, the mobile device can detect two parallel communication networks […] [0089] The UE 134 described above can communicate with a plurality of radio access networks using a plurality of access technologies and with wired communication networks. […] The UE 134 can receive updates and other information from these applications on the network”); and
acquiring, for each of the detected multiple communication units respectively, status information relating to the corresponding communication unit, ([0019], [0017] “When a mobile device enters this region with parallel communication networks, the mobile device can detect two parallel communication networks […] [0089] The UE 134 described above can communicate with a plurality of radio access networks using a plurality of access technologies and with wired communication networks. […] The UE 134 can receive updates and other information from these applications on the network”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) to include the region with parallel communication networks, disclosed by GRAYSON. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to confirm the existence, and particulars of multiple communication units in the given area of coverage, thus perform prioritization accordingly, GRAYSON ([0019], [0017], [0089]).
However, Yamaguchi, as modified by GRAYSON does not disclose generating the prioritization of communications of the detected multiple communication units based
on the status information of all of the detected multiple communication units.
In the same field of endeavor, Shimizu discloses generating the prioritization of communications of the detected multiple communication units based on the status information of all of the detected multiple communication units, ([0071]- [0073], ([0007] “a mobile terminal mounted with plural communication devices holds a communication device allocation priority table corresponding to each of the plural communication devices […] The communication device allocation priorities are determined according to combinations of application types and the operating states of applications. The mobile terminal allocates the communication device to an application in accordance with the priorities recorded in the allocation priority table. The communication device allocation priorities recorded in the communication device allocation priority table are updated according to the operating states of applications and the availability of alternative communication devices”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON to include the devices application types and the operating states, disclosed by Shimizu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so prioritization of the communication devices is determined based upon the devices’ respective statuses, Shimizu ([0071]- [0073], ([0007]).
However, Yamaguchi, as modified by GRAYSON and Shimizu does not
disclose (b) detecting that one of the multiple communication units is attempting to
initiate a communication.
In the same field of endeavor, Holtschneider discloses (b) detecting that one of the multiple communication units is attempting to initiate a communication, ([0027] “when the initiating communication device 100 finds multiple candidate communication devices 100 in the connection request mode, the initiating communication device 100 may obtain various candidate discriminators associated with the candidate communication devices 100 to help determine which candidate communication device 100 is the target communication device 100. […] By comparing the candidate discriminators to corresponding discriminators associated with the connection request mode of the initiating communication device 100, the initiating communication device 100 may determine which candidate communication device 100 is the target communication device 100. […] Once the correct initiating/target communication device pair is identified, exchanged identification information is used to initiate a long-range wireless connection between the identified pair of communication devices 100”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON and Shimizu to include the initiating communication device 100, disclosed by Holtschneider. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been
motivated to make this modification to generate prioritization of the existing
communication devices, Holtschneider ([0027]).
However, Yamaguchi, as modified by GRAYSON, Shimizu, and Holtschneider does not disclose (c) controlling the initiated communication and simultaneously executed communications of further ones of the multiple communication units based on the generated prioritization and currently available resources.
In the same field of endeavor, Behnamfar discloses (c) controlling the initiated communication and simultaneously executed communications of further ones of the multiple communication units based on the generated prioritization and currently available resources, ([0031] “[…] determine the priority of transmitting wireless signals (e.g., Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and LTE signals) relative to the priority of receiving satellite signals. […] the relative priorities of transmitting wireless signals and receiving satellite signals may be used to selectively adjust the transmission rates of the wireless signals, for example, to reduce the interference of the satellite signals caused by IM products created during concurrent transmission of multiple wireless signals [0040] When device 200 is communicating with one or more other devices, processor 210 may generate data to be transmitted as Wi-Fi signals, Bluetooth signals, and/or LTE signals to the other device(s) via one or more of antennas ANT1-ANT3 (equivalent to currently available resources), and may receive Wi-Fi signals, Bluetooth signals, LTE signals, and/or satellite signals from the other device(s) via one or more of antennas ANT1-ANT3. During such communications, processor 210 may assign the first priority value (PV1) to the transmission of Wi-Fi signals and may assign the second priority value (PV2) to the reception of satellite signals. For some embodiments, the first and second priority values may be weighted in response to a number of weighting values (e.g., provided by a user via user interface 230)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON, Shimizu, and Holtschneider to include the transmitting wireless signals, disclosed by Behnamfar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to execute concurrent transmission of multiple wireless signals per respective priorities, Behnamfar ([0031], [0040]).
Regarding claim 8, as applied to claim 7 above, Behnamfar, as included in the combination of Yamaguchi, GRAYSON, Shimizu, and Holtschneider, further discloses wherein the step of controlling the initiated communication and simultaneously executed communications of further ones of the multiple communication units comprises: controlling the initiated communication based on the generated prioritization, currently available resources, and information about requirements for communication of at least one portion of the multiple communication units, ([0031] “[…] determine the priority of transmitting wireless signals (e.g., Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and LTE signals) relative to the priority of receiving satellite signals. […] the relative priorities of transmitting wireless signals and receiving satellite signals may be used to selectively adjust the transmission rates of the wireless signals, for example, to reduce the interference of the satellite signals caused by IM products created during concurrent transmission of multiple wireless signals [0040] When device 200 is communicating with one or more other devices, processor 210 may generate data to be transmitted as Wi-Fi signals, Bluetooth signals, and/or LTE signals to the other device(s) via one or more of antennas ANT1-ANT3 (equivalent to currently available resources), and may receive Wi-Fi signals, Bluetooth signals, LTE signals, and/or satellite signals from the other device(s) via one or more of antennas ANT1-ANT3. During such communications, processor 210 may assign the first priority value (PV1) to the transmission of Wi-Fi signals and may assign the second priority value (PV2) to the reception of satellite signals. For some embodiments, the first and second priority values may be weighted in response to a number of weighting values (e.g., provided by a user via user interface 230)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON, Shimizu, and Holtschneider to include the transmitting wireless signals, disclosed by Behnamfar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to execute concurrent transmission of multiple
wireless signals per respective priorities, Behnamfar ([0031], [0040]).
Regarding claim 10, Yamaguchi discloses a system for controlling communications in an environment, wherein the environment comprises multiple communication units, and wherein the multiple communication units communicate on different frequencies, wherein the system comprises: a provisioning unit which is designed so as to provide a prioritization of communications of the multiple communication units in the environment, wherein the prioritization has been generated by a system comprising: (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) “In a wireless communication device including at least two wireless units and a control unit that controls them, and each wireless unit can operate at different frequencies under the control of the control unit, Each of the at least two radio units, has a function of detecting a specific priority radio wave radar and a data communication function, The control unit is configured to determine whether or not the specific priority radio wave is generated by performing detection of the specific priority radio wave for a plurality of channels with respect to a plurality of channels with respect to the idle radio state among the at least two radio units. Each of the two transmission / reception circuits has a frequency control unit, and each transmission / reception circuit operates at a different frequency, and can transmit / receive data and detect a specific priority radio wave”).
However, Yamaguchi does not disclose at least one detection unit which is
designed so as to detect multiple communication units in the environment; at least one acquisition unit which is designed so as to acquire, for each of the detected multiple communication units respectively, status information relating to the corresponding communication unit.
In the same field of endeavor, GRAYSON discloses at least one detection unit which is designed so as to detect multiple communication units in the environment, ([0019], [0017] “When a mobile device enters this region with parallel communication networks, the mobile device can detect two parallel communication networks […] [0089] The UE 134 described above can communicate with a plurality of radio access networks using a plurality of access technologies and with wired communication networks. […] The UE 134 can receive updates and other information from these applications on the network”);
at least one acquisition unit which is designed so as to acquire, for each of the detected multiple communication units respectively, status information relating to the corresponding communication unit, ([0019], [0017] “When a mobile device enters this region with parallel communication networks, the mobile device can detect two parallel communication networks […] [0089] The UE 134 described above can communicate with a plurality of radio access networks using a plurality of access technologies and with wired communication networks. […] The UE 134 can receive updates and other information from these applications on the network”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) to include the region with parallel communication networks, disclosed by GRAYSON. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to confirm the existence, and particulars of multiple communication units in the given area of coverage, thus perform prioritization accordingly, GRAYSON ([0019], [0017], [0089]).
However, Yamaguchi, as modified by GRAYSON does not disclose a generation unit which is designed so as to generate a prioritization of communications of the detected multiple communication units based on the status information of all of the detected multiple communication units.
In the same field of endeavor, Shimizu discloses a generation unit which is designed so as to generate a prioritization of communications of the detected multiple communication units based on the status information of all of the detected multiple communication units, ([0071]- [0073], ([0007] “a mobile terminal mounted with plural communication devices holds a communication device allocation priority table corresponding to each of the plural communication devices […] The communication device allocation priorities are determined according to combinations of application types and the operating states of applications. The mobile terminal allocates the communication device to an application in accordance with the priorities recorded in the allocation priority table. The communication device allocation priorities recorded in the communication device allocation priority table are updated according to the operating states of applications and the availability of alternative communication devices”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON to include the devices application types and the operating states, disclosed by Shimizu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so prioritization of the communication devices is determined based upon the devices’ respective statuses, Shimizu ([0071]- [0073], ([0007]).
However, Yamaguchi, as modified by GRAYSON and Shimizu does not disclose a detection unit which is designed so as to detect that one of the multiple communication units is attempting to initiate a communication.
In the same field of endeavor, Holtschneider discloses a detection unit which is designed so as to detect that one of the multiple communication units is attempting to initiate a communication, ([0027] “when the initiating communication device 100 finds multiple candidate communication devices 100 in the connection request mode, the initiating communication device 100 may obtain various candidate discriminators associated with the candidate communication devices 100 to help determine which candidate communication device 100 is the target communication device 100. […] By comparing the candidate discriminators to corresponding discriminators associated with the connection request mode of the initiating communication device 100, the initiating communication device 100 may determine which candidate communication device 100 is the target communication device 100. […] Once the correct initiating/target communication device pair is identified, exchanged identification information is used to initiate a long-range wireless connection between the identified pair of communication devices 100”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON and Shimizu to include the initiating communication device 100, disclosed by Holtschneider. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to implement prioritization of the existing communication devices, Holtschneider ([0027]).
However, Yamaguchi, as modified by GRAYSON, Shimizu, and Holtschneider does not disclose a control unit which is adapted so as, in response to one of the multiple communication units attempting to initiate a communication, to control the initiated communication and simultaneously executed communications of further ones of the multiple communication units based on the generated prioritization and currently available resources.
In the same field of endeavor, Behnamfar discloses a control unit which is adapted so as, in response to one of the multiple communication units attempting to initiate a communication, to control the initiated communication and simultaneously executed communications of further ones of the multiple communication units based on the generated prioritization and currently available resources, ([0031] “[…] determine the priority of transmitting wireless signals (e.g., Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and LTE signals) relative to the priority of receiving satellite signals. […] the relative priorities of transmitting wireless signals and receiving satellite signals may be used to selectively adjust the transmission rates of the wireless signals, for example, to reduce the interference of the satellite signals caused by IM products created during concurrent transmission of multiple wireless signals [0040] When device 200 is communicating with one or more other devices, processor 210 may generate data to be transmitted as Wi-Fi signals, Bluetooth signals, and/or LTE signals to the other device(s) via one or more of antennas ANT1-ANT3 (equivalent to currently available resources), and may receive Wi-Fi signals, Bluetooth signals, LTE signals, and/or satellite signals from the other device(s) via one or more of antennas ANT1-ANT3. During such communications, processor 210 may assign the first priority value (PV1) to the transmission of Wi-Fi signals and may assign the second priority value (PV2) to the reception of satellite signals. For some embodiments, the first and second priority values may be weighted in response to a number of weighting values (e.g., provided by a user via user interface 230)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON, Shimizu, and Holtschneider to include the transmitting wireless signals, disclosed by Behnamfar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to execute concurrent transmission of multiple wireless signals per respective priorities, Behnamfar ([0031], [0040]).
Regarding claim 11, as applied to claim 10 above, Behnamfar, as included in the combination of Yamaguchi, GRAYSON, Shimizu, and Holtschneider, further discloses wherein the control unit is designed so as to control the initiated communication and simultaneously executed communications of further ones of the multiple communication units based on the generated prioritization, currently available resources and information about requirements for communication of at least one portion of the multiple communication participants, ([0031] “[…] determine the priority of transmitting wireless signals (e.g., Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and LTE signals) relative to the priority of receiving satellite signals. […] the relative priorities of transmitting wireless signals and receiving satellite signals may be used to selectively adjust the transmission rates of the wireless signals, for example, to reduce the interference of the satellite signals caused by IM products created during concurrent transmission of multiple wireless signals [0040] When device 200 is communicating with one or more other devices, processor 210 may generate data to be transmitted as Wi-Fi signals, Bluetooth signals, and/or LTE signals to the other device(s) via one or more of antennas ANT1-ANT3 (equivalent to currently available resources), and may receive Wi-Fi signals, Bluetooth signals, LTE signals, and/or satellite signals from the other device(s) via one or more of antennas ANT1-ANT3. During such communications, processor 210 may assign the first priority value (PV1) to the transmission of Wi-Fi signals and may assign the second priority value (PV2) to the reception of satellite signals. For some embodiments, the first and second priority values may be weighted in response to a number of weighting values (e.g., provided by a user via user interface 230)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the two wireless units, disclosed by Yamaguchi (see page 7 of the translated document [claims]) as modified by GRAYSON, Shimizu, and Holtschneider to include the transmitting wireless signals, disclosed by Behnamfar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to execute concurrent transmission of multiple wireless signals per respective priorities, Behnamfar ([0031], [0040]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GILBERT GRANT whose telephone number is (703)756-1136. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 7:00 pm, Monday - Thursday.
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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached on 571-272-7915. 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.
/GILBERT M. GRANT/Examiner, Art Unit 2642
/Rafael Pérez-Gutiérrez/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2642