FINAL OFFICE ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2013/0227356 to Kim et al. (hereinafter Kim) in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2012/0266031 to Yang et al. (hereinafter Yang) and further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2021/0096880 to Bhuiyan et al. (hereinafter Bhuiyan).
Kim discloses:
1. An Information Handling System (IHS), comprising:
an Embedded Controller (EC) (para. [0024] – mobile terminal with processor); and
a memory coupled to, or integrated into, the EC (para. [0024] – software modules), wherein the memory comprises program instructions that, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to:
determine that a booting process is incomplete (paras. [0026]-[0028] – deadlock state during boot process); and
at least in part in response to the determination, store accident data relating to an accident in a Non-Volatile Memory (NVM) (paras. [0025], [0026], [0030] – flag indicates error information and stored to ROM).
Kim does not disclose expressly wherein the accident comprises at least one of: a drop, a fall, a throw, a hit, a physical crash, an impact, or a collision involving the IHS or a component thereof.
Yang teaches wherein the accident comprises at least one of: a drop, a fall, a throw, a hit, a physical crash, an impact, or a collision involving the IHS or a component thereof (para. [0018]).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim by applying the steps to an accidental dropping, as taught by Yang. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to detect a specific type of error condition in the electronic device and optimize reliability, as discussed by Yang (paras. [0018], [0028]).
Kim further does not disclose storing HIS settings from a Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) flash memory to a No-Volatile Memor (NVM).
Bhuiyan teaches storing IHS settings from a Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) flash memory to a No-Volatile Memory (NVM) (paras. [0021], [0022], [0025]).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim by storing settings from a SPI flash memory to NVM, as taught by Bhuiyan. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a valid restore point in the event of boot failure or corruption, as discussed by Bhuiyan (para. [0019]).
Modified Kim discloses:
3. The IHS of claim 1, wherein the program instructions, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to, at least in part in response to a determination that the IHS suffered the accident, store the accident data in the NVM (paras. [0030], [0048] and Fig. 3, S103).
4. The IHS of claim 3, wherein to determine that the IHS suffered the accident, the EC is configured to check an accident flag or register after a reboot (paras. [0030], [0049], [0050]).
5. The IHS of claim 3, wherein the accident takes place before the reboot (Fig. 3, S102, S104).
7. The IHS of claim 1, wherein the accident data comprises at least one of: IHS identification data, sensor data, or classification data (para. [0030]).
8. The IHS of claim 7, wherein the IHS identification data comprises at least one of: an IHS identification, serial number, model identification, or service tag, of the HIS (para. [0030]).
9. The IHS of claim 7, wherein the classification data comprises at least one of: a type of the accident, a severity of the accident, diagnostics data, or IHS damage data (para. [0030]).
11. The IHS of claims 1, wherein to determine that the booting process is incomplete, the program instructions that, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to wait for the expiration of a watchdog timer which monitors a status of the booting process (Yang - para. [0025]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Yang and Bhuiyan, and further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0268461 to Ai.
Kim does not disclose expressly:
10. The IHS of claim 7, wherein the program instructions, upon execution by the EC, further cause the EC to execute an Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML) model configured to determine the classification data based, at least in part, upon data collected by one or more sensors.
Yang teaches wherein the program instructions, upon execution by the EC, further cause the EC to execute an Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML) model configured to determine the classification data based, at least in part, upon data collected by one or more sensors. (paras. [0004], [0024], [0059]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim by using a machine learning model to determine the classification, as taught by Ai. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to predict and avoid future drop events, as discussed by Ai (para. [0024]). In this manner, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Kim with Ai to achieve the invention as recited in claim 10.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Yang and Bhuiyan, and further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0340058 to Sasidharan et al. (hereinafter Sasidharan).
Kim does not disclose expressly:
12. The IHS of claim 1, wherein to store the accident data, the program instructions that, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to move the accident data from a Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) flash memory to the NVM.
Sasidharan teaches wherein to store the accident data, the program instructions that, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to move the accident data from a Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) flash memory to the NVM (paras. [0004], [0039]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim by storing the accident data, as taught by Sasidharan. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to retrieve crash information without needing replacement firmware, as discussed by Sasidharan (para. [0023]). In this manner, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Kim with Sasidharan to achieve the invention as recited in claim 12.
Claims 13, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Yang and Bhuiyan, and further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2021/0248939 to Ahn et al. (hereinafter Ahn).
Kim does not disclose expressly:
13. The IHS of claim 1, wherein the program instructions, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to, at least in part in response to the determination, write a value to a timing controller (TCON) register to output an image or text on a display coupled to the IHS.
Ahn teaches wherein the program instructions, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to, at least in part in response to the determination, write a value to a timing controller (TCON) register to output an image or text on a display coupled to the HIS (paras. [0069], [0086]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim by writing to a TCON register and output to a display, as taught by Ahn. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to allow users to identify the type of kind of defects or faults without any additional process, as discussed by Ahn (para. [0027]). In this manner, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Kim with Sasidharan to achieve the invention as recited in claim 13.
Modified Kim discloses:
17. A memory device having program instructions stored thereon that, upon execution by an Embedded Controller (EC) of an Information Handling System (IHS), cause the IHS to:
determine that a booting process is incomplete (Kim - paras. [0026]-[0028]);
determine that the IHS has suffered an accident (Kim - paras. [0026]-[0028]), wherein the accident comprises at least one of: a drop, a fall, a throw, a hit, a physical crash, an impact, or a collision involving the IHS or a component thereof (Yang – para. [0018]); and
at least in part in response to the determinations, store accident data relating to an accident and IHS settings data from a Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) flash memory to a Non-Volatile Memory (NVM) (Kim - paras. [0025], [0026], [0030] and Bhuiyan - paras. [0021], [0022], [0025]).
18. The memory device of claim 17, wherein the image or text is configured to indicate at least one of: a type of the accident, or a severity of the accident (Ahn – para. [0069]).
Claims 14, 6, 15, 16, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Yang and Bhuiyan, and further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2023/0298443 to Alon.
Kim does not dislose expressly:
14. The IHS of claim 1, wherein the program instructions, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to, at least in part in response to the determination, blink one or more Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) on a chassis of the IHS.
Alon teaches wherein the program instructions, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to, at least in part in response to the determination, blink one or more Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) on a chassis of the HIS (paras. [0005], [0008]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim by blinking an LED in response to the determination, as taught by Alon. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to indicate system or component status and failures or other catastrophic events, as discussed by Alon (para. [0002]). In this manner, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Kim with Alon to achieve the invention as recited in claim 14.
Modified Kim discloses:
6. The IHS of claim 5, wherein the accident takes place while the IHS is in a modern standby or low-power state (Alon – para. [0045]).
15. The IHS of claim 1, wherein the program instructions, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to select at least one of: a blinking frequency, or a blinking pattern for the one or more Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) based upon a policy (Alon - paras. [0005], [0008]).
16. The IHS of claim 1, wherein the program instructions, upon execution by the EC, cause the EC to select at least one of: a blinking frequency, or a blinking pattern for the one or more Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) based upon at least one of a type or severity of the accident (Alon - paras. [0033], [0037]).
19. A method, comprising:
determining, by an Information Handling System (IHS), that a booting process is incomplete (Kim - paras. [0026]-[0028]);
determining that IHS has suffered an accident (Kim - paras. [0026]-[0028]), wherein the accident comprises at least one of: a drop, a fall, a throw, a hit, a physical crash, an impact, or a collision involving the IHS or a component thereof (Yang – para. [0018]); and
at least in part in response to the determinations, store accident data relating to an accident and IHS settings data from a Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) flash memory to a Non-Volatile Memory (NVM) (Kim - paras. [0025], [0026], [0030] and Bhuiyan - paras. [0021], [0022], [0025]).
20. The method of claim 19, further comprising selecting at least one of: a blinking frequency, or a blinking pattern to indicate at least one of: a type of the accident, or a severity of the accident (Alon - paras. [0033], [0037]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Philip Guyton whose telephone number is (571)272-3807. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30.
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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at (571)272-3655. 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.
/PHILIP GUYTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2113
Prosecution Insights