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 .
Claims 1-15 have been examined.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 line 2 “link, , the” should read “link, the”
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 4-6, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter.
In reference to claim 1, 4-6
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to "logic" covers software per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of the term "logic". In the instant case, the specification fails to define the term "logic". Therefore, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term "logic" includes software per se. Hence, claims 1, and 4-6 are rejected as being directed to non-statutory subject matter, i.e. software per se.
In reference to claim 15
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a "computer program product" covers software per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of the term "computer program product". In the instant case, the specification fails to define the term "computer program product". Therefore, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term "computer program product" includes software per se. Hence, claims 15 is rejected as being directed to non-statutory subject matter, i.e. software per se.
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 2-3, 5 and 9-15 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.
In reference to claim 2
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the input" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner assumes the limitation should read “an input”.
In reference to claim 3
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the output of " in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner assumes the limitation should read “an output in the buffer of”.
In reference to claim 5
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the data to be transmitted over the awake communication lanes" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. While parent claim 1 line 6 recites “data to the second end over one awake communication lane”, this cannot be the antecedent basis for the limitation of claim 5 because claim 5 refers to data transmitted over awake communication lanes (emphasis on lanes being plural).
In reference to claim 9
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the other communication interface" in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In reference to claim 10
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the input" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner assumes the limitation should read “an input”.
In reference to claim 11
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the output of " in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner assumes the limitation should read “an output in the buffer of”.
In reference to claim 13
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the data to be transmitted over the awake communication lanes" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. While parent claim 1 line 4 recites “data from the first end to second end over one awake communication lane”, this cannot be the antecedent basis for the limitation of claim 13 because claim 13 refers to data transmitted over awake communication lanes (emphasis on lanes being plural).
In reference to claims 12, 14-15
Claims 12 and 14-15 are rejected because they depend on a rejected parent claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 7, 9, 13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherian et al. (US 2018/0206190) in view of Wijnands (US 2013/0329546).
- In reference to claim 1, as best understood
Cherian et al. teaches a communication interface (e.g. combination of receiver 510 and transmitter 520; Fig. 5 par. 00077, 0080) for use at a first end (e.g. AP 105; Fig. 2, par. 0052, 0076) of a communication link comprising a number of communication lanes greater or equal to two (e.g. three links including anchor link, first link and second link; par. 0039, 0045, 0055), the communication interface comprising: a logic (e.g. communication manager 515; par. 0078-0079) configured to:
cooperate with another communication interface at a second end (e.g. STA 115-a; Fig. 2, par. 0052) of the communication link (e.g. cooperate with combination of receiver 510 and transmitter 520 of Station 115; par. 0076) to send data to the second end over one awake communication lane amongst the communication lanes (e.g. data sent over first link in active status; 0055, 0070) and to not sent data over at least one asleep communication lane amongst the communication lanes being in a sleep mode (e.g. not sending data over an inactive/asleep second link par. 0055-0058);
store a communication lane status for the awake communication lane (e.g. AP 105-a stores awake status as lifetime for first link that is awake; par. 0060-0063);
stop sending data over the awake communication lane (e.g. stop transmitting data over the first link that is awake when there is no data in the queue; 0059-0060)
change the asleep communication lane into a new awake communication lane (e.g. change the second link from inactive/sleep to active; par. 0059, 0089, 0130);
inform the communication interface at the second end that the new awake communication lane will be used to send data (e.g. inform transmitter/receiver at station 115 that the second link with be active and used to send data; par. 0056, 0058, 0096); and
send data to the second end over the new awake communication lane (e.g. transmitting data over the newly active second link; par. 0056, 0096, 0131).
Cherian et al. does not teach upon detecting that the communication lane status for the awake communication lane has changed to a first determined status performing the stop, change, inform, and send.
Wijnands teaches upon detecting that a communication lane status for an awake communication lane has changed to a first determined status (e.g. detecting active LSP status has changed to a determined status in response to receiving the UFNP; par. 0036) performing actions (par. 0036).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logic configured to the stop, change, inform, and send of Cherian et al. to be performed upon detecting that the communication lane status for the awake communication lane has changed to a first determined status as suggested by Wijnands because it would allow an access point to detect a failure upon an awake lane and in response switch communications from the awake lane to a previously asleep lane in order to maintain communications with the receiving station.
In reference to claim 5 and 13, as best understood
The combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands teaches a system and method that covers substantially all limitations of the parent claim. Wijnands teaches the data to be transmitted over the awake communication lanes is a control message containing a control information to be used for controlling the working of a device located at the second end and connected to the other communication interface at the second end (e.g. control messages containing indication to dynamically turn on or off other wireless links of station 115a; par. 0056-0057).
In reference to claim 7
The combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands teaches a system and method that covers substantially all limitations of the parent claim. Cherian et al. further teaches a communication network (e.g. WLAN 200; Fig. 2 par. 0052) comprising a first node (e.g. AP 105-a; par. 0052) at the first end of the communication link and a second node (e.g. AP 115-a; par. 0052) at the second end of the communication link, the first node and the second node each comprising a respective communication interface (e.g. combination of receiver 510 and transmitter 520; Fig. 5 par. 00077, 0080) configured according to the communication interface of claim 1.
- In reference to claim 9, as best understood
Cherian et al. teaches a method of communication over a communication link comprising a number of communication lanes greater or equal to two (e.g. three links including anchor link, first link and second link; par. 0039, 0045, 0055), and having a first end (e.g. AP 105; Fig. 2, par. 0052, 0076) and a second end (e.g. STA 115-a; Fig. 2, par. 0052), the method comprising:
sending data from the first end to second end over one awake communication lane amongst the communication lanes (e.g. data sent over first link in active status; 0055, 0070), and not sending data over at least one asleep communication lane amongst the said communication lanes being in a sleep mode (e.g. not sending data over an inactive/asleep second link par. 0055-0058);
storing, at the first end, a communication lane status for the awake communication lane (e.g. AP 105-a stores awake status as lifetime for first link that is awake; par. 0060-0063); and
stopping sending data over the awake communication lane (e.g. stop transmitting data over the first link that is awake when there is no data in the queue; 0059-0060);
changing the asleep communication lane into a new awake communication lane (e.g. change the second link from inactive/sleep to active; par. 0059, 0089, 0130);
informing the other communication interface at the second end that the new awake communication lane will be used to send data (e.g. inform transmitter/receiver at station 115 that the second link with be active and used to send data; par. 0056, 0058, 0096); and
sending data to the second end over the new awake communication lane (e.g. transmitting data over the newly active second link; par. 0056, 0096, 0131).
Cherian et al. does not teach upon detecting that the communication lane status for the awake communication lane has changed to a first determined status performing the stop, change, inform, and send.
Wijnands teaches upon detecting that a communication lane status for an awake communication lane has changed to a first determined status (e.g. detecting active LSP status has changed to a determined status in response to receiving the UFNP; par. 0036) performing actions (par. 0036).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stop, change, inform, and send of the method of Cherian et al. to be performed upon detecting that the communication lane status for the awake communication lane has changed to a first determined status as suggested by Wijnands because it would allow an access point to detect a failure upon an awake lane and in response switch communications from the awake lane to a previously asleep lane in order to maintain communications with the receiving station.
- In reference to claim 15, as best understood
The combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands teaches a system and method that covers substantially all limitations of the parent claim. Cherian et al. a computer program product comprising program code for performing the method according to claim 9, upon being executed by a processor in a computer system. (par. 0104)
Claim(s) 4 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherian et al. (US 2018/0206190) in view of Wijnands (US 2013/0329546), as applied to the parent claim, and further in view of Nichols et al. (US 2003/0039250).
In reference to claim 4
The combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands teaches a system and method that covers substantially all limitations of the parent claim. Cherian et al. teaches the data to be transmitted over the awake communication lanes.
The combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands does not teach the logic is further configured to split a data frame into a number of subframes corresponding to the number of awake communication lanes, the data to be transmitted over the awake communication lanes being one of the number of subframes.
Nichols et al. teaches a transmit node may split a data frame (e.g. data frame; par. 0108) into a number of subframes (e.g. 5 fragments; par. 0108-0110) corresponding to a number of communication lanes (e.g. lines 40A, 40B, 40C, 40D, 40E, par. 0108) the data to be transmitted over the communication lanes being one of the number of subframes.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logic of the combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands to be configured to split a data frame into a number of subframes corresponding to the number of awake communication lanes, the data to be transmitted over the awake communication lanes being one of the number of subframes as suggested by Nichols et al. because it would increase the throughput and/or bandwidth by allowing portions of a data frame to be transmitted simultaneously over multiple links.
In reference to claim 12
The combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands teaches a system and method that covers substantially all limitations of the parent claim. Cherian et al. teaches the data to be transmitted over the awake communication lanes.
The combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands does not teach splitting, at the first end, a data frame into a number of subframes corresponding to the number of awake communication lanes, the data to be transmitted over the awake communication lanes being one of the number of subframes.
Nichols et al. teaches splitting, at a first end (e.g. a transmit node 20; Fig. 1, par. 0108), a data frame (e.g. data frame; par. 0108) into a number of subframes (e.g. 5 fragments; par. 0108-0110) corresponding to a number of communication lanes (e.g. lines 40A, 40B, 40C, 40D, 40E, par. 0108) the data to be transmitted over the communication lanes being one of the number of subframes.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of the combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands to be configured to splitting, at the first end, a data frame into a number of subframes corresponding to the number of awake communication lanes, the data to be transmitted over the awake communication lanes being one of the number of subframes as suggested by Nichols et al. because it would increase the throughput and/or bandwidth by allowing portions of a data frame to be transmitted simultaneously over multiple links.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherian et al. (US 2018/0206190) in view of Wijnands (US 2013/0329546), as applied to the parent claim, and further in view of BEN-NOON et al. (US 2020/0186560).
- In reference to claim 8
The combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands teaches a system and method that covers substantially all limitations of the parent claim.
The combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands does not the communication network being an in-vehicle communication network.
BEN-NOON et al. teaches an in-vehicle communication network (e.g. in-vehicle network communication network 60; Fig. 1C, par. 0080).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication network of the combination of Cherian et al. and Wijnands to be an in-vehicle communication network as suggested by BEN-NOON et al. because it would allow network components in a vehicle to communicate over multiple links to increase throughput and perform redundancy.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 6, 10-11 and 14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101 and/or under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure are
US 2021/0289442 pertains to managing use of power of a wireless communication device configured to communicate over a plurality of radio links. A criterion is detected, and one of the plurality of radio links is selected as a selected radio link based on detecting the criterion. Operation of the selected radio link is switched from a first operating mode to a second operating mode, and operation of one or more remaining radio links of the plurality of radio links is disabled. In response to switching operation of the selected radio link to the second operating mode, the selected radio link oscillates between an awake state and an asleep state. Radio traffic information for the plurality of radio links is received, via the selected radio link, during the awake state.
US 11601999 pertains to a method of multi-link communications involves, at a multi-link STA device (STA MLD) that supports a first link, link1, and a second link, link2, receiving a beacon on link2, acquiring an updated critical operating parameter for link1 in response to the beacon received on link2, and operating link1 according to the acquired updated critical operating parameter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN S ROBERTS whose telephone number is (571)272-3095. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 9am to 5pm.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at (571) 272-7969. 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.
BRIAN S. ROBERTS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2466
/BRIAN S ROBERTS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466