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 .
The amendment filed on June 5, 2026 has been considered.
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 1-3 and 5-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Pursuant to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (MPEP 2106), the following analysis is made:
Under step 1 of the Guidance, the claims fall within a statutory category.
Under step 2A, prong 1, claims 1, 8, and 13 recite an abstract idea of “the virtual thermal device is a prediction model built from simulation data” (prediction model, mathematical concept), “providing the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior of the computing device based on the computing device measurement data” (mental process), “providing … one or more options to prevent the incoming behavior, wherein the one or more options include an option to lower power submitted to a processor or increase a fan speed above a noise threshold (providing options, mental process), “providing an instruction to perform the selected option” (instructing, mental process).
Claims 8 and 13 further recite an abstract idea of “one or more options to prevent the undesired incoming behavior” (mental process). Claim 13 further recites an abstract idea of “the one or more thermal health predictions” (mental process), “the one or more options to prevent the undesired thermal health predictions” (mental process).
The mere nominal recitation of a generic processor (computing device) does not take the claim limitation out of the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) (III)).
Under step 2A, prong 2, Under step 2A, prong 2, the claim limitations are not integrated into a practical application (MPEP 2106.04(d)(I)).
Receiving computing device/telemetry data/options, collecting actual measurements, displaying predictions of incoming behavior are directed to insignificant extra-solution activities (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Under step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(A)).
Claims 2 and 6 are directed to conventional insignificant extra solution activities.
Claims 3, 5, 7, 9-12, and 14-20 are directed to an abstract idea/data.
Claims 17 and 19 are directed to conventional data/features.
Accordingly, claims 1, 8, and 13 and their respective dependent claims are patent ineligible under 35 USC 101.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boaz Costa Leite et al. (US 20200118012) in view of Bhagwat et al. (US 2013/0073245) and Xu et al. (US 2023/0289022).
Regarding claims 1 and 8, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses a method for providing one or more predictions of incoming behavior of a computing device (Abstract, lines 2-4), comprising:
receiving computing device measurement data (paragraph 0016, lines 4-6) from sensors of the computing device (paragraph 0018, lines 1-4);
providing the computing device measurement data as an input to a virtual thermal device (model, Abstract, lines 2-4; model is trained, paragraph 0022, lines 1-3, using measurement data, paragraph 0018), wherein discloses the virtual thermal device is a prediction model (prediction model, paragraph 0022, lines 1-3) build from a simulation data (prediction model is trained, paragraph 0022, lines 1-3);
receiving, from the virtual thermal device, the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior of the computing device based on the computing device measurement data (predict temperature, paragraph 0022, lines 1-3; predicted temperature is received in 708, Fig. 7).
Boaz Costa Leite et al. does not disclose providing the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior on a display.
Bhagwat et al. discloses providing the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior on a display (Abstract, lines 3-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide with Boaz Costa Leite et al. with displaying the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior as disclosed by Bhagwat et al. for the purpose of providing a complete profile of the temperature (generated/to be generated).
Boaz Costa Leite et al. further does not disclose providing one or more options to prevent the incoming behavior, wherein the one or more options include an option to lower power submitted to a processor or increase a fan speed above a noise threshold;
receiving a selected option from the one or more options; and
providing an instruction to perform the selected option.
Xu et al. discloses providing one option (lower performance of processor, paragraph 0137, line 7) to prevent the incoming behavior (to prevent operating at temperature exceeding threshold, paragraph 0137, lines 5-6), wherein the one option includes an option to lower power submitted to a processor (lower performance of processor, paragraph 0137, line 7);
receiving a selected option (electronic device lowers performance of a processor, paragraph 0137, lines 6-7); and
providing an instruction to perform the selected option (electronic device executes temperature processing policy to perform lowering performance of processor, paragraph 0137, lines 2-7).
It is noted that the more option to increase a fan speed above a noise threshold to prevent the incoming behavior is an alternative limitation because it is recited in the alternative form.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide with Boaz Costa Leite et al. with as disclosed by Xu et al. for the purpose of preventing incoming behavior of operating at temperature exceeding threshold.
Regarding claim 2, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses the computing device measurement data is received from one or more sensors (paragraph 0016, lines 4-6; paragraph 0018, lines 1-7).
Regarding claim 3, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses the computing device measurement data includes one or more of a central processing unit (CPU) temperature (step 708, Fig. 7), a CPU power usage (paragraph 0018, line 5), a graphics processing unit (GPU) power usage (paragraph 0018, line 6).
It is noted that the computing device measurement data includes one or more of a GPU temperature, a battery temperature, an ambient temperature, a display brightness measurement, a battery charge and discharge measurements, and a fan rotation speed measurement are alternative limitations because they are recited in the alternative form.
Regarding claims 5 and 9, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior relate to one or more of a battery level change (battery usage, paragraph 0018, line 10).
It is noted that Costa Leite et al. discloses the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior relate to one or more of a fan noise level change, a power consumption change, or a skin temperature change are alternative limitations because they are recited in the alternative form.
Regarding claim 6, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses receiving telemetry data and providing the telemetry data as the input to the virtual thermal device (model is trained, paragraph 0022, lines 1-3, using measurement data, paragraph 0018; 704, Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 7, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses the telemetry data includes one or more of information about applications that are running in the computing device (descriptive features, paragraph 0017, lines 3-5).
It is noted that the telemetry data includes one or more of information about communication interfaces being used are alternative limitations because they are recited in the alternative form.
Regarding claim 8, while Boaz Costa Leite et al. does not expressly disclose receiving the one or more options to prevent the undesired incoming behavior, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses a triggering a maintenance alert so that engineers can investigate and determine the root cause of the abnormal thermal behavior (paragraph 0064, lines 1-5) so the abnormal thermal behavior can to be prevented, where the abnormal thermal behavior is an undesired incoming behavior.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Boaz Costa Leite et al. with a triggering a maintenance alert for the purpose of preventing an undesired incoming behavior.
Regarding claim 10, it is noted that the skin temperature change is an alternative limitation (see claim 9).
Regarding claim 12, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses at least one of the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior is the undesired incoming behavior (early detection of abnormal thermal behavior, paragraph 0064, lines 1-5).
Claims 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boaz Costa Leite et al. (US 20200118012) in view of Shenoy et al. (KR 20220116187), Xu et al. (US 2023/0289022), and Bhagwat et al. (US 2013/0073245).
Regarding claim 13, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses a method for providing one or more options to prevent undesired incoming behavior of a computing device, and providing one or more options to prevent undesired thermal health predictions of the computing device, comprising:
receiving computing device measurement data (paragraph 0016, lines 4-6) from sensors of the computing device (paragraph 0018, lines 1-4);
receiving telemetry data of the computing device (paragraph 0016, lines 4-6);
receiving history data of the computing device (704 receives collected data 702, the collected data are stored in in data repository 106, lines 4-6);
providing the computing device measurement data, the telemetry data, and the history data as an input to a virtual thermal device (model, Abstract, lines 2-4; model is trained, paragraph 0022, lines 1-3, using measurement data, paragraph 0018), wherein discloses the virtual thermal device is a prediction model (prediction model, paragraph 0022, lines 1-3) build from a simulation data (prediction model is trained, paragraph 0022, lines 1-3);
receiving, from the virtual thermal device, one or more predictions of an incoming behavior of the computing device based on the computing device measurement data (predict temperature, paragraph 0022, lines 1-3; predicted temperature is received in 708, Fig. 7) and the telemetry data (paragraph 0018, lines 1-7), and one or more thermal health predictions based on the history data (predicted temperature, 706, predicted health grade 712 are based on collected data. 702, Fig. 7);
While Boaz Costa Leite et al. does not expressly disclose receiving the one or more options to prevent the undesired incoming behavior and the one or more options to prevent the undesired thermal health predictions, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses a triggering a maintenance alert so that engineers can investigate and determine the root cause of the abnormal thermal behavior (paragraph 0064, lines 1-5) so the abnormal thermal behavior can to be prevented, where the abnormal thermal behavior is an undesired incoming behavior and the undesired thermal health predictions.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Boaz Costa Leite et al. with triggering a maintenance alert so that engineers can investigate and determine the root cause of the abnormal thermal behavior for the purpose of preventing an undesired incoming behavior and the undesired thermal health predictions.
Boaz Costa Leite et al. does not disclose the one or more predictions provide a predicted skin temperature change of the computing device.
Shenoy et al. discloses one or more predictions provide a predicted skin temperature of the computing device (page 3, paragraph 1, line 6) for managing processing device temperature (page 3, paragraph 1, lines 7-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Boaz Costa Leite et al. with a predicted skin temperature change as disclosed by Shenoy et al. for the purpose of managing the processing device temperature.
Boaz Costa Leite et al. further does not disclose the one option includes an option to lower power submitted to a processor;
receiving a selected option of lowering the power submitted to the processor; and
providing an instruction to perform the selected option.
Xu et al. discloses one option includes an option to lower power submitted to a processor (lower performance of processor, paragraph 0137, line 7).
receiving a selected option of lowering the power submitted to the processor (electronic device lowers performance of a processor, paragraph 0137, lines 6-7); and
providing an instruction to perform the selected option (electronic device executes temperature processing policy to perform lowering performance of processor, paragraph 0137, lines 2-7).
It is noted that the more option to increase a fan speed above a noise threshold to prevent the incoming behavior is an alternative limitation because it is recited in the alternative form.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide with Boaz Costa Leite et al. with as disclosed by Xu et al. for the purpose of preventing incoming behavior of operating at temperature exceeding threshold.
Boaz Costa Leite et al. further does not disclose providing the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior, the one or more options to prevent the undesired incoming behavior, the one or more thermal health predictions, and the one or more options to prevent the undesired thermal health predictions on a display.
Bhagwat et al. discloses providing the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior the one or more thermal health predictions on a display (predicted temperature, Abstract, lines 3-6, where indicates predicted thermal health, Abstract, lines 3-6). Further, it would have been obvious to provide the one or more options to prevent the undesired incoming behavior and the one or more options to prevent the undesired thermal health predictions on a display for providing an alert to a user for preventing undesired incoming behaviors.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Boaz Costa Leite et al. with a display as suggested by Bhagwat et al. for the purpose of providing behavior predictions and alerts to a user for preventing undesired incoming behaviors.
.
Regarding claim 14, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses the history data includes long-term measurement data and long-term telemetry data collected over a long period of time (time data are collected from a variety of electronic devices, paragraph 0016, lines 4-11, the data are collected that influence the thermal behavior of over time, paragraph 0017, lines 1-2; paragraph 0018, lines 1-4).
Regarding claim 15, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses the computing device measurement data and the telemetry data are real-time data (the data are real-times data when sensed, paragraph 0018, lines 1-3).
Regarding claim 16, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses the claim limitations as discussed above with regard to claim 7.
Regarding claim 17, it is noted that the communication interface is an alternative limitation (see claim 16).
Regarding claim 18, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses the one or more thermal health predictions predict long-term failures of a hardware component (thermal health grade, 712, Fig. 7, are based on expected temperature, 706, and data sensed from hardware components of electronic device, paragraph 0018, lines 1-7).
Regarding claim 19, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses the hardware component is one or more of a battery, a display (526), a CPU, a GPU the computing device (paragraph 0018).
It is noted that the hardware component is one or more of a thermal management system of the computing device is an alternative limitation because it is recited in the alternative form.
Regarding claim 20, Boaz Costa Leite et al. discloses the claim limitations with regard to claims 5 and 9.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boaz Costa Leite et al. in view of Bhagwat et al. as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Khandhar et al. (US 2020/0379034).
Regarding claim 11, Boaz Costa Leite et al. as modified by Bhagwat et al. discloses the claimed limitations as discussed above with regard to claim 8.
However, Boaz Costa Leite et al. as modified by Bhagwat et al. does not disclose an option to close one or more applications that are running in the computing device.
Khandhar et al. discloses an option to close one or more applications that are running in the computing device (powering off applications performed by CPUs, paragraph 0090, lines 11-14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Boaz Costa Leite et al. as modified with closing one or more applications that are running in the computing device as suggested by Khandhar et al. for the purpose of preventing further severity in the thermal state.
It is noted that the one or more options include an option to lower a display brightness, an option to disconnect from a charger, an option to change to a higher power supply unit (PSU), or an option to disconnect from a network are alternative limitations because they are recited in the alternative form.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on June 5, 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objections have been withdrawn.
With regard to the rejections under 35 USC 101, Applicants argue “the amended independent claims are directed towards a practical application of thermal management of a computing device. For example, "by providing predictions of thermal behavior, a user may choose to take actions that may prevent any unwanted thermal behaviors," and "by providing predictions on thermal health of a computing device a user may prepare for any device health degradations by taking precautions, or by taking actions that may prolong the computing device's service life." See, Specification, paragraphs [0026] and [0027].”
Examiner’s position is that actions that may prevent any unwanted thermal behaviors are recited in the claims as intended actions. For example, the claims recite “providing options (selections) to prevent incoming behavior”, “option (selection) to lower power submitted to a processor or increase a fan speed above a noise threshold”, “providing instruction (instructing) to perform the selected option”.
Thus, the abstract idea in the claims has not yet been applied/used in a meaningful way (MPEP 2106.05(e)). Accordingly, the claims are not indicative of integration into a practical application.
With regard to the rejections under 35 USC 103, Applicants argue “the cited references do not disclose or suggest at least "providing the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior on a display and one or more options to prevent the incoming behavior, wherein the one or more options include an option to lower power submitted to a processor or increase a fan speed above a noise threshold; receiving a selected option from the one or more options; and providing an instruction to perform the selected option," as recited in amended independent claims 1 and similarly in amended independent claims 8 and 13.”
Examiner’s position is that, as discussed above, Boaz Costa Leite et al. in view of Bhagwat et al. and Xu et al. discloses the claim limitations.
Bhagwat et al. discloses providing the one or more predictions of the incoming behavior on a display (Abstract, lines 3-6), while
Xu et al. discloses providing one option (lower performance of processor, paragraph 0137, line 7) to prevent the incoming behavior (to prevent operating at temperature exceeding threshold, paragraph 0137, lines 5-6), wherein the one option includes an option to lower power submitted to a processor (lower performance of processor, paragraph 0137, line 7);
receiving a selected option (electronic device lowers performance of a processor, paragraph 0137, lines 6-7); and
providing an instruction to perform the selected option (electronic device executes temperature processing policy to perform lowering performance of processor, paragraph 0137, lines 2-7).
It is noted that the more option to increase a fan speed above a noise threshold to prevent the incoming behavior is an alternative limitation because it is recited in the alternative form.
Applicant’s remaining arguments have been considered but are traversed in view of the discussions and grounds of rejection discussed above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Nghiem whose telephone number is (571) 272-2277. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571) 272-2302. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/MICHAEL P NGHIEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 June 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights