DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: The acronym "BLE” is utilized without first defining it. Appropriate correction is required.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
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 claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification, as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a first networking feature data acquisition module; a first election message broadcasting module; a second election message reception module; an enrollment message reception module; and an enrollment module; a first configuration parameter acquisition unit; a first networking score acquisition unit; and a first networking feature data acquisition unit” in claims 10 and 11.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. This structure is discussed in para. 0140 of Applicant’s published application and is the electronic device includes a communication interface 61 and a processing apparatus 62.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
35 USC 112 CLAIM REJECTIONS
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.
Claims 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 8 and 19, they recite “determining that the second election message broadcast by the second device is not received within a predetermined time length, triggering to determine the first device as the master device”. Therefore, it is not clear to the Examiner how the first device can be determined to be the master device since claims 1 and 12 state that the first device receives an enrollment message from the determined master device and sends a response message to the master device. How can the first device be the master when it has already been communicating with the determined master. Furthermore, the claims state the second election message is not received within a predetermined time length which reads as the second election message wasn’t received and not that it hasn’t been received yet due to use of “is” rather than “was” received. How can second network feature data be used in a comparison when it hasn’t been received yet even though claims 1 and 12 say it was already received. Given all of the issues with these claims and not being able to find a reasonable interpretation that would work without significant changes to claims 1 and 12, along with claims 4, 8, 15, and 19, Examiner cannot find a proper interpretation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-13, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wang et al (US2024/0380661 A1).
Regarding claims 1,10, and 12, Wang teaches a dynamic networking method/ apparatus/ electronic device applied to a first device (Abstract), comprising:
a communication interface; and a processing apparatus including: a processor; and a memory storing a computer program that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to (Paras. 0016 and 0084; i.e. communication between the wireless devices would necessitate a communication interface):
obtaining first networking feature data, the first networking feature data representing a networking capability of the first device (Paras. 0009, 0027, and 0037-0043; the election message further includes a third field, the third field indicates a metric of capability of the network device to be networked; the relevant parameters may include user service quality, channel quality, interference, etc. Furthermore, different relevant parameters can be set with different weights, and then summed to obtain the metric; i.e. in order for the first device to transmit the metric of capability, it would need to obtain it); and
broadcasting a first election message and receiving a second election message broadcast by a second device, the first election message including the first networking feature data, and the second election message including second networking feature data of the corresponding second device (Paras. 0009, 0027, and 0037-0043; in step S11, the election message transmitted from the first device to be networked 401 may include information indicating that the device to be networked transmitting the election message is the first device to be networked 401, such as but not limited to the MAC address of the first device to be networked 401 to identify the first device to be networked 401 participating in the master-slave election; the election message received by the first device to be networked 401 from the second device to be networked 402 may include information indicating that the device to be networked transmitting the election message is the second device to be networked 402; i.e. the election message between all the devices includes the metric of capability); and
receiving an enrollment message broadcast by a determined master device, the master device being determined according to the first networking feature data and the second networking feature data, and the enrollment message including an access identification of a networking access point created by the master device; (Paras. 0009, 0027, 0033, 0037-0043, and 0052; the confirmation message may at least include the information associated with the master device that is confirmed by the device to be networked transmitting the confirmation message; in the case where the second device to be networked 402 confirms that the first device to be networked 401 is the master device, the confirmation message received by the first device to be networked 401 from the second device to be networked 402 may include information indicating the first device to be networked 401, such as but not limited to the MAC address of the first device to be networked 401; i.e. the confirmation message reads on the enrollment message and MAC address reads on the access identification); and
sending an enrollment response message to the master device according to the access identification to access the networking access point (Paras. 0009, 0027, 0033, 0037-0043, 0052, and 0078; Device A compares the magnitudes of MAC (A.MAC) and the MAC address of the master device. If the MAC (A.MAC) is consistent with the MAC address of the master device, then the device A is set as the master device and enter the normal networking process; if the MAC (A.MAC) is inconsistent with the MAC address of the master device, then the device A is set as a slave device and enter the regular networking process; i.e. the normal networking process would entail communicating with the master device utilizing the MAC address).
Regarding claims 2, 11, and 13, Wang teaches the limitations of the previous claims. Wang further teaches wherein obtaining the first networking feature data includes: obtaining first configuration parameters of the first device in different capability dimensions; obtaining a first networking score for the networking capability of the first device according to the first configuration parameters and networking weights corresponding to the capability dimensions; and obtaining the first networking feature data using the first configuration parameters and the first networking score (Paras. 0009, 0027, 0033, 0037-0043, 0052, 0059, and 0078; different relevant parameters can be set with different weights, and then summed up to obtain a score value, that is, the first master device potential value; similarly, the second master device potential value can be obtained).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Wang teaches the limitations of the previous claims. Wang further teaches further comprising: according to a comparison result of the first networking feature data and the second networking feature data, determining that the first device satisfies a networking abandonment condition, determining the first device as a secondary device, and stopping broadcasting the first election message (Paras. 0009, 0027, 0033, 0037-0043, and 0052; the confirmation message may at least include the information associated with the master device that is confirmed by the device to be networked transmitting the confirmation message; in the case where the second device to be networked 402 confirms that the first device to be networked 401 is the master device, the confirmation message received by the first device to be networked 401 from the second device to be networked 402 may include information indicating the first device to be networked 401, such as but not limited to the MAC address of the first device to be networked 401; i.e. once a different device is selected as master, the election message is no longer sent and the confirmation message is sent to stop the election process).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Wang teaches the limitations of the previous claims. Wang further teaches wherein determining that the first device satisfies the networking abandonment condition according to the comparison result of the first networking feature data and the second networking feature data includes: parsing the second networking feature data to obtain a second networking score and a plurality of second configuration parameters of the corresponding second device; comparing the second networking score with the first networking score of the first device; and in response to the second networking score being greater than the first networking score, determining that the first device satisfies the networking abandonment condition (Paras. 0009, 0027, 0033, 0037-0043, 0052, 0059, and 0078; different relevant parameters can be set with different weights, and then summed up to obtain a score value, that is, the first master device potential value; similarly, the second master device potential value can be obtained).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Wang teaches the limitations of the previous claims. Wang further teaches wherein determining that the first device satisfies the networking abandonment condition according to the comparison result of the first networking feature data and the second networking feature data further includes: determining that the second networking score is equal to the first networking score, obtaining a second configuration parameter and a first configuration parameter of a corresponding capability dimension according to an order of networking weights of different capability dimensions from large to small; and in response to the second configuration parameter being greater than the first configuration parameter, determining that the first device satisfies the networking abandonment condition and stopping obtaining the second configuration parameter and the first configuration parameter of the capability dimension corresponding to a next networking weight (Paras. 0009, 0027, 0033, 0037-0043, 0052, 0059, and 0078; different relevant parameters can be set with different weights, and then summed up to obtain a score value, that is, the first master device potential value; similarly, the second master device potential value can be obtained).
Regarding claims 7 and 18, Wang teaches the limitations of the previous claims. Wang further teaches wherein determining that the first device satisfies the networking abandonment condition according to the comparison result of the first networking feature data and the first second networking feature data further includes: determining that the second configuration parameters under different capability dimensions are equal to the first configuration parameters, and obtaining first broadcasting time included in the first election message and second broadcasting time included in the second election message; and in response to the first broadcasting time being later than the second broadcasting time, determining that the first device satisfies the networking abandonment condition (Paras. 0009, 0027, 0033, 0037-0043, 0052, 0059, 0073, 0078, and 0086; by controlling the ending time of transmission of the confirmation message of the first device to be networked, the problem that the second device to be networked cannot receive the confirmation message transmitted by the first device to be networked due to the probabilistic packet loss of wireless broadcast messages is solved).
Regarding claims 8 and 19, Wang teaches the limitations of the previous claims. Wang further teaches further comprising: according to the comparison result of the first networking feature data and the second networking feature data, determining that the first device satisfies a networking election condition and returning to broadcasting the first election message; determining that the second election message broadcast by the second device is not received within a predetermined time length, triggering to determine the first device as the master device; creating a networking access point and obtaining an access identification of the networking access point; and broadcasting an enrollment message including the access identification (Paras. 0009, 0027, 0033, 0037-0043, 0052, 0059, 0073, 0078, and 0086; by controlling the ending time of transmission of the confirmation message of the first device to be networked, the problem that the second device to be networked cannot receive the confirmation message transmitted by the first device to be networked due to the probabilistic packet loss of wireless broadcast messages is solved).
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 of this title, 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 3, 9, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al (US2024/0380661 A1) in view of Bahrami et al (US 2023/0239765 A1).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Wang teaches the limitations of the previous claims.
However, Wang does not specifically disclose wherein obtaining the first networking feature data using the first configuration parameters and the first networking score includes: performing hard encryption processing on the first configuration parameters and the first networking score using a predetermined hardware encryption feature to obtain a first networking capability encrypted text; and performing serialization on the first networking capability encrypted text to obtain the first networking feature data.
Bahrami teaches Mesh device communication is provided (Abstract). He further teaches wherein obtaining the first networking feature data using the first configuration parameters and the first networking score includes: performing hard encryption processing on the first configuration parameters and the first networking score using a predetermined hardware encryption feature to obtain a first networking capability encrypted text; and performing serialization on the first networking capability encrypted text to obtain the first networking feature data (Paras. 0020, 0031, and 0040; the fleet may specify a set of encryption keys that are to be used for the communication of the messages 204 between the vehicles 102 of the fleet).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Bahrami with the teachings as in Kim. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide the quality of short-range service and/or connected features may be improved (Bahrami at para. 0037).
Regarding claims 9 and 20, Wang teaches the limitations of the previous claims.
However, Wang does not specifically disclose wherein broadcasting the first election message includes: obtaining corresponding to-be-broadcast information of the first device according to a predetermined frame structure of a BLE broadcasting method, the to-be-broadcast information including the first networking feature data and device information of the first device; forming a first election message having the predetermined frame structure using the to-be-broadcast information; and broadcasting the first election message in the BLE broadcasting method.
Bahrami teaches Mesh device communication is provided (Abstract). He further teaches wherein broadcasting the first election message includes: obtaining corresponding to-be-broadcast information of the first device according to a predetermined frame structure of a BLE broadcasting method, the to-be-broadcast information including the first networking feature data and device information of the first device; forming a first election message having the predetermined frame structure using the to-be-broadcast information; and broadcasting the first election message in the BLE broadcasting method (Paras. 0019-0021 and 0045; The RF transceiver 106 may operate using various wireless protocols, such as Wi-Fi, UWB, Bluetooth, BLE, and/or near field communication (NFC), as some non-limiting examples).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Bahrami with the teachings as in Kim. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide the quality of short-range service and/or connected features may be improved (Bahrami at para. 0037).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENT KRUEGER whose telephone number is (303)297-4238. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-5:00 MT.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Thier can be reached on (571) 272-2832. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KENT KRUEGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474