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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/25 have been fully considered but they are not duo to the new ground rejection shown below
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected because it is unclear.
Claim 1 recites an amended claim limitation “wherein subsequent to the duration of the wake-up state exceeding a predetermined time period, the communication monitoring unit stores the accumulated communication information, from the accumulation storage in the storage medium during the wake-up state of the communication device during the wake-up state of the communication device.”. This claim limitation needs clarity:
a) “subsequent to the duration of the wake-up state exceeding a predetermined time period” is not clear. The phrase “subsequent to” normally refers to “a moment” of time, not a duration (“subsequent to” a “duration” suggests infinite choices of time that are after the starting point of the “duration”);
b) “the communication monitoring unit stores the accumulated communication information, from the accumulation storage in the storage medium during the wake-up state of the communication device during the wake-up state of the communication device” is unclear. First, “in” appear should have been “to”; and second, “during the wake-up state” (cited twice, seems unnecessary) appears contradict to “subsequent to the duration of the wake-up state” cited in a) because “subsequent to the duration of the wake-up state” suggests being in a non-wake-up state. Applicant stated that the specification support for the amendment of claim 1 is in [0020]-[0021], but [0021] appears indicating accumulated information in “accumulation area 42” is copied to the “storage medium 30” in the “stopped state”.
Proper correction is required.
To continue prosecution on merit, the claims will be interpreted as best understood.
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MYUNG (US 20210298090 A1) in view of Kurosa (WO 2015194652 A1).
For claim 1, MYUNG discloses a communication device mounted on a vehicle and configured to communicate with another device (FIG.15 and the associated text, such as “[0294] The first device 9010 may be a base station, a network node, a transmit UE, a receive UE, a wireless device, a wireless communication device, a vehicle, a vehicle with an autonomous navigation function”), the communication device comprising:
a communication monitoring unit that monitors communication with the other device and accumulates communication information for specifying the other device that performs communication (FIG.15 and the associated text, such as “[0369] The processor 180 may collect history information including the operation contents of the AI device 100 and/or the user's feedback on the operation, etc. The processor 180 may store the collected history information in the memory 170 …”);
a storage medium that stores the communication information (FIG. 15, memory 9012 or 9022); and
a timer configured to count a duration of a wake-up state of the communication device (“[0575] … the UE operates (or runs) an inactive timer and maintain the timer in the awake state”),
MYUNG does not directly state wherein the communication monitoring unit stores the accumulated communication information in the storage medium when a duration of the wake-up state has passed a predetermined time.
However, MYUNG discloses storing a variety collected information, including of historic communication information (“[0303] … memories 1813 and 1823 storing various types of information related to communication in a wireless communication system …”), and the monitoring and storing information is only done in sleep state (after a period of wake-up) (“[0202] If the activity time is not a complete PDCCH occasion …, the MAC entity does not have to monitor the PDCCH” and FIG. 9 in view of [0576] “… If a PDCCH is successfully detected during PDCCH monitoring, the UE operates (or runs) an inactive timer and maintain the timer in the awake state. On the other hand, if a PDCCH is not detected successfully during PDCCH monitoring, the UE may enter the sleep state after the On Duration expires.”, wherein the monitoring and storing information is done in the duration of “opportunity For DRX”). It would have been an obvious try for MYUNG to monitor and store information in a duration of the sleep state.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to monitor and store accumulated communication information in a duration of the sleep state.
MYUNG is silent but Kurosa, in the same field of endeavor of data communication associated with vehicles, discloses accumulated communication information is stored in an accumulation storage, and subsequent to the duration of the wake-up state exceeding a predetermined time period, the communication monitoring unit stores the accumulated communication information from the accumulation storage, to the storage medium during the wake-up state of the communication device, which is interpreted as (p4, 3rd para “… if the update program data has already been accumulated in the memory of the relay device, the wake-up pattern is transmitted to the in-vehicle control device connected to the in-vehicle network to wake up the in-vehicle control device, … This is a means for executing the update program and update data writing process after transmitting a transition command to the helicopter mode and receiving a notification that the in-vehicle control device has transitioned to the repro mode. …” and p4, 1st para, 1st line “… the repro mode (program rewrite mode) …”; note that “wake-up pattern” has periods of up state and down state). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Kurosa above to the accumulated communication information and to deliver it in a period of the down/sleep state as disclosed by MYUNG to yield a predictable result of delivering the accumulated information in a power saving way.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application combine MYUNG and Kurosa for the benefit of delivering the accumulated information in a power saving way (p4 of Kurosa).
As to claim 2, MYUNG in view of Kurosa discloses claim 1, MYUNG further discloses: a system monitoring unit that monitors a state of a vehicle control system mounted on the vehicle (FIG.15 and the associated text, such as “[0294] The first device 9010 may be a base station, a network node, a transmit UE, a receive UE, a wireless device, a wireless communication device, a vehicle, a vehicle with an autonomous navigation function”), wherein the timer counts a duration of the wake-up state while the vehicle control system is in a stopped state [0576] “… the UE may enter the sleep state after the On Duration expires.”), and the communication monitoring unit is configured to: accumulate the communication information while the vehicle control system is in a stopped state, and store the communication information accumulated while the vehicle control system is in a stopped state in the storage medium when a duration of the wake-up state exceeds the predetermined time period (FIG. 9 and the associated text, such as “[0581] … A DRX cycle operating as many times as the number of drxShortCycleTimers when the Drx-InactivityTimer expires” and “[0592] When the DRX inactive timer expires, the DRX mode may be started. The UE may wake up from the DRX cycle and monitor the PDCCH for a predetermined time period (on the duration timer). [0593] … After the RRC inactive timer expires, the UE may transition to the IDLE state and perform the IDLE mode DRX operation”).
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MYUNG in view of Kurosa, further in view of INABA (US 20210116926 A1).
As to claim 3, MYUNG in view of Kurosa discloses claim 2, and is silent but INABA, in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication associated with vehicle, discloses: an abnormality determination unit that performs an abnormality determination to determine whether the other device performs abnormal communication (FIG. 2 or 5 and the associated text, such as “[0031] … The determination unit 14 is configured to determine whether or not there is a communication failure of the communication unit 13 …”), wherein the abnormality determination unit performs the abnormality determination based on an execution frequency ( “[0031] … the determination unit 14 is configured to determine whether or not the communication failure of the communication unit 13 occurs by detecting an electromagnetic interference between the management center 20 and the communication unit 13 of the vehicle control device 10 …“; note that “electromagnetic interference” suggests that the abnormality determination is based on an execution frequency because wireless communication is executed using frequency) or a number of consecutive executions of a saving operation for saving the communication information accumulated while the vehicle control system is in the stopped state in the storage medium (as disclosed by the parent claims). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of INABA above to the vehicle communication system by NYUNG to yield a predictable result of determining communication failure.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine MYUNG in view of Kurosa with INABA for the benefit of determining communication failure ([0031] of INABA).
As to claim 4, MYUNG in view of Kurosa and INABA discloses claim 3, INABA further discloses: wherein when the abnormality determination unit determines that the other device has performed abnormal communication, the abnormality determination unit notifies an outside of occurrence of abnormality “[0031] … The determination unit 14 is configured to determine whether or not there is a communication failure of the communication unit 13 …”), wherein the abnormality determination unit performs the abnormality determination based on an execution frequency ( “[0031] … the determination unit 14 is configured to determine whether or not the communication failure of the communication unit 13 occurs by detecting an electromagnetic interference between the management center 20 and the communication unit 13 of the vehicle control device 10 …“). The motivation of combining MYUNG in Kurosa with INABA is the same as stated in claim 3.
As to claim 5, MYUNG in view of Kurosa discloses claim 2, MYUNG further discloses: wherein teacher information that is information regarding communication of the other device acquired when the other device performs normal communication is preset in the communication monitoring unit, and the communication monitoring unit is configured to:
accumulate the communication information while the vehicle control system is in an activated state (“[0067] … provides various services by connecting many devices and objects …” and “[0369] The processor 180 may collect history information including the operation contents of the AI device 100 and/or the user's feedback on the operation, etc. The processor 180 may store the collected history information in the memory 170 …”); and
MYUNG and INABA is silent but INABA, in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication associated with vehicle, discloses: store, in the storage medium, the communication information accumulated while the vehicle control system is in an activated state when a difference between the teacher information and information regarding communication of the other device acquired when the other device performs communication while the vehicle control system is in the activated state is out of an allowable range (FIG. 3 suggests an out of allowable range situation when a vehicle leaving a parking slot and goes out of an allowable range and the information collected within the allowable range is different from the information collected outside of allowable range in view of the parent claim). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of INABA above to the vehicle communication system by NYUNG in view of Kurosa to yield a predictable result of collecting communication information in different situations.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine MYUNG in view of Kurosa and INABA for the benefit of collecting communication information in different situations (suggested by FIG. 3 of INABA).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIANYE WU whose telephone number is (571)270-1665. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8am-6pm.
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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571) 272-3927. 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.
/JIANYE WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462