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 .
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.
Priority
The instant application is the national stage entry under 35 U.S.C. 371 of PCT Application No. PCT/JP2021/021051, filed on 2 June 2021, having claims 1-15. In a preliminary amendment, Applicant has amended claims 1-9 and cancelled claims 10-13. Claims 1-9, 14, and 15 have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 29 November 2023 was filed before the mailing date of the first action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to under 37 C.F.R. 121 because the matter being deleted should be shown and crossed out and new material should be underlined. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The specification is objected to under 37 C.F.R. 121 because of the following informalities: Matter being added should be underlined.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The semi-colon at the end of line 4 of each claim should be a colon.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-9, 14, and 15 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.
Claims 1, 14, and 15 each recite “determine [or determining], in a case where the reception device number is a first number, a data size or a bit rate of the communication data such that a data size or a bit rate becomes smaller or lower than that in a case where the reception device number is a second number smaller than the first number.” These claims are phrased in a such a way as to make it appear that the “a case where the reception device number is a second number smaller than the first number” is hypothetical in nature and not clearly part of the claimed invention, rendering it indefinite in scope.
For purposes of the prior art search in claims 1 and 15, it is being presumed that the claim limitations simply mandate that these exists a first device configuration having a number of reception devices that has a smaller data size or bit rate than that of a second configuration that has a greater number of reception devices.
For purposes of the prior art search in claim 14, this is a contingent limitation in a method and is not necessary to be shown to establish anticipation. See MPEP 2111.04.
Claims 2-9 are dependent upon rejected base claim 1 and are likewise indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 9,860,901 to Sato.
Regarding claim 14, Sato discloses a transmission method executed in a transmission device that transmits communication data to one or more reception devices via a network, the transmission method comprising: specifying a reception device number indicating the number of the reception devices that are a destination of the communication data.
The remainder of the claim is dependent on the fulfilling of a contingent limitation; the claim is therefore anticipated for the situation where this contingent limitation is not triggered.
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 1-9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0099606 to Sato (hereinafter Sato) in view of U. S Patent No. 9,973,547 to Simms (hereinafter Simms).
Regarding claim 1, Sato discloses a transmission device that transmits communication data to one or more reception devices via a network, the transmission device comprising: at least one memory storing instructions, and at least one processor (see paragraphs 23, 119, and 120) configured to execute the instructions to:
specify a reception device number indicating the number of the reception devices that are a destination of the communication data (see paragraphs 94-95 and figure 5); and
transmit the generated communication data to one or more of the reception devices that are the destination via the network (see paragraph 97).
Although Sato discloses a determining that a reception device number is a first number and there is a modification of bandwidth in view of that determination (see paragraph 93 and figure 5, item S210), Sato does not explicitly disclose “determine, in a case where the reception device number is a first number, a data size or a bit rate of the communication data such that a data size or a bit rate becomes smaller or lower than that in a case where the reception device number is a second number smaller than the first number; generate the communication data using the determined data size or bit rate.”
Simms discloses an analogous network configuration in which a resource management system may kill active sessions to operate within available bandwidth (as Sato does, see figure 5), but, alternatively, throttle sessions in light of the exceeding of a threshold or criterion (see column 4, lines 15-58; column 5, lines 24-34; column 10, lines 22-38).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing of the invention to modify the invention of Sato by throttling (i.e. reducing the data size or bit rate), as per Simms, as this is a specific alternative to killing sessions.
Regarding claim 2, Sato discloses the network may use TCP/IP (see paragraph 126); a destination of the communication data is a terminal group including one or more of the reception devices (e.g. a subnet of IP devices), and the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to specify the reception device number based on group identification information for identifying the terminal group (devices may be identified according to IP addresses, which are part of a subnet, see Simms, column 12, line 60 to column 13, line 3).
Regarding claim 3, the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to acquire the reception device number belonging to the terminal group from a server that manages information related to the terminal group (IP messages from subnets are relayed from the routers or servers the manage the subnet, and include the router IP address as part of the transmission path).
Regarding claim 4, the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: classify one or more of the reception devices that are a destination of the communication data into a subgroup having an identical relay device to be routed through in the network (IP messages from subnets are relayed from the routers or servers the manage the subnet, and include the router IP address as part of the transmission path); specify the reception device number for each of the subgroups (this is an IP destination address); and determine a data size or a bit rate of the communication data by using the reception device number specified for each subgroup (see Simms, column 12, lines 60-64).
Regarding claim 5, the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to determine a data size or a bit rate of the communication data by using the reception device number of the subgroup specified among the reception device number specified for each subgroup (Throttling may be client IP address-specific, see Simms, column 12, lines 60-65).
Regarding claim 6, the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to determine, for each of the subgroups, in a case where the reception device number in the subgroup is a third number, a data size or a bit rate of the communication data such that a data size or a bit rate becomes smaller or lower than that in a case where the reception device number in the subgroup is a fourth number smaller than the third number (Sato states the use of many types of threshold values, see paragraph 121; throttling may be client IP address-specific, see Simms, column 12, lines 60-65; it would therefore be obvious to use Simms’ configuration options to allow different thresholds for throttling within a subgroup).
Regarding claim 7, the network has a wireless network, and the relay device is a wireless access node of the wireless network (see Sato, paragraph 53).
Regarding claim 8, the communication data is communication data received from a transmission terminal, and the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to determine a data size or a bit rate to be applied to the communication data received from the transmission terminal (Sato in view of Simms applies the data size or bit rate to the transmission from the source to destinations, as shown for base claim 1).
Regarding claim 9, the communication data is data including a sound, an image, or a video, and the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to control the data size or the bit rate by changing a compression parameter of the data (see Sato, paragraph 46).
Regarding claim 15, Sato discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium in which a program is stored for causing a computer, which transmits communication data to one or more reception devices via a network (see paragraphs 23, 119, and 120), to execute: specifying a reception device number indicating the number of the reception devices that are a destination of the communication data (see paragraphs 94-95 and figure 5);
and transmitting the communication data generated to one or more of the reception devices that are the destination via the network (see paragraph 97).
Although Sato discloses a determining that a reception device number is a first number and there is a modification of bandwidth in view of that determination (see paragraph 93 and figure 5, item S210), Sato does not explicitly disclose “determining, in a case where the reception device number is a first number, a data size or a bit rate of the communication data such that a data size or a bit rate becomes smaller or lower than that in a case where the reception device number is a second number smaller than the first number; generating the communication data using the determined data size or bit rate.”
Simms discloses an analogous network configuration in which a resource management system may kill active sessions to operate within available bandwidth (as Sato does, see figure 5), but, alternatively, throttle sessions in light of the exceeding of a threshold or criterion (see column 4, lines 15-58; column 5, lines 24-34; column 10, lines 22-38).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing of the invention to modify the invention of Sato by throttling (i.e. reducing the data size or bit rate), as per Simms, as this is a specific alternative to killing sessions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW E HENEGHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3834. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Michael Fuelling can be reached at (571)270-1367. 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.
/MATTHEW E HENEGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992