DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
I. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
II. Applicant’s arguments, see Response to Election/Restriction, pages 1-2, filed January 16, 2026, with respect to claims 9-22 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The requirement for restriction/election of claims 9-22 has been withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
III. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 9 contains allowable subject matter because the prior art does not teach a communication connection determination method, the method comprising: determining whether a reception number of pieces of the first data has reached a first specified number; calculating a mean deviation reference value using a first time stamp interval obtained from the first time stamp in response to a determination that the reception number of pieces of the first data has reached the first specified number; determining whether a reception number of pieces of the second data has reached a second specified number; calculating a mean deviation evaluation value using a second time stamp interval obtained from the second time stamp in response to a determination that the reception number of pieces of the second data has reached the second specified number; and testing whether there is a threshold difference between the mean deviation reference value and the mean deviation evaluation value and determining that there is a communication connection abnormality in response to a determination that there is the threshold difference.
Claims 10-14 contain allowable subject matter based on their dependence on independent claim 9,
Claims 16-17 and 20-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but may be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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.
IV. Claims 15-22 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 regards as the invention.
Claim 15 recites “storing the time stamp or time stamp interval obtained from the time stamp” in line 7 and “statistically determining a communication connection status between the sensor terminal and a sensor accommodating terminal based on the time stamp interval” in lines 8-9. It is unclear how the communication connection status can be based on the time stamp interval in situations where the time stamp is stored and not the time stamp interval. The recitation of “storing the time stamp or a time stamp interval” in line 7 is being interpreted to mean that either of the time stamp or the time stamp interval may be stored. The limitation renders the claim indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention.
For the purposes of examination, the examiner will treat the following quotation from claim 1, “storing the time stamp or time stamp interval obtained from the time stamp; and statistically determining a communication connection status between the sensor terminal and a sensor accommodating terminal based on the time stamp interval” as
“storing the time stamp or time stamp interval obtained from the time stamp; and statistically determining a communication connection status between the sensor terminal and a sensor accommodating terminal based on the time stamp or time stamp interval”.
Claims 16-18 are dependent on claim 15 and are rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same reasons given above regarding claim 15.
Claim 19 recites limitations as recited in claim 15 above. Therefore, claim 19is rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same reasons given above regarding claim 15.
Claims 20-22 are dependent on claim 19 and are rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same reasons given above regarding claim 19.
The following prior art rejection is based on the best possible interpretation of the claim language in light of the above rejection for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
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 (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 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.
V. Claims 15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yehliu (US 2022/0182855 A1).
Regarding claim 15 Yehliu teaches a communication connection determination device (see paragraph [0037], Each of the RSUs, MECs and vehicles may include a communications diagnosis module to evaluate the effectiveness of a current communication state. This reads on a communication connection determination device), the device comprising: one or more processors; and a storage device storing a program to be executed by the one or more processors (see paragraphs [0023] & [0054], a central processing unit (CPU) and a memory for storing software and sensor data reads on a storage device storing a program to be executed by the one or more processors), the program including instructions for: measuring an arrival time of data from a sensor terminal (sensor(s) 100, Fig. 1) (see paragraph [0045], The sensor 100 re-transmits the message back to the RSU 100 with the Timestamp_1. The communication diagnosis module 150 obtains a Timestamp_2 after the message is received back from the sensor 100. This reads on measuring an arrival time of data from a sensor terminal); acquiring a time stamp based on the arrival time (see paragraphs [0038] & [0045], The communications may be monitored using timestamps with dedicated communications to determine a current communications status. The sensor 100 re-transmits the message back to the RSU 100 with the Timestamp_1. The communication diagnosis module 150 obtains a Timestamp_2 after the message is received back from the sensor 100. This reads on acquiring a time stamp based on the arrival time); storing the time stamp or time stamp interval obtained from the time stamp (see paragraphs [0023] & [0045], The RSU has a memory for storing sensor data. Timestamp data is used to determine current communication status. For example, The sensor 100 re-transmits the message back to the RSU 100 with the Timestamp_1. The communication diagnosis module 150 obtains a Timestamp_2 after the message is received back from the sensor 100. After receiving this information, the communication diagnosis module 150 determines the round-trip transmission time using the timestamps. The indicates that the communication diagnosis module at least temporarily stores the timestamps, which are considered to be sensor data, and this reads on storing the time stamp or time stamp interval obtained from the time stamp); and statistically determining a communication connection status between the sensor terminal (sensor(s) 100, Fig. 1) and a sensor accommodating terminal (e.g. RSU 101, MEC, 200, vehicle, 300, Fig. 1) based on a time stamp or a time stamp interval (see paragraphs [0036] – [0038] & [0044] – [0045] and Fig. 1, The communication status between the Sensors and corresponding RSUs can measure the status by evaluating the time latency of communications between devices to ensure that communications are timely received. The communications may be monitored using timestamps with dedicated communications to determine a current communications status. The sensor/RSU communication status is determined using the RSUs communication diagnosis module 150. The communications diagnosis module 150 sends transmits a message with Timestamp_1 obtained just prior to transmission to a corresponding sensor 100. The sensor 100 re-transmits the message back to the RSU 100 with the Timestamp_1. The communication diagnosis module 150 obtains a Timestamp_2 after the message is received back from the sensor 100. After receiving this information, the communication diagnosis module 150 determines the round-trip transmission time as follows: Round-trip transmission time=Timestamp_2−Timestamp_1. This reads on statistically determining a communication connection status between a sensor terminal and a sensor accommodating terminal based on a time stamp or a time stamp interval).
Regarding claim 19 Yehliu teaches a sensor system (System Configuration, Fig. 1) comprising: a sensor terminal (sensor(s) 100, Fig. 1); and a sensor accommodating terminal (e.g. RSU 101, MEC, 200, vehicle, 300, Fig. 1) comprising: a communication connection determination device (see paragraph [0037], Each of the RSUs, MECs and vehicles may include a communications diagnosis module to evaluate the effectiveness of a current communication state. This reads on a communication connection determination device), the device comprising: one or more processors; and a storage device storing a program to be executed by the one or more processors (see paragraphs [0023] & [0054], a central processing unit (CPU) and a memory for storing software and sensor data reads on a storage device storing a program to be executed by the one or more processors), the program including instructions for: measuring an arrival time of data from a sensor terminal (sensor(s) 100, Fig. 1) (see paragraph [0045], The sensor 100 re-transmits the message back to the RSU 100 with the Timestamp_1. The communication diagnosis module 150 obtains a Timestamp_2 after the message is received back from the sensor 100. This reads on measuring an arrival time of data from a sensor terminal); acquiring a time stamp based on the arrival time (see paragraphs [0038] & [0045], The communications may be monitored using timestamps with dedicated communications to determine a current communications status. The sensor 100 re-transmits the message back to the RSU 100 with the Timestamp_1. The communication diagnosis module 150 obtains a Timestamp_2 after the message is received back from the sensor 100. This reads on acquiring a time stamp based on the arrival time); storing the time stamp or time stamp interval obtained from the time stamp (see paragraphs [0023] & [0045], The RSU has a memory for storing sensor data. Timestamp data is used to determine current communication status. For example, The sensor 100 re-transmits the message back to the RSU 100 with the Timestamp_1. The communication diagnosis module 150 obtains a Timestamp_2 after the message is received back from the sensor 100. After receiving this information, the communication diagnosis module 150 determines the round-trip transmission time using the timestamps. The indicates that the communication diagnosis module at least temporarily stores the timestamps, which are considered to be sensor data, and this reads on storing the time stamp or time stamp interval obtained from the time stamp); and statistically determining a communication connection status between the sensor terminal (sensor(s) 100, Fig. 1) and a sensor accommodating terminal (e.g. RSU 101, MEC, 200, vehicle, 300, Fig. 1) based on a time stamp or a time stamp interval (see paragraphs [0036] – [0038] & [0044] – [0045] and Fig. 1, The communication status between the Sensors and corresponding RSUs can measure the status by evaluating the time latency of communications between devices to ensure that communications are timely received. The communications may be monitored using timestamps with dedicated communications to determine a current communications status. The sensor/RSU communication status is determined using the RSUs communication diagnosis module 150. The communications diagnosis module 150 sends transmits a message with Timestamp_1 obtained just prior to transmission to a corresponding sensor 100. The sensor 100 re-transmits the message back to the RSU 100 with the Timestamp_1. The communication diagnosis module 150 obtains a Timestamp_2 after the message is received back from the sensor 100. After receiving this information, the communication diagnosis module 150 determines the round-trip transmission time as follows: Round-trip transmission time=Timestamp_2−Timestamp_1. This reads on statistically determining a communication connection status between a sensor terminal and a sensor accommodating terminal based on a time stamp or a time stamp interval).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
VI. Claims 18 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yehliu (US 2022/0182855 A1) in view of Komala et al. (US 2019/0236058 A1).
Regarding claim 18 Yehliu teaches the device according to claim 15 except for wherein the sensor terminal is provided in plural, and wherein the program further includes instructions for selecting a first sensor terminal of the plural sensor terminals as a normally communicating sensor terminal based on a communication interval of each of the plural sensor terminals and a time stamp interval of each piece of data received from the plural sensor terminals.
Yehliu teaches wherein the sensor terminal is provided in plural (see paragraph [0050], plurality of sensors reads on wherein the sensor terminal is provided in plural), and wherein the program further includes instructions (see paragraph [0149]) for selecting a first sensor terminal of the plural sensor terminals as a normally communicating sensor terminal based on a communication interval of each of the plural sensor terminals and a time stamp interval of each piece of data received from the plural sensor terminals (see paragraphs [0151] & [0161] – [0162], The method includes accessing timestamps of a sensor signal of a selected sensor from a plurality of sensors. For example, access to a first, second, and third timestamp of a sensor signal from a selected sensor of a plurality of sensors. The first, second, and third timestamps occur sequentially within a desired duration. Timestamps of other sensor signals (sensor signals not associated with the selected sensor) are checked. It is determined whether the timestamps of the other sensor signals overlap with a start time of the first period of time, wherein the first period of time corresponds to a time between a midpoint between a first and second time stamp and a second midpoint between a second and third timestamp (see paragraphs [0152] – [0153]). This reads on selecting a first sensor terminal of the plural sensor terminals as a normally communicating sensor terminal based on a communication interval of each of the plural sensor terminals and a time stamp interval of each piece of data received from the plural sensor terminals).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make Yehliu adapt to include wherein the sensor terminal is provided in plural, and wherein the program further includes instructions for selecting a first sensor terminal of the plural sensor terminals as a normally communicating sensor terminal based on a communication interval of each of the plural sensor terminals and a time stamp interval of each piece of data received from the plural sensor terminals because it would allow for more efficient collection and processing of the sensor data.
Regarding claim 22 Yehliu and Komala teach limitations as recited in claim 18 and are therefore rejected for the same reasons given above regarding claim 22.
Conclusion
VII. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Marti et al. Pub. No.: US 2016/0357163 A1 discloses data-driven context determination including a plurality of sensor for collecting sensor data and aggregating readings of sensor data by calculating a mean and deviation of the aggregated readings (see paragraphs [0034] – [0035]).
Bak et al. Pub. No.: US 2014/0184649 A1 discloses spatiotemporal visualization of sensor data including storing sensor data in memory, wherein the stored sensor data includes data and a startTime, wherein the startTime is a starting timestamp of an interval (an ending timestamp of the interval may inherently be the staring timestamp of the next interval) (see paragraphs [0027] & [0030]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON J MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-7869. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Alison Slater can be reached at 571-270-0375. 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.
/BRANDON J MILLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
March 19, 2026