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 . In virtue of the communication filed on 12/11/2023 claims 1-20 are pending in the present application, claims 1, 18, 20 are recited in independent form. The Present Application claims Priority to Foreign Application CN2021115027550.5 with a filing date of 12/10/2021 is a 371 of PCT/CN2022/122338 with a filing date of 09/28/2022.
Claim Interpretation
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 ONLY when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. Otherwise, the broadest reasonable interpretation prohibits importing limitations from the specification in to the claims.
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The Claims are directed to non-volatile computer-readable storage medium wherein a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium incorporates a transitory signal which does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. The claims are directed to a non-volatile computer readable medium, which is not defined in the specification such that non-transitory signals are excluded as an embodiment of the invention. Inclusion of non-volatile fails to exclude transitory embodiments such as transitory signals. Therefore, under a broadest reasonable interpretation a transitory signal embodiment including a transitory signals falls within the claimed scope, wherein a transitory signal is not directed to a statutory category. Non-limiting examples of claims that are not directed to any of the statutory categories include: products that do not have a physical or tangible form, such as information (often referred to as "data per se") or a computer program per se (often referred to as "software per se") when claimed as a product without any structural recitations; transitory forms of signal transmission (often referred to as "signals per se"), such as a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal or carrier wave. The courts' definitions of machines, manufactures and compositions of matter indicate, a product must have a physical or tangible form in order to fall within one of these statutory categories. Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1348, 111 USPQ2d at 1719. In order to overcome the rejection the Application must amend the claims to remove transitory signals as an embodiment. This often achieved by add “non-transitory” in connection with the present computer readable storage medium language.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication US-20200053648 to Guo (hereinafter d1) in view of United States Patent Application Publication US-20170181091 to Cao et al (hereinafter d2).
Regarding claim 1, as to the limitation “A wireless communication method, comprising:” d1 discloses techniques regarding wireless communication (see d1 para. 0002) which are implemented as a method (see d1 Fig. 6), with respect to wake-up communication (see d1 para. 0004-0019);
As to the limitation “monitoring, by a device node, a wake-up frame using a monitoring duration at a first wake-up interval, wherein the wake-up frame is a wake-up frame that is continuously sent by a collection node; in response to that the device node has detected the wake-up frame, monitoring, by the device node, the wake-up frame using the monitoring duration at a second wake- up interval, wherein the first wake-up interval is greater than the second wake-up interval, and a duration of the wake-up frame is greater than the monitoring duration; and in response to that the device node fails to detect the wake-up frame within a preset duration when monitoring the wake-up frame at the second wake-up interval, entering, by the device node, a receiving state, so as to perform wireless communication between the collection node and the device node” d1 discloses implementation of power-saving mode, wherein a main transceiver wakes up according to a preset period (equivalent to a device node listening for a wake-up frame according to a first wake-up period) and receives a beacon frame sent by an access point; when a station (STA) is in both the conventional power-saving mode and a WUR sleep mode, the STA wakes up the main transceiver upon receiving a wake-up frame (equivalent to in response to the wake-up frame being detected), and the main transceiver does not wake up according to the preset period; and the wake-up period (equivalent to a second wake-up period) of the main transceiver is shorter than the preset period in the conventional power-saving mode (equivalent to listening fora wake-up frame according to a second wake-up period, wherein the first wake-up period is longer than the second wake-up period) (see d1 Fig. 6 para. 0054-0059; para. 0079-0080).
d1 does not appear to explicitly disclose the wake-up frame being sent continuously by a collection node, and a device node listening for the wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of a wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration; and in response to no wake-up frame being detected over a preset duration within a second wake-up period, the device node entering a receiving state to communicate with the collection node. The differences between claims 18, 19 and 20 and D1 further comprise a system composed of a device node and a collection node, a node device composed of a memory and a processor, or a corresponding method being implemented by means of a medium which stores instructions.
Attention is directed to D2 which in a similar field of endeavor of wireless communication discloses listening for a wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of the wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration. In addition, a wake-up mechanism being used between a device node and a collection node is a conventional means, and in order to ensure timely reception of a wake-up frame, a collection node continuously sending the wake-up frame is a conventional means. Moreover, the device node in D1 detects a wake-up frame before switching to a second wake-up period, which indicates that there is already a requirement for communication between the device node and a node that sends the wake-up frame. The repeated sending of a wake-up frame being stopped after a device has been woken up and started to prepare for communication (see d2 para. 0047-0059), and the device then correspondingly entering a receiving state in which same can perform communication are all obvious given the disclosure of d1 in view of d2. Therefore, the case of no wake-up frame being detected by a device node over a preset duration within a second wake-up period is obvious given the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 addressed above to a person skilled in the art, and a device node entering a receiving state to communicate with a collection node being in response to a received wake-up frame is evident therefrom. D2 also discloses a system composed of a device node and a collection node, a node device composed of a memory and a processor, or a corresponding method being implemented by means of a medium which stores instructions (see d2 Fig.1, para. 0042-0045 (system), wherein the nodes include at least an embodiment which includes a memory and processor, and a computer readable medium (see d2 para. 0082), which is considered in connection with the disclosure of d1 discussed above.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of wake-up frame being sent continuously by a collection node, and a device node listening for the wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of a wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration; and in response to no wake-up frame being detected over a preset duration within a second wake-up period, the device node entering a receiving state to communicate with the collection node as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 2, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein a process of sending, by the collection node, the wake-up frame comprises: continuously sending, by the collection node, the wake-up frame for a set total duration; and entering a silent state after the sending of the wake-up frame is completed” d1 in view of d2 discloses continuously sending, by the collection node, the wake-up frame for a set total duration; and entering a silent state after the sending of the wake-up frame is completed (see d1 para. 0042
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of continuously sending, by the collection node, the wake-up frame for a set total duration; and entering a silent state after the sending of the wake-up frame is completed as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 3, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 2, wherein the device node performs communication based on an id wake-up frame, which comprises: in response to that a control domain of the id wake-up frame is a function frame, sending, by the device node, corresponding service data to the collection node based on the function frame” d1 in view of d2 discloses in response to that a control domain of the id wake-up frame is a function frame, sending, by the device node, corresponding service data to the collection node based on the function frame (see d1 para. 0047-0048).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of in response to that a control domain of the id wake-up frame is a function frame, sending, by the device node, corresponding service data to the collection node based on the function frame as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 4, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 2, wherein the device node performs communication on based on an id wake-up frame, which comprises: in response to that a control domain of the id wake-up frame is a wake-up frame, sending, by the device node, an acknowledgment frame to the collection node; and entering, by the device node, the receiving state” d1 in view of d2 discloses in response to that a control domain of the id wake-up frame is a wake-up frame, sending, by the device node, an acknowledgment frame to the collection node; and entering, by the device node, the receiving state (see d1 para. 0047-0048).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of in response to that a control domain of the id wake-up frame is a wake-up frame, sending, by the device node, an acknowledgment frame to the collection node; and entering, by the device node, the receiving state as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 5, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 4, further comprising: in response to receiving the acknowledgment frame, sending a collection frame by the collection node, so that the device node returns corresponding service data based on the collection frame; and receiving the service data and replying with an acknowledgment frame by the collection node” d1 in view of d2 discloses in response to receiving the acknowledgment frame, sending a collection frame by the collection node, so that the device node returns corresponding service data based on the collection frame; and receiving the service data and replying with an acknowledgment frame by the collection node (see d1 para. 0049, 0056-0057, 0061).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of in response to receiving the acknowledgment frame, sending a collection frame by the collection node, so that the device node returns corresponding service data based on the collection frame; and receiving the service data and replying with an acknowledgment frame by the collection node as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 6, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 2,wherein when the device node receives an id wake-up frame, the wireless communication method further comprises: acquiring a power consumption control field from the id wake-up frame; and setting, based on the power consumption control field, power used in a communication process” d1 in view of d2 discloses acquiring a power consumption control field from the id wake-up frame; and setting, based on the power consumption control field, power used in a communication process (see d1 para. 0047-0048).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of acquiring a power consumption control field from the id wake-up frame; and setting, based on the power consumption control field, power used in a communication process as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 7, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 6, wherein when the device node enters the receiving state, the wireless communication method further comprises: in response to that no data is received within the preset duration, monitoring, by the device node, a wake-up frame using the monitoring duration at the first wake-up interval” d1 in view of d2 discloses in response to that no data is received within the preset duration, monitoring, by the device node, a wake-up frame using the monitoring duration at the first wake-up interval (see d2 para. 0047-0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of in response to that no data is received within the preset duration, monitoring, by the device node, a wake-up frame using the monitoring duration at the first wake-up interval as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 8, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein the device node serves as a responder of the wireless communication, and is configured to make a response to the wireless communication with the collection node and upload device running information” d1 in view of d2 discloses a device node serves as a responder of the wireless communication, and is configured to make a response to the wireless communication with the collection node and upload device running information (see d1 para. 0071-0078).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of a device node that serves as a responder of the wireless communication, and is configured to make a response to the wireless communication with the collection node and upload device running information as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 9, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein during the monitoring, by the device node, the wake-up frame using the monitoring duration at the first wake-up interval, the wireless communication method further comprises: controlling power consumption of the device node, wherein the device node is powered by a battery” d1 in view of d2 discloses controlling power consumption of the device node, wherein the device node is powered by a battery (see d2 para. 0063).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of controlling power consumption of the device node, wherein the device node is powered by a battery as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 10, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein before the monitoring, by the device node, the wake-up frame using the monitoring duration at the first wake-up interval, the wireless communication method further comprises: setting the device node to be in a low-power-consumption mode” d1 in view of d2 discloses setting the device node to be in a low-power-consumption mode (see d1 para. 0058-0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of setting the device node to be in a low-power-consumption mode as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 11, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein in response to that the device node has detected the wake-up frame, the wireless communication method further comprises: switching the longer first wake-up interval to the shorter second wake-up interval” d1 in view of d2 discloses switching the longer first wake-up interval to the shorter second wake-up interval (see d2 para. 0046, 0049, 0053).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of switching the longer first wake-up interval to the shorter second wake-up interval as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 12, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein in response to that the device node fails to detect the wake-up frame within the preset duration when monitoring the wake-up frame at the second wake-up interval, the wireless communication method further comprises: when the preset duration is equal to the second wake-up interval, in a next monitoring of the device node, when the device node fails to detect the wake-up frame during wake-up, entering, by the device node, the receiving state” d1 in view of d2 discloses when the preset duration is equal to the second wake-up interval, in a next monitoring of the device node, when the device node fails to detect the wake-up frame during wake-up, entering, by the device node, the receiving state (see d2 para. 0049-0050).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of when the preset duration is equal to the second wake-up interval, in a next monitoring of the device node, when the device node fails to detect the wake-up frame during wake-up, entering, by the device node, the receiving state as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 13, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 2, wherein performing the wireless communication between the collection node and the device node comprises: in response to that the silent state is maintained for the preset duration, sending, by the collection node, an id wake-up frame to the device node, so that the device node performs communication based on the id wake-up frame” d1 in view of d2 discloses in response to that the silent state is maintained for the preset duration, sending, by the collection node, an id wake-up frame to the device node, so that the device node performs communication based on the id wake-up frame (see 1 para. 0047-0048).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of in response to that the silent state is maintained for the preset duration, sending, by the collection node, an id wake-up frame to the device node, so that the device node performs communication based on the id wake-up frame as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 14, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 2, wherein performing the wireless communication between the collection node and the device node further comprises: in response to that the silent state is maintained for the preset duration and the collection node does not need to send an acknowledgment frame again, sending, by the collection node, data to the device node” d1 in view of d2 discloses in response to that the silent state is maintained for the preset duration and the collection node does not need to send an acknowledgment frame again, sending, by the collection node, data to the device node (see d1 para. 0047-0048).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of in response to that the silent state is maintained for the preset duration and the collection node does not need to send an acknowledgment frame again, sending, by the collection node, data to the device node as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 15, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 13, when the device node performs the communication based on the id wake-up frame, comprising: in response to that a control domain of the id wake-up frame is a function domain, sending, by the device node, corresponding service data to the collection node based on the function frame” d1 in view of d2 discloses in response to that a control domain of the id wake-up frame is a function domain, sending, by the device node, corresponding service data to the collection node based on the function frame (see d1 para. 0047-0048).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of in response to that a control domain of the id wake-up frame is a function domain, sending, by the device node, corresponding service data to the collection node based on the function frame as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 16, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 5, further comprising: in response to receiving the acknowledgment frame, completing, by the collection node, corresponding data interaction based on the acknowledgment frame” d1 in view of d2 discloses in response to receiving the acknowledgment frame, completing, by the collection node, corresponding data interaction based on the acknowledgment frame (see d1 para. 0048, 0056-0061).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of in response to receiving the acknowledgment frame, completing, by the collection node, corresponding data interaction based on the acknowledgment frame as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 17, as to the limitation “The wireless communication method according to claim 6, wherein the power control field comprises low power consumption, medium power consumption, and high power consumption” d1 in view of d2 discloses wherein the power control field comprises low power consumption, medium power consumption, and high power consumption (see d1 para. 0060-0061, 0072-0078, 0086, 0093-0094 including table).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of the power control field comprises low power consumption, medium power consumption, and high power consumption as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 18, as to the limitation “A wireless communication system, comprising a device node and a collection node” d1 discloses techniques regarding wireless communication (see d1 para. 0002) which are implemented as a method (see d1 Fig. 6), with respect to wake-up communication (see d1 para. 0004-0019);
As to the limitation “wherein the device node is configured to monitor a wake-up frame using a monitoring duration at a first wake-up interval, wherein the wake-up frame is a wake-up frame that is continuously sent by the collection node; the device node is configured to, in response to that the device node has detected the wake-up frame, monitor the wake-up frame using the monitoring duration at a second wake-up interval, wherein the first wake-up interval is greater than the second wake-up interval, and a duration of the wake-up frame is greater than the monitoring duration; and the device node is configured to, in response to that the device node fails to detect the wake-up frame within a preset duration when monitoring the wake-up frame at the second wake-up interval, enter a receiving state, so as to perform wireless communication between the collection node and the device node” d1 discloses implementation of power-saving mode, wherein a main transceiver wakes up according to a preset period (equivalent to a device node listening for a wake-up frame according to a first wake-up period) and receives a beacon frame sent by an access point; when a station (STA) is in both the conventional power-saving mode and a WUR sleep mode, the STA wakes up the main transceiver upon receiving a wake-up frame (equivalent to in response to the wake-up frame being detected), and the main transceiver does not wake up according to the preset period; and the wake-up period (equivalent to a second wake-up period) of the main transceiver is shorter than the preset period in the conventional power-saving mode (equivalent to listening fora wake-up frame according to a second wake-up period, wherein the first wake-up period is longer than the second wake-up period) (see d1 Fig. 6 para. 0054-0059; para. 0079-0080).
d1 does not appear to explicitly disclose the wake-up frame being sent continuously by a collection node, and a device node listening for the wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of a wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration; and in response to no wake-up frame being detected over a preset duration within a second wake-up period, the device node entering a receiving state to communicate with the collection node. The differences between claims 18, 19 and 20 and D1 further comprise a system composed of a device node and a collection node, a node device composed of a memory and a processor, or a corresponding method being implemented by means of a medium which stores instructions.
Attention is directed to D2 which in a similar field of endeavor of wireless communication discloses listening for a wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of the wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration. In addition, a wake-up mechanism being used between a device node and a collection node is a conventional means, and in order to ensure timely reception of a wake-up frame, a collection node continuously sending the wake-up frame is a conventional means. Moreover, the device node in D1 detects a wake-up frame before switching to a second wake-up period, which indicates that there is already a requirement for communication between the device node and a node that sends the wake-up frame. The repeated sending of a wake-up frame being stopped after a device has been woken up and started to prepare for communication (see d2 para. 0047-0059), and the device then correspondingly entering a receiving state in which same can perform communication are all obvious given the disclosure of d1 in view of d2. Therefore, the case of no wake-up frame being detected by a device node over a preset duration within a second wake-up period is obvious given the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 addressed above to a person skilled in the art, and a device node entering a receiving state to communicate with a collection node being in response to a received wake-up frame is evident therefrom. D2 also discloses a system composed of a device node and a collection node, a node device composed of a memory and a processor, or a corresponding method being implemented by means of a medium which stores instructions (see d2 Fig.1, para. 0042-0045 (system), wherein the nodes include at least an embodiment which includes a memory and processor, and a computer readable medium (see d2 para. 0082), which is considered in connection with the disclosure of d1 discussed above.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of wake-up frame being sent continuously by a collection node, and a device node listening for the wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of a wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration; and in response to no wake-up frame being detected over a preset duration within a second wake-up period, the device node entering a receiving state to communicate with the collection node as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 19, as to the limitation “A node device, comprising: one or more memories, configured to store executable computer-readable instructions; one or more processors, configured to implement, when executing the executable computer-readable instructions, the operations of the wireless communication method according to” d1 discloses techniques regarding wireless communication (see d1 para. 0002) which are implemented as a method (see d1 Fig. 6), with respect to wake-up communication (see d1 para. 0004-0019);
As to the limitation “claim 1” d1 discloses implementation of power-saving mode, wherein a main transceiver wakes up according to a preset period (equivalent to a device node listening for a wake-up frame according to a first wake-up period) and receives a beacon frame sent by an access point; when a station (STA) is in both the conventional power-saving mode and a WUR sleep mode, the STA wakes up the main transceiver upon receiving a wake-up frame (equivalent to in response to the wake-up frame being detected), and the main transceiver does not wake up according to the preset period; and the wake-up period (equivalent to a second wake-up period) of the main transceiver is shorter than the preset period in the conventional power-saving mode (equivalent to listening fora wake-up frame according to a second wake-up period, wherein the first wake-up period is longer than the second wake-up period) (see d1 Fig. 6 para. 0054-0059; para. 0079-0080).
d1 does not appear to explicitly disclose the wake-up frame being sent continuously by a collection node, and a device node listening for the wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of a wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration; and in response to no wake-up frame being detected over a preset duration within a second wake-up period, the device node entering a receiving state to communicate with the collection node. The differences between claims 18, 19 and 20 and D1 further comprise a system composed of a device node and a collection node, a node device composed of a memory and a processor, or a corresponding method being implemented by means of a medium which stores instructions.
Attention is directed to D2 which in a similar field of endeavor of wireless communication discloses listening for a wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of the wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration. In addition, a wake-up mechanism being used between a device node and a collection node is a conventional means, and in order to ensure timely reception of a wake-up frame, a collection node continuously sending the wake-up frame is a conventional means. Moreover, the device node in D1 detects a wake-up frame before switching to a second wake-up period, which indicates that there is already a requirement for communication between the device node and a node that sends the wake-up frame. The repeated sending of a wake-up frame being stopped after a device has been woken up and started to prepare for communication (see d2 para. 0047-0059), and the device then correspondingly entering a receiving state in which same can perform communication are all obvious given the disclosure of d1 in view of d2. Therefore, the case of no wake-up frame being detected by a device node over a preset duration within a second wake-up period is obvious given the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 addressed above to a person skilled in the art, and a device node entering a receiving state to communicate with a collection node being in response to a received wake-up frame is evident therefrom. D2 also discloses a system composed of a device node and a collection node, a node device composed of a memory and a processor, or a corresponding method being implemented by means of a medium which stores instructions (see d2 Fig.1, para. 0042-0045 (system), wherein the nodes include at least an embodiment which includes a memory and processor, and a computer readable medium (see d2 para. 0082), which is considered in connection with the disclosure of d1 discussed above.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of wake-up frame being sent continuously by a collection node, and a device node listening for the wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of a wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration; and in response to no wake-up frame being detected over a preset duration within a second wake-up period, the device node entering a receiving state to communicate with the collection node as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 20, as to the limitation “A non-volatile computer-readable storage medium, wherein the non-volatile computer-readable storage medium stores executable computer- readable instructions; and the executable computer-readable instructions, when executed by one or more processors, implement the following operations:” d1 discloses techniques regarding wireless communication (see d1 para. 0002) which are implemented as a method (see d1 Fig. 6), with respect to wake-up communication (see d1 para. 0004-0019);
As to the limitation “monitoring, by a device node, a wake-up frame using a monitoring duration at a first wake-up interval, wherein the wake-up frame is a wake-up frame that is continuously sent by a collection node; in response to that the device node has detected the wake-up frame, monitoring, by the device node, the wake-up frame using the monitoring duration at a second wake- up interval, wherein the first wake-up interval is greater than the second wake-up interval, and a duration of the wake-up frame is greater than the monitoring duration; and in response to that the device node fails to detect the wake-up frame within a preset duration when monitoring the wake-up frame at the second wake-up interval, entering, by the device node, a receiving state, so as to perform wireless communication between the collection node and the device node” d1 discloses implementation of power-saving mode, wherein a main transceiver wakes up according to a preset period (equivalent to a device node listening for a wake-up frame according to a first wake-up period) and receives a beacon frame sent by an access point; when a station (STA) is in both the conventional power-saving mode and a WUR sleep mode, the STA wakes up the main transceiver upon receiving a wake-up frame (equivalent to in response to the wake-up frame being detected), and the main transceiver does not wake up according to the preset period; and the wake-up period (equivalent to a second wake-up period) of the main transceiver is shorter than the preset period in the conventional power-saving mode (equivalent to listening fora wake-up frame according to a second wake-up period, wherein the first wake-up period is longer than the second wake-up period) (see d1 Fig. 6 para. 0054-0059; para. 0079-0080).
d1 does not appear to explicitly disclose the wake-up frame being sent continuously by a collection node, and a device node listening for the wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of a wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration; and in response to no wake-up frame being detected over a preset duration within a second wake-up period, the device node entering a receiving state to communicate with the collection node. The differences between claims 18, 19 and 20 and D1 further comprise a system composed of a device node and a collection node, a node device composed of a memory and a processor, or a corresponding method being implemented by means of a medium which stores instructions.
Attention is directed to D2 which in a similar field of endeavor of wireless communication discloses listening for a wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of the wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration. In addition, a wake-up mechanism being used between a device node and a collection node is a conventional means, and in order to ensure timely reception of a wake-up frame, a collection node continuously sending the wake-up frame is a conventional means. Moreover, the device node in D1 detects a wake-up frame before switching to a second wake-up period, which indicates that there is already a requirement for communication between the device node and a node that sends the wake-up frame. The repeated sending of a wake-up frame being stopped after a device has been woken up and started to prepare for communication (see d2 para. 0047-0059), and the device then correspondingly entering a receiving state in which same can perform communication are all obvious given the disclosure of d1 in view of d2. Therefore, the case of no wake-up frame being detected by a device node over a preset duration within a second wake-up period is obvious given the disclosure of d1 in view of d2 addressed above to a person skilled in the art, and a device node entering a receiving state to communicate with a collection node being in response to a received wake-up frame is evident therefrom. D2 also discloses a system composed of a device node and a collection node, a node device composed of a memory and a processor, or a corresponding method being implemented by means of a medium which stores instructions (see d2 Fig.1, para. 0042-0045 (system), wherein the nodes include at least an embodiment which includes a memory and processor, and a computer readable medium (see d2 para. 0082), which is considered in connection with the disclosure of d1 discussed above.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication with respect to wake-up communication to incorporate the details of wake-up frame being sent continuously by a collection node, and a device node listening for the wake-up frame over a listening duration, wherein the duration of a wake-up frame is longer than the listening duration; and in response to no wake-up frame being detected over a preset duration within a second wake-up period, the device node entering a receiving state to communicate with the collection node as disclosed by d2. There is ample teaching, suggestion, and motivation, in d1 and d2 as well as in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the d1 or to combine d1 and d2 to arrive at the claimed invention: improved power consumption (see d2 para. 0005-0006; d1 para. 0003). Furthermore, as the techniques are employed in compatible technology in a similar field of endeavor, the combination would yield a reasonable expectation of success. The Examiner further maintains that, according to the reasoning above, the prior art includes each element claimed although not necessarily in a single reference. The Examiner notes that the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performed the same function as it does separately. The Examine further asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (according to the motivations noted above); and the combination would yield predicable results without undue experimentation.
Examiner Note
Applicant must review each of the references used in the rejections of record in their entirety, as well as all the noted art below in their entirety prior to presenting amendments and specifically not how any amendment distinguishes over the art noted in the Notice of References cited as well as the art in the rejections of record. Any response arguing the rejections of the Examiner must address every cited section noted by the Examiner explicitly addressing how each recitation fails to meet the limitation. Any response that fails to address every noted and cited art with reference to a limitation will be considered an incomplete response.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN SCOTT TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)270-3189. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon. - Thurs. 9:00-4:00.
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, JINSONG HU can be reached on 5712723965. 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.
/NATHAN S TAYLOR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643