Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the amendment filed on January 30, 2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim 1 has been amended.
Claims 13-20 have been added.
The 35 U.S.C. § l 12(b) and (a) rejections of claims 1-12 are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s Remarks filed on January 30, 2026.
The double patenting rejections of claims 1and 12 are maintained and details are provided in the claim rejections section.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive and/or moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection, as set forth in the Claim Rejections section hereinabove. Any new ground(s) of rejection below were necessitated by Applicant's amendments. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
In the Remarks, Applicant argues:
Yang discloses a fundamentally different operational structure. In Yang, the firmware upgrade client 111 must first send "a download request for a new version of firmware to the server 20" before it can receive the firmware package and subsequently deliver it to the function module. See Yang at [0071]. Yang refers to a "push notification" merely to describe the server sending "a push notification about the new versions" - in other words, a notification of firmware availability, not delivery of the actual firmware itself See Id. at [0052]. After receiving such notification, the client of Yang still must affirmatively fetch the firmware from the server before any delivery can occur.
The presently amended claim embraces that the update unit, on its own initiative, initiates
delivery after reception, at the communication module, of an update data distribution from the external server (emphasis original). The firmware has already arrived at the communication module, and the update unit then decides to initiate delivery to the processing unit. At no point does Yang teach or suggest wherein the update unit initiates the delivery to the processing unit to be updated on its own initiative and without request from the processing unit to be updated (emphasis original). (Remarks, ¶ 5-6)
Examiner’s response:
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The cited potion of Yang indicates that a firmware upgrade client 111 determines that a firmware update is available after receiving a push notification from the server and then initiates the firmware upgrade process, including sending a download request to obtain the firmware package (Yang, ¶¶ 52 and 71). The request from firmware is generated by the firmware upgrade client 111 itself, which corresponds to the claimed update unit, rather than by the processing unit to be updated. The fact that the processing unit may include firmware upgrade client 111 does not negate that it is a separate component and it performs the update initiation function. Accordingly, the firmware upgrade process is initiated by the update unit on its own initiative and without a request from the processing unit to be updated, as recited in the claim.
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, the recitation “without request from the processing unit to be updated” excludes only updates processes initiated by a request generated by the processing unit being updated and does not exclude update processes initiated by another component, such as an update unit, in response to information received from an external server. Applicant’s argument appears to interpret the claim as excluding any request to the server for firmware download. However, such a limitation is not recited in the claim.
In addition, Applicant argues that “The firmware has already arrived at the communication module, and the update unit then decides to initiate delivery to the processing unit.” (Remarks, pg. 5) However, “The firmware has already arrived at the communication module” is not required by the claim language and is not part of the claim. In fact, claim 1 only requires that “an update data distribution” has already arrived at the communication module. As shown in the previous Office Action, the “update data distribution” is interpreted as “the firmware version information” in Yang (e.g., Fig. 7, pg. 7, para. 13).
Therefore, for at least the reason set forth above, the rejections made under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) with respect to claim 1 is proper and therefore, maintained.
With respect to the remaining dependent claims, Applicant merely reiterates the argument made regarding claim 1 and asserts that any additional references cited by Examiner fail to resolve the alleged deficiencies in the rejections of the independent claims (Remarks, pg. 6). Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 1.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 11 of US 2024/0385824. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 4, and 12 of the instant application define an obvious variation of the invention claimed in US 2024/0385824.
The following side-by-side comparison between the representative claim 1 of US 2024/0385824 and the representative claim 1 of the instant application with the differences boldfaced for the Applicant’s convenience.
Claim 1 of US 2024/0385824
Claim 1 of instant application
1. A household appliance comprising:
a plurality of processing units for controlling electrically and/or electronically controllable components of the household appliance; and
a communication unit for allowing a data communication between the household appliance and an external server through a communication network
wherein the communication unit is configured to: receive from the external server an update data distribution comprising firmware update data packages for updating corresponding processing units, wherein the update data distribution includes a software component configured to be installed at, and executed by, at least one of said processing units, said software component being configured to selectively enable, between the communication unit and each one of the plurality of processing units, a respective communication line; and
deliver a firmware update package to a selected processing unit [update unit initiates the delivery to the processing unit to be updated on its own initiative and without request from the processing unit to be updated]
through the respective communication line between the communication unit and the selected processing unit enabled by said software component during an update operating mode of the household appliance.
1. A household appliance comprising:
a plurality of processing units for controlling a plurality of electrically controllable components of the household appliance;
a communication module for allowing a communication between the household appliance and an external server through a communication network; and
an update unit, wherein the update unit is configured to, after reception, at the communication module, of an update data distribution from the external server and based on the update data distribution,
initiate a delivery to a processing unit to be updated of a respective firmware update package included in the update data distribution, wherein the update unit initiates the delivery to the processing unit to be updated on its own initiative and without request from the processing unit to be updated.
Similarly, dependent claim 12 is an obvious variation of claim 11 in US 2024/0385824. Therefore, they are rejected under the same rational set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
This is a provisional anticipatory-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not been patented.
Claims 1 and 12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 14 of US 2024/0211245. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-12 of the instant application define an obvious variation of the invention claimed in US 2024/0211245.
The following side-by-side comparison between the representative claim 1 of US 2024/0211245 and the representative claim 1 of the instant application with the differences boldfaced for the Applicant’s convenience.
Claim 1 of US 2024/0211245
Claim 1 of instant application
1. A household appliance comprising:
one or more processing units for controlling electrically and/or electronically controllable components of the household appliance according to a corresponding instructions set during a first operating mode of the household appliance, wherein each instructions set corresponding to a processing unit is installed at the processing unit; and
a communication unit for allowing a data communication between the household appliance and an external server through a communication network, wherein the communication unit is configured to: receive from the external server an update data distribution [wherein the update unit initiates the delivery to the processing unit to be updated on its own initiative and without request from the processing unit to be updated] comprising, for each instructions set installed at the corresponding processing unit, a corresponding update data package comprising a latest version of the instructions set; and carry out the following operations during a second operating mode of the household appliance: preventing data communication between the household appliance and the external server; and providing to each one among a set of selected processing units the corresponding update package, each selected processing unit of the set of selected processing units being selected based on a comparison between a version of the instructions set installed at the corresponding processing unit with the latest version of the instructions set included in the corresponding update package; wherein each selected processing unit is configured to update the corresponding instructions set installed thereat with the latest version of the instructions set included in the corresponding update package received from the communication unit.
1. A household appliance comprising:
a plurality of processing units for controlling a plurality of electrically controllable components of the household appliance;
a communication module for allowing a communication between the household appliance and an external server through a communication network; and
an update unit, wherein the update unit is configured to, after reception, at the communication module, of an update data distribution from the external server and based on the update data distribution, initiate a delivery to a processing unit to be updated of a respective firmware update package included in the update data distribution, wherein the update unit initiates the delivery to the processing unit to be updated on its own initiative and without request from the processing unit to be updated.
Similarly, dependent claim 12 is an obvious variation of claim 14 in US 2024/0211245. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
This is a provisional anticipatory-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not been patented.
112(f) interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, and 11 recites the limitations “a plurality of processing units for controlling a plurality of electrically controllable components of the household appliance”, “a communication module for allowing a communication between the household appliance and an external server through a communication network”, and “an update unit, wherein the update unit is configured to, … initiate a delivery to a processing unit to be updated of a respective firmware update package included in the update data distribution”.
Claims 2-12 also invoke 112(f) interpretation based on their claim dependencies.
Because claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, 12-14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3674889 A1 (hereinafter “Yang”) in view of CN 113227968 A (hereinafter “Ma”) and further in view of US 2014/0282486 (Hereinafter “Hisamoto”).
In the following claim analysis, Applicant’s claim limitations are shown in bold text and Examiner’s explanations/notes/remarks are enclosed in square brackets and emphases are underlined.
As to claim 1, Yang discloses A household appliance (Yang, Fig. 1, Abstract, A household appliance and a household appliance firmware upgrade method) comprising:
a plurality of processing units for controlling a plurality of electrically controllable components of the household appliance (Yang, Fig. 1, pg. 5, para. 2-6, The household appliance 10 includes: a system master control module 11 and at least one function module (121-12N) [a plurality of electrically controllable components of the household appliance]);
a communication module for allowing a communication between the household appliance and an external server through a communication (Yang, Fig. 1, pg. 2, the last paragraph, the household appliance further includes a second communications module, configured to support the firmware upgrade client in information interaction with the server through wireless communication; Fig. 7, pg. 7, para. 10-11, the firmware upgrade client 111 sends a firmware version information request to the server 20 through the second communications module 116); and
an update unit (Yang, Fig. 1, pg. 5, para. 2-3, the system master control module 11 includes: a firmware upgrade client 111), wherein the update unit is configured to, after reception, at the communication module, of an update data distribution from the external server (Yang, Fig. 7, pg. 7, para. 13, the firmware upgrade client 111 receives the firmware version information from the server 20 through the second communications module 116. … if the firmware version information request includes a request about the user interaction interface and the camera, the firmware upgrade client 111 may obtain the firmware version information about the user interaction interface and the camera from the server 20), and based on the update data distribution, initiate a delivery to a processing unit to be updated of a respective firmware update package included in the update data distribution (Yang, Fig. 7, pg. 7, the last paragraph, after obtaining the firmware version information, the firmware upgrade client 111 determines whether the function module with a firmware upgrade capability needs to upgrade firmware; pg. 8, para. 3, after determining the function modules needing to upgrade firmware, the firmware upgrade client 111 sends a download request for a new version of firmware to the server 20; pg. 8, para. 4-6, the new version of firmware sent by the server is received. ... the new version of firmware received by the firmware upgrade client 111 is a firmware upgrade package. … the new version of firmware is sent to the function module so as to enable the function module to upgrade the firmware), wherein the update unit initiates the delivery to the processing unit to be updated on its own initiative (Yang, pg. 8, para. 3, after determining the function modules needing to upgrade firmware, the firmware upgrade client 111 sends a download request [i.e., the firmware upgrade client 111 initiates a update process itself, thereby initiating the delivery of the firmware update package to the function module without a request from the function module itself ] for a new version of firmware to the server 20; pg. 8, para. 4-6, the new version of firmware sent by the server is received. After sending the download request for a new version of firmware to the server 20, the firmware upgrade client 111 receives the new version of firmware sent by the server 20 … the new version of firmware received by the firmware upgrade client 111 is a firmware upgrade package. the new version of firmware is sent to the function module so as to enable the function module to upgrade the firmware).
Yang does not appear to explicitly disclose a communication network. However, in an analogous art to the claimed invention in the field of software update, Ma teaches a communication network (Ma, pg. 15, para. 7-8, the server 110 and the terminal 120 can perform wireless communication. … the wireless communication of the invention can be realized by the communication network communication).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s system with the system taught by Ma including a communication network. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to use a communication network in performing wireless communication between a smart device and a server to take advantage of the communication network, such as enhanced collaboration, more efficient information flow, and cost savings through resource sharing.
Yang does not appear to explicitly disclose without request from the processing unit to be updated. However, in an analogous art to the claimed invention in the field of software update, Hisamoto teaches without request from the processing unit to be updated (Hisamoto, ¶ 48, The control unit 102 may request software that is a firmware update for the sensor 430 from the remote server. In other embodiments, the remote server automatically pushes a notification to the control unit 102 when the firmware update is available, or automatically sends the firmware update to the control unit 102 … the control unit 102 may also determine which of the electronic devices are target electronic devices for which the firmware update is intended. In FIG. 4, the sensor 430 is the target electronic device [Examiner’s Remarks: Hisamoto teaches that a remote server may automatically push a notification or automatically send a firmware update to the control unit when firmware update becomes available (¶ 48). Because the firmware update is automatically provided by the server rather than being requested by the target electronic device, this teaches initiating delivery of the firmware update package without request from the processing unit to be updated, as recited in the claim]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s teaching as modified with the teaching taught by Hisamoto. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the update delivery without request from the processing unit, in order to allow the update control component to automatically manage firmware updates. Such an implementation would improve system reliability and efficiency by ensuring that firmware updates are initiated based on system determined conditions rather than requiring a request from the processing unit, thereby reducing processing overhead and simplify update management.
As to claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Yang as modified further discloses The household appliance according to claim 1, wherein, the update unit is configured to ,after reception, at the communication module, of the update data distribution, and based on the update data distribution, initiate an identification of the processing unit to be updated (Yang, Fig. 7, pg. 7, the last paragraph, after obtaining the firmware version information, the firmware upgrade client 111 determines whether the function module with a firmware upgrade capability needs to upgrade firmware; pg. 8, para. 3, after determining the function modules needing to upgrade firmware, the firmware upgrade client 111 sends a download request for a new version of firmware to the server 20; pg. 8, para. 4-6, the new version of firmware sent by the server is received. ... the new version of firmware received by the firmware upgrade client 111 is a firmware upgrade package. … the new version of firmware is sent to the function module so as to enable the function module to upgrade the firmware).
As to claim 7, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated. Yang as modified further discloses The household appliance according to claim 2, wherein the update data distribution includes a plurality of firmware update packages (Ma, claim 9, the installation result and the indication information based on the plurality of upgrade packages) each one associated with a respective processing unit of said plurality of processing units (Ma, claim 10, the upgrade object corresponding to each upgrade package is electronic control unit), and wherein the update unit is configured to identify the processing unit to be updated as the processing unit (Ma, pg. 8, para. 5, it can ensure that the upgrade object corresponding to the upgrade package in the first upgrade package group with successful installation is normally used and updated version) whose firmware version is different from the firmware version of the respective firmware update package included in the update data distribution (Ma, pg. 10, para. 5, determining the installation failure of the upgrade package does not belong to the first upgrade package group (i.e., upgrade package in the first upgrade package group is installed successfully), in this case; The intelligent vehicle can only backoff the version [a different version] of the upgrading object corresponding to the upgrading packet in the second upgrading packet group, without backing to the version of the upgrading object corresponding to the upgrading packet in the first upgrading packet group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s system with the system taught by Ma including that the update data distribution includes a plurality of firmware update packages, each one associated with a respective processing unit of said plurality of processing units, and wherein the update unit is configured to identify the processing unit to be updated as the processing unit whose firmware version is different from the firmware version of the respective firmware update package included in the update data distribution. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to implement a version management method and device by grouping a plurality of upgrade packages with different versions for version management to effectively improve the upgrade efficiency (Ma, pg. 3, para. 5 and 7)
As to claim 8, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated. Yang as modified further discloses
The household appliance according to claim 2, wherein the update data distribution includes a software component configured to enable, between the update unit and each one of the plurality of processing units, a respective enabled communication line (Yang, Fig. 1, pg. 5, para. 2-5, the firmware upgrade client 111 and the at least one function module (121-12N) use a same set of communications buses for mutual communication … The physical interface module 115 is configured to adjust information sent by the system master control module 11 to adapt to a physical interface corresponding to the at least one function module (121-12N), or adjust information sent by the at least one function module (121-12N) to adapt to a physical interface corresponding to the system master control module 11), and wherein the update unit is configured to initiate the identification of the processing unit to be updated and delivery of the respective firmware update package thereto through the respective enabled communication line (Yang, pg. 1, para. 7, the system master control module 11 further includes a system configuration module 112, configured to store configuration information of the at least one function module (121-12N). The configuration information includes firmware version information of the at least one function module (121-12N) and whether the at least one function module (121-12N) has a firmware upgrade capability).
As to claim 12, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Yang as modified further discloses The household appliance according to claim 1, wherein the household appliance is a laundry machine configured to wash and/or dry laundry, a dishwasher, an oven, a refrigerator, or a cooking hob (Yang, pg. 4, para. 8, A household appliance provided in embodiments of the present invention may be an intelligent household appliance with a communications function, such as a washing machine, a refrigerator, an air conditioner, a microwave oven, or a television set).
As to claim 13, Yang discloses A method of updating a household appliance (Yang, Fig. 1, Abstract, A household appliance and a household appliance firmware upgrade method), the method comprising:
receiving, at a communication module of the household appliance, an update data distribution from an external server (Yang, Fig. 1, pg. 2, the last paragraph, the household appliance further includes a second communications module, configured to support the firmware upgrade client in information interaction with the server through wireless communication; Fig. 7, pg. 7, para. 10-11, the firmware upgrade client 111 sends a firmware version information request to the server 20 through the second communications module 116; Yang, Fig. 7, pg. 7, para. 13, the firmware upgrade client 111 receives the firmware version information from the server 20 through the second communications module 116. … if the firmware version information request includes a request about the user interaction interface and the camera, the firmware upgrade client 111 may obtain the firmware version information about the user interaction interface and the camera from the server 20);
processing, by an update unit of the household appliance, the received update data distribution (Yang, Fig. 7, pg. 7, the last paragraph, after obtaining the firmware version information, the firmware upgrade client 111 determines whether the function module with a firmware upgrade capability needs to upgrade firmware);
identifying, from the update data distribution, a respective firmware update package associated with at least one processing unit to be updated of a plurality of processing units of the household appliance, wherein the plurality of processing units are for controlling a plurality of electrically controllable components (Yang, pg. 8, para. 3, after determining the function modules needing to upgrade firmware, the firmware upgrade client 111 sends a download request for a new version of firmware to the server 20; pg. 8, para. 4-6, the new version of firmware sent by the server is received. ... the new version of firmware received by the firmware upgrade client 111 is a firmware upgrade package. … the new version of firmware is sent to the function module so as to enable the function module to upgrade the firmware; pg. 4, the last paragraph, the intelligent refrigerator includes at least one function module. The function module may be configured to control the household appliance to operate in a corresponding operating status); and
initiating, by the update unit, a delivery of the respective firmware update package to the processing unit to be updated (Yang, Fig. 7, pg. 7, the last paragraph, after obtaining the firmware version information, the firmware upgrade client 111 determines [initiates a delivery of the respective firmware update package] whether the function module with a firmware upgrade capability needs to upgrade firmware; pg. 8, para. 3, after determining the function modules needing to upgrade firmware, the firmware upgrade client 111 sends a download request for a new version of firmware to the server 20; pg. 8, para. 4-6, the new version of firmware sent by the server is received. ... the new version of firmware received by the firmware upgrade client 111 is a firmware upgrade package. … the new version of firmware is sent to the function module so as to enable the function module to upgrade the firmware), wherein the update unit initiates the delivery to the processing unit to be updated on its own initiative (Yang, pg. 8, para. 3, after determining the function modules needing to upgrade firmware, the firmware upgrade client 111 sends a download request [i.e., the firmware upgrade client 111 initiates a update process itself, thereby initiating the delivery of the firmware update package to the function module without a request from the function module itself ] for a new version of firmware to the server 20; pg. 8, para. 4-6, the new version of firmware sent by the server is received. After sending the download request for a new version of firmware to the server 20, the firmware upgrade client 111 receives the new version of firmware sent by the server 20 … the new version of firmware received by the firmware upgrade client 111 is a firmware upgrade package. the new version of firmware is sent to the function module so as to enable the function module to upgrade the firmware).
Yang does not appear to explicitly disclose a communication network. However, in an analogous art to the claimed invention in the field of software update, Ma teaches a communication network (Ma, pg. 15, para. 7-8, the server 110 and the terminal 120 can perform wireless communication. … the wireless communication of the invention can be realized by the communication network communication).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s system with the system taught by Ma including a communication network. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to use a communication network in performing wireless communication between a smart device and a server to take advantage of the communication network, such as enhanced collaboration, more efficient information flow, and cost savings through resource sharing.
Yang does not appear to explicitly disclose without request from the processing unit to be updated. However, in an analogous art to the claimed invention in the field of software update, Hisamoto teaches without request from the processing unit to be updated (Hisamoto, ¶ 48, The control unit 102 may request software that is a firmware update for the sensor 430 from the remote server. In other embodiments, the remote server automatically pushes a notification to the control unit 102 when the firmware update is available, or automatically sends the firmware update to the control unit 102 … the control unit 102 may also determine which of the electronic devices are target electronic devices for which the firmware update is intended. In FIG. 4, the sensor 430 is the target electronic device [Examiner’s Remarks: Hisamoto teaches that a remote server may automatically push a notification or automatically send a firmware update to the control unit when firmware update becomes available (¶ 48). Because the firmware update is automatically provided by the server rather than being requested by the target electronic device, this teaches initiating delivery of the firmware update package without request from the processing unit to be updated, as recited in the claim]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s teaching as modified with the teaching taught by Hisamoto. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the update delivery without request from the processing unit, in order to allow the update control component to automatically manage firmware updates. Such an implementation would improve system reliability and efficiency by ensuring that firmware updates are initiated based on system determined conditions rather than requiring a request from the processing unit, thereby reducing processing overhead and simplify update management.
As to claim 14, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated and the claim is corresponding to claim 2. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
As to claim 19, the rejection of claim 14 is incorporated and the claim is corresponding to claim 7. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational set forth in the rejection of claim 7.
As to claim 20 the rejection of claim 14 is incorporated and the claim is corresponding to claim 8. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational set forth in the rejection of claim 8.
Claims 3 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3674889 A1 (hereinafter “Yang”) in view of CN 113227968 A (hereinafter “Ma”), and further in view of KR 20180117934 (hereinafter “Yang2”).
As to claim 3, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated. Yang as modified does not appear to explicitly disclose The household appliance according to claim 2, wherein: the processing units are configured to: operate in a first operating mode allowing the processing units to control the electrically controllable components or operate in a second operating mode preventing the processing units to control the electrically controllable components; and the update unit is configured to initiate the identification of the processing unit to be updated after activation of the second operating mode in the processing units. However, in an analogous art to the claimed invention in the field of firmware update, Yang2 teaches wherein: the processing units are configured to:
operate in a first operating mode allowing the processing units to control the electrically controllable components (Yang2, The air conditioner can be operated according to a plurality of operation modes. The control unit 240 can control the vane driver 1210, the fan driver 1220, and the like according to the selected operation mode) or
operate in a second operating mode preventing the processing units to control the electrically controllable components (Yang2, ¶ 79, the controller 240 can update the firmware in the standby mode [i.e., a state where a device or service is ready but not actively in use]; ¶ 284, The home appliance 200 can operate in the standby mode for a predetermined time (S1810). The predetermined time can be set by the company or the service provider, and can be set to a time when the frequency of use of the user is small).
Thus, the combination of Yang and Yang2 teaches the update unit is configured to initiate the identification of the processing unit to be updated (Yang, Fig. 7, pg. 7, the last paragraph, the firmware upgrade client 111 determines whether the function module with a firmware upgrade capability needs to upgrade firmware) after activation of the second operating mode in the processing (Yang2, ¶ 284, The home appliance 200 can operate in the standby mode for a predetermined time (S1810)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s system as modified with the system taught by Yang2 including that the processing units are configured to: operate in a first operating mode allowing the processing units to control the electrically controllable components or operate in a second operating mode preventing the processing units to control the electrically controllable components; and the update unit is configured to initiate the identification of the processing unit to be updated after activation of the second operating mode in the processing units. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to update the firmware in the standby mode where the household appliance is not in use to ensure a successful update with no disruptions.
As to claim 15, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated and the claim is corresponding to claim 3. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational set forth in the rejection of claim 3.
Claims 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3674889 A1 (hereinafter “Yang”) in view of CN 113227968 A (hereinafter “Ma”), in view of KR 20180117934 (hereinafter “Yang2”), and further in view of US 2020/0257520 (hereinafter “Doering”).
As to claim 4, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated. Yang as modified does not appear to explicitly disclose The household appliance according to claim 3, wherein the update unit is configured to cause activation of the second operating mode in the processing units by forcing the processing units to run respective bootloader firmware. However, in an analogous art to the claimed invention in the field of firmware updating, Doering teaches The household appliance according to claim 3, wherein the update unit is configured to cause activation of the second operating mode in the processing units by forcing the processing units to run respective bootloader firmware (Doering, claim 1, receiving a request from the USB host indicative of a selection of the predefined bootloader configuration; and in response to generating an internal interrupt within the processor circuit, reading the request for controlling the USB device to operate in accordance with the bootloader configuration, thereby switching into an update mode of operation of the USB device for updating the firmware).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s system as modified with the system taught by Doering including that the update unit is configured to cause activation of the second operating mode in the processing units by forcing the processing units to run respective bootloader firmware. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to control the microcontroller to switch the microcontroller from the normal mode of operation into an update mode of operation of the microcontroller for updating the firmware. In the update operation mode the microcontroller may operate in accordance with the bootloader configuration such that they may enter the bootloader code that is configured to read the updates received from the host and update the firmware during the update mode of operation (Doering, ¶ 32).
As to claim 16, the rejection of claim 15 is incorporated and the claim is corresponding to claim 4. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational set forth in the rejection of claim 4.
Claims 5-6 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3674889 A1 (hereinafter “Yang”) in view of CN 113227968 A (hereinafter “Ma”), and further in view of US 2019/0050218 (hereinafter “Giatilis”).
As to claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Yang as modified does not appear to explicitly disclose The household appliance according to claim 1, wherein the update unit is configured to cause the processing unit to be updated to run a software plugin allowing installation of the respective firmware update package delivered thereto. However, in an analogous art to the claimed invention in the field of software updating, Giatilis teaches The household appliance according to claim 1, wherein the update unit is configured to cause the processing unit to be updated to run a software plugin allowing installation of the respective firmware update package delivered thereto (Giatilis, ¶ 40, the program code may be program code of an operating system, any kind of software or application software such as server application, client application, mobile application, telecommunication software, routing software, an app, plug-in or extension, an update package or service package, and may be included in an installing package).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s system as modified with the system taught by Giatilis including that the update unit is configured to cause the processing unit to be updated to run a software plugin allowing installation of the respective firmware update package delivered thereto. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to run a software plugin to help enhance security and improving performance and stability.
As to claim 6, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated. Yang as modified further discloses The household appliance according to claim 5, wherein the software plugin is included in the update data distribution (Giatilis, ¶ 40, the program code may be program code of an operating system, any kind of software or application software such as server application, client application, mobile application, telecommunication software, routing software, an app, plug-in or extension, an update package or service package, and may be included in an installing package). The motivation to combine the references is the same as set forth in the rejection of claim 5.
As to claim 17, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated and the claim is corresponding to claim 5. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational set forth in the rejection of claim 5.
As to claim 18, the rejection of claim 117 is incorporated and the claim is corresponding to claim 6. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational set forth in the rejection of claim 6.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3674889 A1 (hereinafter “Yang”) in view of CN 113227968 A (hereinafter “Ma”), and further in view of US 2010/0332634 (hereinafter “Keys”).
As to claim 9, the rejection of claim 8 is incorporated. Yang as modified further discloses The household appliance according to claim 8, wherein the plurality of processing units comprise: a first processing unit connected to the update unit through a first electrical connection (Yang, pg. 8, para. 3, after determining the function modules needing to upgrade firmware, the firmware upgrade client 111 sends a download request for a new version of firmware to the server 20; pg. 8, para. 4-6, the new version of firmware sent by the server is received. ... the new version of firmware is sent to the function module so as to enable the function module to upgrade the firmware), but does not appear to explicitly disclose a second processing unit connected to the first processing unit through a second electrical connection, wherein the respective enabled communication line between the update unit and the second processing unit comprises comprising the first electrical connection and the second electrical connection being electrically coupled to each other. However, in an analogous art to the claimed invention in the field of software update, Keys teaches a second processing unit connected to the first processing unit through a second electrical connection, wherein the respective enabled communication line between the update unit and the second processing unit comprises comprising the first electrical connection and the second electrical connection being electrically coupled to each other (Keys, ¶ 82, However, one of the objects 815 included in the payload is the peer-to-peer software agent for installation to each of the nodes to which the payload is distributed. Moreover, the instructions 810 provided in the payload 800 instruct each node to distribute the peer-to-peer agent to each subordinate node in a one to one manner before sending the payload 800 including the software updates to the subordinate node).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s system as modified with the system taught by Keys including a second processing unit connected to the first processing unit through a second electrical connection, wherein the respective enabled communication line between the update unit and the second processing unit comprises comprising the first electrical connection and the second electrical connection being electrically coupled to each other. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to implement a method if updating a fleet of multi-function peripheral (MFPs) in a peer-to-peer manner utilizing software for distributing updates. The net result is a significant simplification of workflow and results management, and a significant improvement in the speed at which a fleet of MFPs is updated (Keys, ¶ 2).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3674889 A1 (hereinafter “Yang”) in view of CN 113227968 A (hereinafter “Ma”), in view of US 2010/0332634 (hereinafter “Keys”), and further in view of Yang2.
As to claim 10, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated. Yang as modified does not appear to explicitly disclose The household appliance according to claim 9, wherein the update unit is configured to cause the first processing unit to receive, install and run the software component after activation of a second operating mode in the first processing unit. However, in an analogous art to the claimed invention in the field of firmware updating, Yang2 teaches The household appliance according to claim 9, wherein the update unit is configured to cause the first processing unit to receive, install and run the software component after activation of a second operating mode in the first processing unit (Yang2, ¶ 79, the controller 240 can update the firmware in the standby mode [i.e., a state where a device or service is ready but not actively in use]; ¶ 284, The home appliance 200 can operate in the standby mode for a predetermined time (S1810). The predetermined time can be set by the company or the service provider, and can be set to a time when the frequency of use of the user is small)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s system as modified with the system taught by Yang2 including that the update unit is configured to cause the first processing unit to receive, install and run the software component after activation of a second operating mode in the first processing unit. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to update the firmware in the standby mode where the household appliance is not in use to ensure a successful update with no disruptions.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3674889 A1 (hereinafter “Yang”) in view of CN 113227968 A (hereinafter “Ma”), in view of US 2010/0332634 (hereinafter “Keys”), and further in view of US 8,793,758 (hereinafter “Raleigh”).
As to claim 11, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated. Yang as modified further discloses The household appliance according to claim 9, wherein the processing units are configured to:
operate in a first operating mode, wherein the first processing unit and the second processing unit are configured to communicate with each other through the second electrical connection based on a peer-to-peer communication protocol (Keys, ¶ 82, However, one of the objects 815 included in the payload is the peer-to-peer software agent for installation to each of the nodes to which the payload is distributed. Moreover, the instructions 810 provided in the payload 800 instruct each node to distribute the peer-to-peer agent [with a first operating mode being distributing the agent] to each subordinate node in a one to one manner before sending the payload 800 including the software updates to the subordinate node) and
operate in a second operating mode, wherein the update unit and the second processing unit are configured to communicate with each other through the respective enabled communication line (Keys, ¶ 82, the peer-to-peer software agent for installation to each of the nodes to which the payload is distributed. Moreover, the instructions 810 provided in the payload 800 instruct each node to distribute the peer-to-peer agent to each subordinate node in a one to one manner before sending the payload 800 including the software updates [with the second operating mode being sending software updates] to the subordinate node).
Yang does not appear to explicitly disclose based on a point-to-point communication protocol. However, in an analogous art to the claimed invention in the field of software updating, Raleigh teaches based on a point-to-point communication protocol (Raleigh, col. 51, ln. 33-44, there are multiple layers of security applied to agent communication bus 1630 communication protocols, such as including one or more of the following: point-to-point message exchange encryption using one or more keys that are partially shared or shared within the service processor 115 agent group and/or service controller 122).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang’s system as modified with the system taught by Raleigh including a point-to-point communication protocol. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated adapt a point-to-point architecture for agents or communication transactions, or point-to-multipoint within the agent framework so that all agent communication can be concentrated, or secured, or controlled, or restricted, or logged, or reported (Raleigh, col. 51, ln. 17-32).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAXIN WU whose telephone number is (571) 270-7721. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (7 am - 11:30 am; 1:30- 5 pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner' s supervisor, Wei Mui can be reached at (571) 272-3708. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
Wu, Daxin
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2191
/DAXIN WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2191