Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
2. 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 11 is rejected under 35 USC 101 since the claims are directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 11 recite a “computer-readable medium” which appears to cover both transitory and non-transitory embodiments. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is required to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification during proceedings before the USPTO. See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (during patent examination the pending claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is silent (see paragraph 32 of the current specification). See MPEP 2111.01. When the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim covers a signal per se, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Aug. 24, 2009; p. 2.
The Examiner suggests that the Applicant add the limitation "non-transitory computer- readable medium" to the claim in order to properly render the claims in statutory form in view of their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the originally filed specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
A) Claims 1-3, 5, and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHEBBO (WO 2010/100444 A1) in view of SATO (US 2020/0126664 A1).
As per claim 1, CHEBBO teaches a communication control apparatus comprising at least one processor (page 3, lines 28-30- device/apparatus comprising processor) that performs: by a measurement information collector, collecting measurement information of a sensor through a mobile communication network (page 5, lines 10-14 and page 9, lines 13-14 and 21-39, data collector for collecting measured data of sensor through a communication network); by a measurement information analyzer, analyzing the measurement information at least during normal time when no emergency is occurring (page 5, lines 10-14 and page 9, lines 13-14 and 21-39, by measured data analyze the sensed data or measurements during time interval to decides whether or not to declare an emergency state or non-emergency state; please note that non-emergency state is when no emergency occurring, therefore no emergency is detected, no emergency is occurring); by an emergency detector, detecting an emergency based on the measurement information (page 5, lines 10-14 and page 9, lines 13-14 and 21-39, sensing or detecting emergency based on the measured data); emergency reporter, making an emergency report (page 10, S13, lines 3-8, sends an indicator of emergency status therefore reporting emergency).
However, CHEBBO does not explicitly teach by an emergency reporter, making an emergency report through the mobile communication network in response to the emergency, before the measurement information analyzer completes the analysis of the measurement information.
In the same field of endeavor, SATO teaches an emergency reporter, making an emergency report through the mobile communication network in response to the emergency, before the measurement information analyzer completes the analysis of the measurement information (¶0239, emergency response (i.e. report) making an emergency response based on high urgency which occurs during 24 hour monitoring (continuous measurement), the phenomena occurred before and after, and in particular data that needs to be analyzed even if it may be unknown at the time, are stored and subsequently used for data analysis; therefore the measurement information analyzer completes the analysis after responding to emergency).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of SATO into invention of CHEBBO in order to implement a mechanism operable when there is a serious discovery related to human life, to store this discovery with the highest priority to improve emergency response.
As per claim 2 as applied to claim 1 above, CHEBBO teaches a wherein the emergency reporter makes the emergency report to an emergency response agency capable of responding to the emergency (page 10, S13-S16, sending messages to the coordinator and the coordinator may take additional action such as alerting a central monitoring station (i.e. emergency response agency) of the emergency status Other emergency actions would include the coordinator sending some form of alert outside the system such as an audible alarm or pager message).
As per claim 3 as applied to claim 2 above, CHEBBO teaches, wherein the at least one processor performs, by an emergency response criteria provider, causing the emergency response agency to provide emergency response criteria concerning an emergency whose report is acceptable, to the mobile communication network, and wherein the emergency reporter makes an emergency report through the mobile communication network in response to an emergency that meets the emergency response criteria (page 10, S13-S16 and page 12 S31-S37, emergency response agency or provider to provide emergency response regarding or concerning sensed parameter became critical (i.e. emergency whose report is acceptable) and sending messages to the coordinator and the coordinator may take additional action such as alerting a central monitoring station (i.e. emergency response agency) in response to an emergency that meets the emergency response standard).
As per claim 5 as applied to claim 1 above, CHEBBO teaches, wherein the emergency reporter makes the emergency report to a communication device used by a user who should be reported the emergency (page 10, S16, sending emergency message or report using MBAN device of the patient/user).
As per claim 7 as applied to claim 1 above, CHEBBO teaches, wherein the sensor is provided in a communication device capable of communicating with the mobile communication network (page 18, third paragraph, the sensor provided in the device is capable of communication with the network).
As per claim 8 as applied to claim 1 above, CHEBBO teaches, wherein the sensor is provided in a communication station that constitutes the mobile communication network and is capable of communicating with a communication device (page 6, 5th paragraph, an MBAN application, the coordinator is external to the body or bodies being monitored. It may be a PDA, a mobile phone, a bedside monitor station or even a sufficiently-capable sensor which on a temporary basis acts as a coordinator. As mentioned above, the coordinator in the beacon enabled network is in charge of providing synchronization and channel access to network devices).
As per claim 9 as applied to claim 1 above, CHEBBO teaches, wherein the sensor capable of communicating with a communication station that constitutes the mobile communication network (page 6, 5th paragraph, an MBAN application, the coordinator is external to the body or bodies being monitored. It may be a PDA, a mobile phone, a bedside monitor station or even a sufficiently-capable sensor which on a temporary basis acts as a coordinator. As mentioned above, the coordinator in the beacon enabled network is in charge of providing synchronization and channel access to network devices).
As per claim 10, CHEBBO teaches a communication control method comprising: collecting measurement information of a sensor through a mobile communication network (page 5, lines 10-14 and page 9, lines 13-14 and 21-39, data collector for collecting measured data of sensor through a communication network); analyzing the measurement information at least during normal time when no emergency is occurring (page 5, lines 10-14 and page 9, lines 13-14 and 21-39, analyze the sensed data or measurements during time interval to decides whether or not to declare an emergency state or non-emergency state; please note that non-emergency state is when no emergency occurring, therefore no emergency is detected, no emergency is occurring); detecting an emergency based on the measurement information (page 5, lines 10-14 and page 9, lines 13-14 and 21-39, sensing or detecting emergency based on the measured data); emergency reporter, making an emergency report (page 10, S13, lines 3-8, sends an indicator of emergency status therefore reporting emergency).
However, CHEBBO does not explicitly teach making an emergency report through the mobile communication network in response to the emergency, before the measurement information analyzer completes the analysis of the measurement information.
In the same field of endeavor, SATO teaches making an emergency report through the mobile communication network in response to the emergency, before the measurement information analyzer completes the analysis of the measurement information (¶0239, emergency response (i.e. report) making an emergency response based on high urgency that occurs during twenty four hour monitoring (continuous measurement), the phenomena occurred before and after, and in particular data that needs to be analyzed even if it may be unknown at the time, are stored and subsequently used for data analysis; therefore the measurement information analyzer completes the analysis after responding to emergency).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of SATO into invention of CHEBBO in order to implement a mechanism operable when there is a serious discovery related to human life, to store this discovery with the highest priority to improve emergency response.
As per claim 11, CHEBBO teaches a computer-readable medium storing a communication control program causing a computer to perform: collecting measurement information of a sensor through a mobile communication network (page 5, lines 10-14 and page 9, lines 13-14 and 21-39, data collector for collecting measured data of sensor through a communication network); analyzing the measurement information at least during normal time when no emergency is occurring (page 5, lines 10-14 and page 9, lines 13-14 and 21-39, analyze the sensed data or measurements during time interval to decides whether or not to declare an emergency state or non-emergency state; please note that non-emergency state is when no emergency occurring, therefore no emergency is detected, no emergency is occurring); detecting an emergency based on the measurement information (page 5, lines 10-14 and page 9, lines 13-14 and 21-39, sensing or detecting emergency based on the measured data); emergency reporter, making an emergency report (page 10, S13, lines 3-8, sends an indicator of emergency status therefore reporting emergency).
However, CHEBBO does not explicitly teach making an emergency report through the mobile communication network in response to the emergency, before the measurement information analyzer completes the analysis of the measurement information.
In the same field of endeavor, SATO teaches making an emergency report through the mobile communication network in response to the emergency, before the measurement information analyzer completes the analysis of the measurement information (¶0239, emergency response (i.e. report) making an emergency response based on high urgency that occurs during twenty four hour monitoring (continuous measurement), the phenomena occurred before and after, and in particular data that needs to be analyzed even if it may be unknown at the time, are stored and subsequently used for data analysis; therefore the measurement information analyzer completes the analysis after responding to emergency).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of SATO into invention of CHEBBO in order to implement a mechanism operable when there is a serious discovery related to human life, to store this discovery with the highest priority to improve emergency response.
B) Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
CHEBBO (WO 2010/100444 A1) in view of SATO (US 2020/0126664 A1) and further in view of Hamre (US 2020/0329358 A1).
As per claim 4 as applied to claim 3 above, CHEBBO in view of SATO does not explicitly teach wherein the emergency response criteria provider causes the mobile communication network to accept an update of the emergency response criteria from the emergency response agency, and the emergency reporter makes an emergency report through the mobile communication network in response to an emergency that meets the updated emergency response criteria.
In the same field of endeavor, Hamre teaches wherein the emergency response criteria provider causes the mobile communication network to accept an update of the emergency response criteria from the emergency response agency, and the emergency reporter makes an emergency report through the mobile communication network in response to an emergency that meets the updated emergency response criteria (Fig.1, and ¶0004 and ¶0027, emergency response system or provider cause the network 140 to receive/accept update of the emergency response module and the provider, or one or more caregivers and generates a feed for display on the caregiver application. For example, the feed may notify the caregiver that the response system connected with the user on the base station, that the provider ended a call with the user, that an emergency medical team has been dispatched to the user's house, and the like).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Hamre into invention of CHEBBO and SATO in order to receive updates regarding the detected emergency and to contact the user and/or a provider associated with the call center to demand for assistance from a monitoring agency.
C) Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
CHEBBO (WO 2010/100444 A1) in view of SATO (US 2020/0126664 A1) and further in view of YIN (US 2025/0351050 A1).
As per claim 6 as applied to claim 1 above, CHEBBO in view of SATO does not explicitly teach wherein the mobile communication network includes the IAB (Integrated Access and Backhaul) node comprising the MT (Mobile Termination) that functions as a communication device to a parent base station and the DU (Distributed Unit) that functions as a child base station to a communication device, and the emergency reporter causes the MT to make the emergency report.
In the same field of endeavor, YIN teaches wherein the mobile communication network includes the IAB (Integrated Access and Backhaul) node comprising the MT (Mobile Termination) that functions as a communication device to a parent base station and the DU (Distributed Unit) that functions as a child base station to a communication device, and the emergency reporter causes the MT to make the emergency report (¶0037-38, IAB nodes 104 may include an JAB mobile termination (IAB-MT) controlled (e.g., scheduled) by DUs 165 of a coupled IAB donor. An IAB-MT may include an independent set of antennas for relay of communications with UEs 115, or may share the same antennas (e.g., of an RU 170) of an IAB node 104 used for access via the DU 165 of the IAB node 104 (e.g., referred to as virtual JAB-MT (vIAB-MT)). the JAB nodes 104 may include DUs 165 that support communication links with additional entities (e.g., IAB nodes 104 and UEs 115) within the relay chain or configuration of the access network (e.g., downstream). In such cases, one or more components of the disaggregated RAN architecture (e.g., one or more IAB nodes 104 or components of TAB nodes 104) may be configured to operate according to the techniques described herein. To support emergency messaging using mobile relay as described. For example, some operations described as being performed by a UE 115 or a network entity 105 (e.g., a base station 140) may additionally, or alternatively, be performed by one or more components of the disaggregated RAN architecture (e.g., IAB nodes 104, DUs 165, CUs 160, RUs 170, RIC 175, and SMO 180).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of YIN into invention of CHEBBO and SATO in order for transmitting a dynamic relay identification (ID) to each of the aircraft-based devices based on the respective estimated position relative to an out-of-coverage area for emergency message relaying.
Conclusion
4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIDEH MADANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1249. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday; 9 AM to 5 PM EST.
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 at 5712723965. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FARIDEH MADANI/Examiner, Art Unit 2643
/JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643