DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the pending claims, 1-8, received 16 January 2024. Accordingly, the detailed action of claims 1-8 is as follows:
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 16 January 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Claim 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.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not 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 not 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 function without reciting 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. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a storage unit configured to store….a transmission processing unit configured to transmit” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/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 § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hideaki (JP2016197873 A, hereafter referred to as Hideaki).
Regarding claim 1, Hideaki teaches an on-vehicle device (Hideaki [0064-0065] teaches an in-vehicle communication device which executes a process of correcting a timestamp such that a transmitting side and receiving side each share and correct the delay time that occurs resulting time synchronization [0016]) comprising:
a storage unit configured to store delay time information (Hideaki [0071] teaches a predetermined (stored) delay time to be corrected on the transmitting side) indicating at least either a first transmission delay time of data from a measurement reference position of a transmission time of the data in an own device, which is the on-vehicle device, to an external position (Hideaki [0075, 0083]), or a second transmission delay time of data from an external position to a measurement reference position of a reception time of the data in the own device (Hideaki [0078, 0084]); and
a transmission processing unit configured to transmit the delay time information stored in the storage unit to a first other device that performs time synchronization with the own device (Hideaki [0083] teaches sharing the transmission and reception delay times between the transmitter and receiver).
Regarding claim 2, Hideaki teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Hideaki teaches the on-vehicle device wherein the delay time information indicates both the first transmission delay time and the second transmission delay time (Hideaki [0083 and 0065] teaches the transmitting side and receiving side each share the delay time that occurs in the transmission and reception).
Regarding claim 3, Hideaki teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Hideaki teaches the on-vehicle device wherein each of the measurement reference positions is located between a MAC processing unit that performs MAC (Medium Access Control) layer processing and a PHY processing unit that performs PHY (Physical) layer processing (Hideaki [0075, 0078]).
Regarding claim 4, Hideaki teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Hideaki teaches the on-vehicle device wherein the transmission processing unit transmits the delay time information to the first other device in response to a communication connection being established between the own device and the first other device (Hideaki [0038-0039] teaches receiving the downlink signal when the device is within range of the downlink area of the transmitting device such that synchronization occurs between devices within the radio wave reachable range [0088]).
Regarding claim 5, Hideaki teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Hideaki teaches the on-vehicle device wherein the transmission processing unit transmits information for time synchronization including the delay time information (Hideaki [0083 and 0065] teaches sharing delay times between the transmitting and receiving side in order to correct the time value and perform time synchronization [0016]).
Regarding claim 6, Hideaki teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Hideaki teaches the on-vehicle device wherein the on-vehicle device further comprises: a time synchronization unit configured to measure a propagation delay time between the on-vehicle device and the second other device by transmitting and receiving information for time synchronization to and from a second other device (Hideaki [0076 and 0085] teaches a determining a transmission delay time between a transmitting and receiving device based on information included in a SDU or PDU), and perform time synchronization with the second other device based on the measured propagation delay time (Hideaki [0084] teaches correcting a local time based on the transmission delay), and the time synchronization unit includes a correction unit configured to correct the propagation delay time based on delay time information indicating at least either a third transmission delay time of data from a measurement reference position of a transmission time of the data in the second other device to an external position, transmitted from the second other device, or a fourth transmission delay time of data from an external position to a measurement reference position of a reception time of the data in the second other device (Hideaki [0084] teaches correcting a local time based on a reception delay time (fourth transmission delay time) of data from the PHY to the MAC unit [0084, 0078]).
Regarding claim 7, the claim is directed to a method executed by the device of claim 1. The claim limitations of claim 7 do no teach or further limit over the limitations presented in claim 1.
Therefore, claim 7 is rejected for the same reasons set forth above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, Hideaki teaches a time synchronization method in an on-vehicle communication system that includes a first on-vehicle device and a second on-vehicle device (Hideaki [0003] teaches vehicle to vehicle communications between in-vehicle communication devices), comprising:
a step in which the first on-vehicle device transmits delay time information (Hideaki [0083 and 0065] teaches the transmitting side and receiving side each share the delay time that occurs in the transmission and reception) indicating at least either a first transmission delay time of data from a measurement reference position of a transmission time of the data in the first on-vehicle device to an external position (Hideaki [0075, 0083]), or a second transmission delay time of data from an external position to a measurement reference position of a reception time of the data in the first on-vehicle device (Hideaki [0078, 0084]);
a step in which the second on-vehicle device receives the delay time information transmitted from the first on-vehicle device (Hideaki [0083 and 0065] teaches the transmitting side and receiving side each share the delay time that occurs in the transmission and reception);
a step in which the second on-vehicle device measures the propagation delay time between the second on-vehicle device and the first on-vehicle device by transmitting and receiving information for time synchronization to and from the first on-vehicle device (Hideaki [0076 and 0085] teaches a determining a transmission delay time between a transmitting and receiving device based on information included in a SDU or PDU);
a step in which the second on-vehicle device corrects the measured propagation delay time based on the delay time information received from the first on-vehicle device (Hideaki [0083-0084] teaches correcting delay times based on information shared between the transmitting and receiving side such that the receiver corrects local time based on the shared delay times); and
a step in which the second on-vehicle device performs time synchronization with the first on-vehicle device based on the corrected propagation delay time (Hideaki [0016] teaches the receiver performs time synchronization using the corrected time value).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hideaki (JP 2015164302 A);
Hideaki (JP 2014023090 A);
Hideaki (JP 2013017211 A);
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEAN TOKUTA whose telephone number is (571)272-5145. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 630-430.
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, Brian Gillis can be reached at 5712727952. 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.
SHEAN TOKUTA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2446
/SHEAN TOKUTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2446