CTNF 18/613,513 CTNF 86456 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Arguments On pg. 2 of Applicant’s Response, applicant argues that the while the claim scope of Group I and Group II does not completely overlap, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the claims are directed to different participants in the same protocol arrangement, namely, provision and use of the service structure hash value of the third device so that the first device can determine whether the service structure of the third device corresponds to that of the second device. The claims in both groups are not so patentably distinct that they would require restriction, and as can be seen from the non-limiting example above, the claim features correlate to each other. Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s argument. Group I is drawn to a service access, applied to a first device (a communication apparatus applied for a first device), comprising: obtaining service structure information of a second device from the second device; obtaining a service structure hash value of the second device; and when the service structure hash value of the second device is the same as a service structure hash value of a third device, accessing a service of the third device, classified in H04L9/3221. Group II is drawn to a service access, applied to a third device (a communication apparatus applied for a third device), comprising: first information indicates a first device to determine whether a service structure hash value of a second device is same as a service structure hash value of the third device, classified in G06F15/177. In Group I, determination of the service structure hash value of the second device is the same as the service structure hash value of the third device is performed when the service structure hash value of the second device and the service structure hash value of the third device is obtained. Distinct to Group I, in Group II, determination of the service structure hash value of the second device is the same as the service structure hash value of the third device is performed based on a command (indication) from the third device to perform the determination, and not from receiving the service structure hash values of the second and the third device. Therefore, Group I and Group II are distinctly different inventions and the Restriction is Final . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3-5, 8, 11, 13-15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michaud (US 2020/0220783 A1) in view of Machida ("Store Broadcast System", JP 2002051020 A, pub. date 2002-02-15) . Regarding claim 1, Michaud teaches a service access method, applied to a first device ([0053], “As shown in FIG. 3, a first peripheral device 302 performs an act 306 of providing a first hash value to the client device 106”) , comprising: obtaining a service structure hash value of the second device ([0053], “a first peripheral device 302 (~second device) performs an act 306 of providing a first hash value to the client device 106 (~first device) ”) ; obtaining first information from a third device, wherein the first information comprises a service structure hash value of the third device ([0058], “ second peripheral device 304 (~third device) of the same equivalence class as the first peripheral device 302 can perform an act 314 of providing a second hash value descriptive of service attributes provided by the second peripheral device 304 to the client device 106 (~first information from a third device comprising a service structure hash value of the third device) ”) ; and when the service structure hash value of the second device is the same as the service structure hash value of the third device, accessing a service of the third device ([0059], “because the second hash value for the second peripheral device 304 (~service structure hash value of the third device) is the same as the first hash value for the first peripheral device 302 (~service structure hash value of the second device) ) (e.g., based on the peripheral devices 302-304 being of the same equivalence class) ... As shown in FIG. 3, the client device 106 (~first device) can perform an act 318 of interacting with the second peripheral device 304 (~accessing a service of the third device) ”) . Michaud does not explicitly teach obtaining service structure information of a second device from the second device. However, Machida teaches obtaining service structure information of a second device from the second device (pg. 7, par. 1, “The receiver can acquire directory information of a stored broadcast service provided by each information provider by sequentially receiving carousels to which service structure information of each information provider is transmitted ”, wherein the receiver is a first device and the sender is a second device ; pg. 13, par. 8, “The signature information constituting the content metadata is used by the receiving side to determine whether or not the content is provided by the correct information provider . The receiver acquires and stores the public key of the information provider that provides the subscribed element service from the service structure information ”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Machida with the teaching of Michaud in order to enable the receiving device to map and understand the capabilities of the transmitting device for securely interacting with the transmitting device. Regarding claim 3, Michaud in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the obtaining of the first information from the third device comprises: receiving the first information broadcast by the third device (Michaud [0058], “second peripheral device 304 (~third device) of the same equivalence class as the first peripheral device 302 can perform an act 314 of providing a second hash value (~first information comprises a service structure hash value) descriptive of service attributes provided by the second peripheral device 304 (~third device) to the client device 106”; [0039], “ peripheral device 112 advertises or broadcasts device information including the device identifier 218 and hash value 220 that the communication manager 216 retrieves”) . Regarding claim 4, Michaud in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the obtaining of the service structure hash value of the second device (Michaud [0053], “a first peripheral device 302 (~second device) performs an act 306 of providing a first hash value to the client device 106 (~first device) ”) comprises: calculating the service structure information of the second device by using a hash function to obtain the service structure hash value of the second device (Michaud [0053], “a first peripheral device 302 (~second device) performs an act 306 of providing a first hash value to the client device 106”; [0042], “ hash value calculated for the peripheral device ”) . Regarding claim 5, Michaud in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the obtaining of the service structure hash value of the second device comprises: sending a second request requesting second information to the second device (Michaud [0053], “first peripheral device 302 (~second device) provides the hash value (~service structure hash value of the second device) to the client device 106 (~first device) in response to a request from the client device 106 (~request requesting second information to the second device) ”) , wherein the second information comprises the service structure hash value of the second device (Michaud [0053], “first peripheral device 302 (~second device) provides the hash value (~second information comprising service structure hash value of the second device) to the client device 106 (~first device) in response to a request from the client device 106”) ; and receiving the second information sent by the second device (Michaud [0053], “first peripheral device 302 (~second device) provides the hash value (~second information comprising service structure hash value of the second device) to the client device 106 (~first device) in response to a request from the client device 106”) . Regarding claim 8 Michaud in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein that the service structure hash value of the second device is the same as the service structure hash value of the third device indicates that a service structure of the second device is the same as a service structure of the third device (Michaud [0059], “the second hash value for the second peripheral device 304 is the same as the first hash value for the first peripheral device 302 (e.g., based on the peripheral devices 302-304 being of the same equivalence class (~same equivalence class is same service structure and same equivalence class devices share identical functional behaviors, device types, or logical classifications, wherein the system treats them as interchangeable when processing tasks, routing traffic, or applying configurations) )”) . Regarding claim 11, Michaud teaches a communication apparatus, applied for a first device, wherein the communication apparatus ([0053], “As shown in FIG. 3, a first peripheral device 302 performs an act 306 of providing a first hash value to the client device 106 (~first device) ”) comprises: at least one processor ([0024], “ client device 106 may refer to any computing device having a processor thereon and capable of acting as a central device to one or multiple peripheral devices. Indeed, the client device 106 may refer to various types of computing devices including, by way of example, a mobile device (e.g., a smartphone, a tablet), a desktop computer, or another type of computing device”; [0099], computer system 900 also includes memory 903 in electronic communication with the processor 901. The memory 903 may be any electronic component capable of storing electronic information”) ; and one or more memories coupled to the at least one processor and storing instructions that when executed by the at least one processor, cause the communication apparatus to perform operations ([0024], client device 106 comprises one or more memories storing instructions executable by the processor ; [0099], computer system 900 also includes memory 903 in electronic communication with the processor 901. The memory 903 may be any electronic component capable of storing electronic information”; [0100], “Instructions 905 and data 907 may be stored in the memory 903. The instructions 905 may be executable by the processor 901 to implement some or all of the functionality disclosed herein. Executing the instructions 905 may involve the use of the data 907 that is stored in the memory 903”) comprising: obtaining a service structure hash value of the second device ([0053], “a first peripheral device 302 (~second device) performs an act 306 of providing a first hash value to the client device 106 (~first device) ”) ; obtaining first information from a third device, wherein the first information comprises a service structure hash value of the third device ([0058], “ second peripheral device 304 (~third device) of the same equivalence class as the first peripheral device 302 can perform an act 314 of providing a second hash value descriptive of service attributes provided by the second peripheral device 304 to the client device 106 (~first information from a third device comprising a service structure hash value of the third device) ”) ; and when the service structure hash value of the second device is the same as the service structure hash value of the third device, accessing a service of the third device ([0059], “because the second hash value for the second peripheral device 304 (~service structure hash value of the third device) is the same as the first hash value for the first peripheral device 302 (~service structure hash value of the second device) ) (e.g., based on the peripheral devices 302-304 being of the same equivalence class) ... As shown in FIG. 3, the client device 106 (~first device) can perform an act 318 of interacting with the second peripheral device 304 (~accessing a service of the third device) ”) . Michaud does not explicitly teach obtaining service structure information of a second device from the second device. However, Machida teaches obtaining service structure information of a second device from the second device (pg. 7, par. 1, “The receiver can acquire directory information of a stored broadcast service provided by each information provider by sequentially receiving carousels to which service structure information of each information provider is transmitted ”, wherein the receiver is a first device and the sender is a second device ; pg. 13, par. 8, “The signature information constituting the content metadata is used by the receiving side to determine whether or not the content is provided by the correct information provider . The receiver acquires and stores the public key of the information provider that provides the subscribed element service from the service structure information ”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Machida with the teaching of Michaud in order to enable the receiving device to map and understand the capabilities of the transmitting device for securely interacting with the transmitting device. Regarding claim 13, Michaud in view of Machida teaches the communication apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the obtaining of the first information from the third device comprises: receiving the first information broadcast by the third device (Michaud [0058], “second peripheral device 304 (~third device) of the same equivalence class as the first peripheral device 302 can perform an act 314 of providing a second hash value (~first information comprises a service structure hash value) descriptive of service attributes provided by the second peripheral device 304 (~third device) to the client device 106”; [0039], “ peripheral device 112 advertises or broadcasts device information including the device identifier 218 and hash value 220 that the communication manager 216 retrieves”) . Regarding claim 14. Michaud in view of Machida teaches the communication apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the obtaining of the service structure hash value of the second device (Michaud [0053], “a first peripheral device 302 (~second device) performs an act 306 of providing a first hash value to the client device 106 (~first device) ”) comprises: calculating the service structure information of the second device by using a hash function to obtain the service structure hash value of the second device (Michaud [0053], “a first peripheral device 302 (~second device) performs an act 306 of providing a first hash value to the client device 106”; [0042], “ hash value calculated for the peripheral device ”) . Regarding claim 15, Michaud in view of Machida teaches the communication apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the obtaining of the service structure hash value of the second device comprises: sending a second request requesting second information to the second device (Michaud [0053], “first peripheral device 302 (~second device) provides the hash value (~service structure hash value of the second device) to the client device 106 (~first device) in response to a request from the client device 106 (~request requesting second information to the second device) ”) , wherein the second information comprises the service structure hash value of the second device (Michaud [0053], “first peripheral device 302 (~second device) provides the hash value (~second information comprising service structure hash value of the second device) to the client device 106 (~first device) in response to a request from the client device 106”) ; and receiving the second information sent by the second device (Michaud [0053], “first peripheral device 302 (~second device) provides the hash value (~second information comprising service structure hash value of the second device) to the client device 106 (~first device) in response to a request from the client device 106”) . Regarding claim 18. Michaud in view of Machida teaches the communication apparatus according to claim 11, wherein that the service structure hash value of the second device is the same as the service structure hash value of the third device indicates that a service structure of the second device is the same as a service structure of the third device ([0059], “the second hash value for the second peripheral device 304 is the same as the first hash value for the first peripheral device 302 (e.g., based on the peripheral devices 302-304 being of the same equivalence class (~same equivalence class is same service structure and same equivalence class devices share identical functional behaviors, device types, or logical classifications, wherein the system treats them as interchangeable when processing tasks, routing traffic, or applying configurations) )”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michaud in view of Machida, and further in view of Wei ("Information Obtaining Method, Device and Electronic Device", CN 103716159 A, pub. date 2014-04-09) Regarding claim 2, Michaud in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 1. The combination does not explicitly teach wherein the obtaining of the first information from the third device comprises: sending a first request requesting the first information to the third device; and receiving the first information sent by the third device. However, Wei teaches wherein obtaining of first information from a device comprises: sending a first request requesting first information to the device; and receiving the first information sent by the device (claim 1, “An information obtaining method, applied to a first electronic device, wherein it comprises: receiving the second electronic device sends the information obtaining request according to the information obtaining request, matching information corresponding to the information obtaining request from the information stored by itself, sending the matched information to the second electronic device”; [0007-0010], “based on one aspect of the present application, there is provided an information acquiring method, applied to a first electronic device, comprising: receiving the second electronic device sends the information obtaining request; The information acquisition request, the matching information corresponding to the information obtaining request from the information stored by itself; sending the matched information to the second electronic device”) . It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Wei with the teaching of Michaud as modified by Machida in order to perform data retrieval in a distributed system, allowing the primary device to fetch data, synchronize states, verify credentials, or trigger remote actions without storing all information locally. Regarding claim 12, Michaud in view of Machida teaches the communication apparatus according to claim 11. The combination does not explicitly teach wherein the obtaining of the first information from the third device comprises: sending a first request requesting the first information to the third device; and receiving the first information sent by the third device. However, Wei teaches wherein obtaining of first information from a device comprises: sending a first request requesting first information to the device; and receiving the first information sent by the device (claim 1, “An information obtaining method, applied to a first electronic device, wherein it comprises: receiving the second electronic device sends the information obtaining request according to the information obtaining request, matching information corresponding to the information obtaining request from the information stored by itself, sending the matched information to the second electronic device”; [0007-0010], “based on one aspect of the present application, there is provided an information acquiring method, applied to a first electronic device, comprising: receiving the second electronic device sends the information obtaining request; The information acquisition request, the matching information corresponding to the information obtaining request from the information stored by itself; sending the matched information to the second electronic device”) . It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Wei with the teaching of Michaud as modified by Machida in order to perform data retrieval in a distributed system, allowing the primary device to fetch data, synchronize states, verify credentials, or trigger remote actions without storing all information locally . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michaud in view of Machida, and further in view of Matsunami (US 2021/0240186 A1) . Regarding claim 6, Michaud in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 1. The combination does not explicitly teach wherein the service structure information of the second device indicates a type of service provided by the second device, a function corresponding to the type of service, and location information corresponding to the type of service. However, Matsunami teaches wherein service structure information of second device indicates a type of service provided by the second device ([0102], “As described above, examples of the service information (~service structure information) include service types (~type of service) , service identification information (service ID), functions required for the running unit (required specs), service providing time slots, service use positions, and minimum remaining battery levels”; [0103], “These pieces of information are prestored in the service information database 2067 by a service provider which provides a service through the running unit 100 (~device) ”) , a function corresponding to the type of service ([0102], “As described above, examples of the service information (~service structure information) include service types (~type of service) , service identification information (service ID), functions required for the running unit (required specs), service providing time slots, service use positions, and minimum remaining battery levels”) , and location information corresponding to the type of service ([0102], “As described above, examples of the service information (~service structure information) include service types (~type of service) , service identification information (service ID), functions required for the running unit (required specs), service providing time slots, service use positions (~location information) , and minimum remaining battery levels”) . It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Matsunami with the teaching of Michaud as modified by Machida in order to enable dynamic service discovery and contextual interoperability between connected devices by allowing a primary device to understand exactly what a secondary device offers, how to execute its features, and where that service is located. Regarding claim 16. Michaud in view of Machida teaches the communication apparatus according to claim 11. The combination does not explicitly teach wherein the service structure information of the second device indicates a type of service provided by the second device, a function corresponding to the type of service, and location information corresponding to the type of service. However, Matsunami teaches wherein service structure information of second device indicates a type of service provided by the second device ([0102], “As described above, examples of the service information (~service structure information) include service types (~type of service) , service identification information (service ID), functions required for the running unit (required specs), service providing time slots, service use positions, and minimum remaining battery levels”; [0103], “These pieces of information are prestored in the service information database 2067 by a service provider which provides a service through the running unit 100 (~device) ”) , a function corresponding to the type of service ([0102], “As described above, examples of the service information (~service structure information) include service types (~type of service) , service identification information (service ID), functions required for the running unit (required specs), service providing time slots, service use positions, and minimum remaining battery levels”) , and location information corresponding to the type of service ([0102], “As described above, examples of the service information (~service structure information) include service types (~type of service) , service identification information (service ID), functions required for the running unit (required specs), service providing time slots, service use positions (~location information) , and minimum remaining battery levels”) . It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Matsunami with the teaching of Michaud as modified by Machida in order to enable dynamic service discovery and contextual interoperability between connected devices by allowing a primary device to understand exactly what a secondary device offers, how to execute its features, and where that service is located . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 8. Claim s 7 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 07-101 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER YI whose telephone number is (571)270-7696 . The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. 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.usp to. gov/interviewpractice . If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, JINSONG HU , can be reached on (571) 272-3965 . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /ALEXANDER YI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2643 /JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 2 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 3 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 4 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 5 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 6 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 7 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 8 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 9 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 10 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 11 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 12 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 13 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 14 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 15 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 16 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 17 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 18 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 19 Art Unit: 2643 Application/Control Number: 18/613,513 Page 20 Art Unit: 2643
Prosecution Insights