DETAILED ACTION
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) was submitted on 03/26/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 18 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 18 recites “The CAN bus of claim 17” in the preamble. It should read "The multi-drop, multi-master CAN bus of claim 17."
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
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 logic device configured to:” in claims 1, 17.
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. Support can be found for algorithm (Fig 2 & 8, [0021]-[0036]) and structure (Figs 3-7, [0017]-[0020][0034][0036]).
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 § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 10-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0290556 Al (Demont) in view of US 2015/0280851 Al (Sarashina).
Regarding Claim 1:
Demont teaches A monitor for a node of a time division multiple access (TDMA) data bus ([0019][0020] The central monitoring unit 130 can monitor or control operations of the battery management nodes 110. The communication medium 120 can have a bus structure, such as a CAN bus, or may be another type of shared communication channel. [0030] TDMA (time division multiple access) can be used so that NodeID N+l will not try to send at same time as NodeID N but in a different time slot.), the monitor comprising: a logic device configured to:
calculate a metric of bandwidth use (ie. actually time slot of the bus being used) of the TDMA data bus based on monitored signals transmitted by the node; ([0071] Each node being configured to: while transmitting on said CAN bus, detect that another node is already transmitting on said CAN bus; and resynchronize subsequent to detecting that another node is already transmitting on said CAN bus. Each node being configured to resynchronize by rebooting. All nodes being configured to periodically reboot to resynchronize all nodes.)
compare of the metric of bandwidth calculated with an expected metric of bandwidth use (ie. assigned time slot of bus bandwidth) for the node; determine that a babbling node failure has occurred in response to the metric of bandwidth calculated differing from the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node; ([0031] Each CAN bus node can have an ID (sometimes referred to as an ID node) defining the message priority. The ID can be assigned at manufacture or initialization of the node and may be stored in a memory device of the node. This ID can be multiplied by a time constant to define when the node may transmit. [0053] At block 606, the nodes can determine, from unique identification codes (IDs) assigned to the nodes, time slots in which to transmit. [0056] The nodes may be determined to be rebooted when a threshold duration of time has passed (for instance, 50 ms, 100ms, 200ms, 500ms, 1s, 2s, 5s, 10s, 1m, 5m, 10m, or another duration) or upon occurrence of an event (for instance, detection of an interfering transmission or an attempted interfering transmission on the communication medium 120).)
and issue a control signal to reset the node in response to a detected babbling node failure being determined. ([0056] Rebooted based on event. [0059] Rebooting is advantageous because the software running on the processor is fully reset. [0061] Optionally, the communication control process 600 can facilitate resynchronization of the nodes without cycling the power of or resetting the nodes. The synchronization signal may be provided periodically or responsive to occurrence of an event.)
Demont teaches on determining that a babbling node failure has occurred based on interference ([0056]). However, Demont is silent on determine that a babbling node failure has occurred in response to the metric of bandwidth calculated exceeding the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node.
Sarashina teaches, in the same field of endeavor, on a controller in an OLT calculates the total bandwidth in use for each OSU, and compares the total bandwidth with a threshold, Abstract.
Sarashina teaches on determining that the metric of bandwidth calculated (ie. threshold) exceeds the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node. ([0056][0057] The OLT controller 110 compares the total bandwidth in use for downstream signals of each OSU 200 with the threshold to determine whether to switch. [0070] The second determiner 116 compares the bandwidth allocated in use to the active ONUs 504 with the threshold 500. Based on the result of the comparison, the second determiner 116 determines in step S6 whether to switch the OSU 200 managing the active ONU s 400 to another one. [0065][0071] Bandwidth exceeds threshold.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention, to modify Demont per Sarashina to include determining that the metric of bandwidth calculated exceeds the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node. This would have been advantageous as discussed above as it would allow the system to provide resiliency and efficiency by implementing thresholds for determination that a node has faulty behavior.
Regarding Claim 2:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 1 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node is a percentage (ie. 100%) of a bus bandwidth used by the node over a defined time interval (ie. assigned time slot). ([0054] At block 608, the nodes transmit one or more messages on the communication medium in the determined time slots. For example, one or more of the battery management nodes 110 can each transmit on the communication medium 120 in its dedicated time slot a message that includes monitor or control parameters for its battery management node.)
Regarding Claim 3:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 1 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node is a stored transmission profile ([0031] Each CAN bus node can have an ID (sometimes referred to as an ID node) defining the message priority. The ID can be assigned at manufacture or initialization of the node and may be stored in a memory device of the node. This ID can be multiplied by a time constant to define when the node may transmit.) comprising a transmission schedule for periodic data and/or aperiodic data. ([0036] FIG. 2 illustrates an example where a node N sends or receives messages during a first slot periodically starting at time 0+k*sequence_length, while node N+i sends or receives messages during the next slot periodically starting at time i*Time_constant+k*sequence_length, where Time_constant is the pitch between two successive slots and sequence_length is the duration of the periodic sequence. [0053] At block 606, the nodes can determine, from unique identification codes (IDs) assigned to the nodes, time slots in which to transmit.)
Regarding Claim 4:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 1 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the metric of bus bandwidth use is determined by maintaining a rolling total or rolling average of data transmissions from the node to the TDMA bus. ([0036] The duration of the periodic sequence can, for example, be 100 ms if we want each node to send 10 messages/second. In other implementations, the duration of the periodic sequence can be shorter or longer than 100 ms, such as being or ranging between one or more of 1 ms, 2 ms, 5, ms, 10 ms, 50 ms, 100 ms, 200 ms, 300 ms, 500 ms, 750 ms, 1 s, 1.5 s, 2 s, 3 s, 5 s, 7 s, or 10 s, among other possible durations.)
Regarding Claim 5:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 1 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the metric of bus bandwidth use is determined by assessing a discrete interval total or a discrete interval average of data transmissions from the node to the TDMA data bus. ([0036] The duration of the periodic sequence can, for example, be 100 ms if we want each node to send 10 messages/second. In other implementations, the duration of the periodic sequence can be shorter or longer than 100 ms, such as being or ranging between one or more of 1 ms, 2 ms, 5, ms, 10 ms, 50 ms, 100 ms, 200 ms, 300 ms, 500 ms, 750 ms, 1 s, 1.5 s, 2 s, 3 s, 5 s, 7 s, or 10 s, among other possible durations.)
Regarding Claim 6:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 1 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the metric of bus bandwidth use is determined by assessing a total or an average of data transmissions according to a transmitted data priority. ([0031] Each CAN bus node can have an ID (sometimes referred to as an ID node) defining the message priority. The ID can be assigned at manufacture or initialization of the node and may be stored in a memory device of the node. This ID can be multiplied by a time constant to define when the node may transmit.)
Regarding Claim 7:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 1 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the metric of bus bandwidth use is determined by assessing a total or an average of data transmissions according to a transmitted data type, the transmitted data types including periodic data and aperiodic data. ([0036] FIG. 2 illustrates an example where a node N sends or receives messages during a first slot periodically starting at time 0+k*sequence_length, while node N+i sends or receives messages during the next slot periodically starting at time i*Time_constant+k*sequence_length, where Time_constant is the pitch between two successive slots and sequence_length is the duration of the periodic sequence. The duration of the periodic sequence can, for example, be 100 ms if we want each node to send 10 messages/second.)
Regarding Claim 10:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 1 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the monitor is integrated into the node. ([0055] At block 610, the messages transmitted by the nodes can be processed. The central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages received on the communication medium 120 from the battery management nodes 110. [0071] Each node being configured to: while transmitting on said CAN bus, detect that another node is already transmitting on said CAN bus; and resynchronize subsequent to detecting that another node is already transmitting on said CAN bus. Each node being configured to resynchronize by rebooting. All nodes being configured to periodically reboot to resynchronize all nodes.)
Regarding Claim 11:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 1 as described.
Demont teaches the monitor being an independent device communicatively coupled to the node. ([0054] At block 608, the nodes transmit one or more messages on the communication medium in the determined time slots. For example, one or more of the battery management nodes 110 can each transmit on the communication medium 120 in its dedicated time slot a message that includes monitor or control parameters for its battery management node. [0055] At block 610, the messages transmitted by the nodes can be processed. For example, the central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages received on the communication medium 120 from the battery management nodes 110. The central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages to monitor a status of the battery management nodes 110 and accordingly control operations of each of the battery management nodes 110.)
Regarding Claim 12:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 11 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the monitor is communicatively coupled to an output of a transceiver of the node, the output configured to passively transmit a single ended logic signal to the monitor. ([0054] At block 608, the nodes transmit one or more messages on the communication medium in the determined time slots. For example, one or more of the battery management nodes 110 can each transmit on the communication medium 120 in its dedicated time slot a message that includes monitor or control parameters for its battery management node. [0055] At block 610, the messages transmitted by the nodes can be processed. For example, the central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages received on the communication medium 120 from the battery management nodes 110. The central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages to monitor a status of the battery management nodes 110 and accordingly control operations of each of the battery management nodes 110.) Fig 5 shows transceiver connected to bus, using CAN bus for communication.
Regarding Claim 13:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 11 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the monitor is communicatively coupled to a transmit line of a controller of the node, the transmit line configured to transmit a single ended logic signal to each of the monitor and a transceiver of the node. ([0054] At block 608, the nodes transmit one or more messages on the communication medium in the determined time slots. For example, one or more of the battery management nodes 110 can each transmit on the communication medium 120 in its dedicated time slot a message that includes monitor or control parameters for its battery management node. [0055] At block 610, the messages transmitted by the nodes can be processed. For example, the central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages received on the communication medium 120 from the battery management nodes 110. The central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages to monitor a status of the battery management nodes 110 and accordingly control operations of each of the battery management nodes 110.)
Regarding Claim 14:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 11 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the monitor is connected to differential data signals of the TDMA bus. ([0059] Rebooting is advantageous because the software running on the processor is fully reset. [0061] Optionally, the communication control process 600 can facilitate resynchronization of the nodes without cycling the power of or resetting the nodes. The synchronization signal may be provided periodically or responsive to occurrence of an event.)
Regarding Claim 15:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 11 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the monitor is communicatively coupled to an intellectual property block (ie. FPGA) configured to make data transmission signals of the node available to the monitor. ([0005] The battery management systems of the nodes can communicate via a communication medium, such as a bus structure like a CAN bus, with one another, as well as with a central monitoring unit that may control (for example, by activating, deactivating, or adjusting supply of power by) or interrogate (for example, temperature or voltage) one or more operations of the nodes. [0078] The various illustrative logical blocks and modules described in connection with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented or performed by a machine, a microprocessor, a state machine, a digital signal processor (DSP), an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a field programmable gate array (FPGA) or other programmable logic device, discrete gate or transistor logic, discrete hardware components.)
Regarding Claim 16:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 1 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the monitor is communicatively separated from other nodes of TDMA data bus. ([0054] At block 608, the nodes transmit one or more messages on the communication medium in the determined time slots. For example, one or more of the battery management nodes 110 can each transmit on the communication medium 120 in its dedicated time slot a message that includes monitor or control parameters for its battery management node. [0055] At block 610, the messages transmitted by the nodes can be processed. For example, the central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages received on the communication medium 120 from the battery management nodes 110. The central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages to monitor a status of the battery management nodes 110 and accordingly control operations of each of the battery management nodes 110.)
Regarding Claim 17:
Demont teaches A multi-drop, multi-master CAN bus comprising a plurality of nodes and a plurality of monitors (Fig 1B, central monitor 130, battery management monitor nodes 112A-N), ([0019][0020] The central monitoring unit 130 can monitor or control operations of the battery management nodes 110. The communication medium 120 can have a bus structure, such as a CAN bus, or may be another type of shared communication channel. [0030] TDMA (time division multiple access) can be used so that NodeID N+l will not try to send at same time as NodeID N but in a different time slot.,
each monitor of the plurality of monitors comprising: a receiver configured to receive data signals transmitted by a single node of the plurality of nodes to the CAN bus; ([0051] At block 602, the nodes can reboot simultaneously. For example, the battery management nodes 110 can be caused to reboot, such as power on or reset, at the same time responsive to a received a power down signal, power up signal, or reset signal at each of the battery management nodes 110. [0055] At block 610, the messages transmitted by the nodes can be processed. The central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages received on the communication medium 120 from the battery management nodes 110. [0071] The plurality of nodes being configured to receive a synchronizing signal and adapt a phase of a clock to said synchronizing signal.)
and a logic device configured to: calculate a metric of bandwidth use (ie. actually time slot of the bus being used) of the CAN data bus based on monitored signals transmitted by the node to the monitor; ([0071] Each node being configured to: while transmitting on said CAN bus, detect that another node is already transmitting on said CAN bus; and resynchronize subsequent to detecting that another node is already transmitting on said CAN bus. Each node being configured to resynchronize by rebooting. All nodes being configured to periodically reboot to resynchronize all nodes.)
compare of the metric of bandwidth calculated with an expected metric of bandwidth use (ie. assigned time slot of bus bandwidth) for the node; determine that a babbling node failure has occurred in response to the metric of bandwidth calculated differing from the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node; ([0031] Each CAN bus node can have an ID (sometimes referred to as an ID node) defining the message priority. The ID can be assigned at manufacture or initialization of the node and may be stored in a memory device of the node. This ID can be multiplied by a time constant to define when the node may transmit. [0053] At block 606, the nodes can determine, from unique identification codes (IDs) assigned to the nodes, time slots in which to transmit. [0056] The nodes may be determined to be rebooted when a threshold duration of time has passed (for instance, 50 ms, 100ms, 200ms, 500ms, 1s, 2s, 5s, 10s, 1m, 5m, 10m, or another duration) or upon occurrence of an event (for instance, detection of an interfering transmission or an attempted interfering transmission on the communication medium 120).)
and issue a control signal to reset the node in response to a detected babbling node failure being determined. ([0056] Rebooted based on event. [0059] Rebooting is advantageous because the software running on the processor is fully reset. [0061] Optionally, the communication control process 600 can facilitate resynchronization of the nodes without cycling the power of or resetting the nodes. The synchronization signal may be provided periodically or responsive to occurrence of an event.)
Demont teaches on determining that a babbling node failure has occurred based on interference ([0056]). However, Demont is silent on determine that a babbling node failure has occurred in response to the metric of bandwidth calculated exceeding the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node.
Sarashina teaches, in the same field of endeavor, on a controller in an OLT calculates the total bandwidth in use for each OSU, and compares the total bandwidth with a threshold, Abstract.
Sarashina teaches on determining that the metric of bandwidth calculated (ie. threshold) exceeds the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node. ([0056][0057] The OLT controller 110 compares the total bandwidth in use for downstream signals of each OSU 200 with the threshold to determine whether to switch. [0070] The second determiner 116 compares the bandwidth allocated in use to the active ONUs 504 with the threshold 500. Based on the result of the comparison, the second determiner 116 determines in step S6 whether to switch the OSU 200 managing the active ONU s 400 to another one. [0065][0071] Bandwidth exceeds threshold.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention, to modify Demont per Sarashina to include determining that the metric of bandwidth calculated exceeds the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node. This would have been advantageous as discussed above as it would allow the system to provide resiliency and efficiency by implementing thresholds for determination that a node has faulty behavior.
Regarding Claim 18:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 17 as described.
Demont teaches wherein the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node is a stored transmission profile of the node. ([0031] Each CAN bus node can have an ID (sometimes referred to as an ID node) defining the message priority. The ID can be assigned at manufacture or initialization of the node and may be stored in a memory device of the node. This ID can be multiplied by a time constant to define when the node may transmit.) comprising a transmission schedule for periodic data and/or aperiodic data. ([0036] FIG. 2 illustrates an example where a node N sends or receives messages during a first slot periodically starting at time 0+k*sequence_length, while node N+i sends or receives messages during the next slot periodically starting at time i*Time_constant+k*sequence_length, where Time_constant is the pitch between two successive slots and sequence_length is the duration of the periodic sequence. [0053] At block 606, the nodes can determine, from unique identification codes (IDs) assigned to the nodes, time slots in which to transmit.)
Regarding Claim 19:
Demont teaches A method of preventing a babbling node failure of a single node from disrupting a time division multiple access (TDMA) data bus comprising a plurality of nodes ([0019][0020] The central monitoring unit 130 can monitor or control operations of the battery management nodes 110. The communication medium 120 can have a bus structure, such as a CAN bus, or may be another type of shared communication channel. [0030] TDMA (time division multiple access) can be used so that NodeID N+l will not try to send at same time as NodeID N but in a different time slot. [0055] At block 610, the messages transmitted by the nodes can be processed. The central monitoring unit 130 can process the messages received on the communication medium 120 from the battery management nodes 110.), the method comprising:
calculating a metric of bandwidth use (ie. actually time slot of the bus being used) of the TDMA data bus based on monitored signals transmitted by the node to the monitor; ([0071] Each node being configured to: while transmitting on said CAN bus, detect that another node is already transmitting on said CAN bus; and resynchronize subsequent to detecting that another node is already transmitting on said CAN bus. Each node being configured to resynchronize by rebooting. All nodes being configured to periodically reboot to resynchronize all nodes.)
comparing of the metric of bandwidth use calculated with an expected metric of bandwidth use (ie. assigned time slot of bus bandwidth) for the node; determining that a babbling node failure has occurred in response to the metric of bandwidth calculated differing from the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node; ([0031] Each CAN bus node can have an ID (sometimes referred to as an ID node) defining the message priority. The ID can be assigned at manufacture or initialization of the node and may be stored in a memory device of the node. This ID can be multiplied by a time constant to define when the node may transmit. [0053] At block 606, the nodes can determine, from unique identification codes (IDs) assigned to the nodes, time slots in which to transmit. [0056] The nodes may be determined to be rebooted when a threshold duration of time has passed (for instance, 50 ms, 100ms, 200ms, 500ms, 1s, 2s, 5s, 10s, 1m, 5m, 10m, or another duration) or upon occurrence of an event (for instance, detection of an interfering transmission or an attempted interfering transmission on the communication medium 120).)
and issuing a control signal to reset the node in response to a detected babbling node failure being determined. ([0056] Rebooted based on event. [0059] Rebooting is advantageous because the software running on the processor is fully reset. [0061] Optionally, the communication control process 600 can facilitate resynchronization of the nodes without cycling the power of or resetting the nodes. The synchronization signal may be provided periodically or responsive to occurrence of an event.)
Demont teaches on determining that a babbling node failure has occurred based on interference ([0056]). However, Demont is silent on determine that a babbling node failure has occurred in response to the metric of bandwidth calculated exceeding the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node.
Sarashina teaches, in the same field of endeavor, on a controller in an OLT calculates the total bandwidth in use for each OSU, and compares the total bandwidth with a threshold, Abstract.
Sarashina teaches on determining that the metric of bandwidth calculated (ie. threshold) exceeds the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node. ([0056][0057] The OLT controller 110 compares the total bandwidth in use for downstream signals of each OSU 200 with the threshold to determine whether to switch. [0070] The second determiner 116 compares the bandwidth allocated in use to the active ONUs 504 with the threshold 500. Based on the result of the comparison, the second determiner 116 determines in step S6 whether to switch the OSU 200 managing the active ONU s 400 to another one. [0065][0071] Bandwidth exceeds threshold.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention, to modify Demont per Sarashina to include determining that the metric of bandwidth calculated exceeds the expected metric of bandwidth use for the node. This would have been advantageous as discussed above as it would allow the system to provide resiliency and efficiency by implementing thresholds for determination that a node has faulty behavior.
Regarding Claim 20:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 19 as described.
Demont teaches wherein calculating a metric of bandwidth use comprises calculating a rolling total or rolling average of transmitted data from the single node to the TDMA bus. ([0036] FIG. 2 illustrates an example where a node N sends or receives messages during a first slot periodically starting at time 0+k*sequence_length, while node N+i sends or receives messages during the next slot periodically starting at time i*Time_constant+k*sequence_length, where Time_constant is the pitch between two successive slots and sequence_length is the duration of the periodic sequence. The duration of the periodic sequence can, for example, be 100 ms if we want each node to send 10 messages/second.)
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0290556 Al (Demont) in view of US 2015/0280851 Al (Sarashina) further in view of US 2005/0141565 Al (Forest).
Regarding Claim 8:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina) teaches on the invention of Claim 1 as described.
Demont teaches on determining that a babbling node failure has occurred based on interference ([0056]). However, Demont (as modified by Sarashina) is silent on wherein the programmable logic device is further configured to issue a control signal to disable the node from transmitting data on the TDMA data bus when the programmable logic device detects a babbling node failure following multiple resets of the node.
Forest teaches, in the same field of endeavor, monitoring the synchronized clock signal of a node of a communication system and in particular for detecting deviations of the synchronized clock signal, Abstract.
Forest teaches on issuing a control signal to disable the node from transmitting data on the TDMA data bus when the programmable logic device detects a babbling node failure following multiple resets of the node. ([0006] Each node can send data across the communication media within the timeslot assigned to the node. [0781] In the operation phase the slot counters shall be initialized with 1 at the start of each communication cycle. [1455] A counter observes how many cycles the coldstart initiator spends in the coldstart path. If too many cycles pass without this node entering the normal operation mode, startup is aborted and the node may not again try to start up the cluster. This prevents faulty nodes from persistently disturbing the startup.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention, to modify Demont (as modified by Sarashina) by modifying Demont per Forest to include issuing a control signal to disable the node from transmitting data on the TDMA data bus when the programmable logic device detects a babbling node failure following multiple resets of the node. This would have been advantageous as discussed above as it would allow the system to prevent faulty nodes from disrupting operations.
Regarding Claim 9:
Demont (as modified by Sarashina & Forest) teaches on the invention of Claim 8 as described.
Demont teaches wherein disabling the node comprises physically disconnecting the node from the TDMA data bus, holding the node in a reset state, or removing power to the node. ([0043][0051] At block 602, the nodes can reboot simultaneously. For example, the battery management nodes 110 can be caused to reboot, such as power on or reset, at the same time responsive to a received a power down signal, power up signal, or reset signal at each of the battery management nodes 110.)
Conclusion & Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL J HACKENBERG whose telephone number is (571)272-5417. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm M-F.
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, Glenton B Burgess can be reached at (571)272-3949. 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.
/RACHEL J HACKENBERG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454
Prosecution Insights