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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of this application claims priority under 35 U.S.C. §119 on Patent Application No. 2023-070500 filed in Japan on April 21, 2023.
Application Status
3. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of the present application on March 28, 2024. Claims 1-7 are pending. This communication is considered fully responsive and sets forth below.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of information disclosure statement (IDS), dated on March 28, 2024 and October 10, 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.
Examiner's Notes
5. Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Specification
6. The title of the invention is not descriptive.
The title of this application is “RADIO DEVICE, COMMUNICATION CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM.” The examiner objects the usage of this title as it is not clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
A substitution of a new title is anticipated.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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 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.
8. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
9. Claims 1-4, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kraus et al. (US 2022/0270201).
Regarding claim 1, Kraus et al. teach the radio device (paragraph [0030] lines 1-20; Examiner’s Notes: data processing system 102 illustrated in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “radio device” in the instant application) comprising:
a plurality of operation parts (paragraph [0036] lines 1-20; Examiner’s Notes: multiple content items in data repository 118, as illustrated in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of operation parts” in the instant application)
each of which is provided with an identifier and each of which is configured to perform an operation related to a task for digital selective calling (DSC) communication (paragraph [0036] lines 1-20; Examiner’s Notes: the content item for selection based on call request in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a task for digital selective calling (DSC) communication;”
in fact, each content item with an identifier of the digital resource, e.g., web page domain address, and performing the operation on each content item for selection based on call request, as illustrated in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “each of which is provided with an identifier and each of which is configured to perform an operation related to a task for digital selective calling (DSC) communication” in the instant application);
a changing section configured to, when one of the plurality of operation parts is selected, (i) change the identifier of the operation part selected to a high-priority identifier indicating that the operation part selected is allowed to preferentially perform the operation (paragraphs [0039] lines 1-19 & [0070] lines 1-19; Examiner’s Notes: function tuner 116 illustrated in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a changing section;”
in fact, when the content item is selected, e.g., a call-to-action content, function tuner 116 modifying/updating the identifier priority, e.g., to a highest priority for the content operation, as illustrated in FIG. 1A, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a changing section configured to, when one of the plurality of operation parts is selected, (i) change the identifier of the operation part selected to a high-priority identifier indicating that the operation part selected is allowed to preferentially perform the operation” in the instant application) and
(ii) change the identifier of another operation part unselected among the plurality of operation parts to a non-high-priority identifier other than the high-priority identifier (paragraph [0070] lines 1-19; Examiner’s Notes: when the content item is selected, e.g., a call-to-action content, function tuner 116 modifying/reducing identifier priority for the another content operation, as illustrated in FIG. 1A, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “change the identifier of another operation part unselected among the plurality of operation parts to a non-high-priority identifier other than the high-priority identifier” in the instant application); and
an execution section configured to accept an operation performed by the operation part provided with the high-priority identifier and execute the task (paragraph [0039] lines 1-19; Examiner’s Notes: content streamer 112 illustrated in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “an execution section;”
in fact, content streamer 112 accepting the content item/operation, e.g. with the highest priority identifier and steaming the content, as illustrated in FIG. 1A, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “an execution section configured to accept an operation performed by the operation part provided with the high-priority identifier and execute the task” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 2, Kraus et al. teach the radio device, further comprising an independent operation part which is provided with the identifier and which is configured to perform an operation related to the DSC communication (paragraph [0034] lines 1-29; Examiner’s Notes: digital resource 138 depicted in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “an independent operation part;”
in fact, digital resource 138 with an identifier, e.g., web page domain address, and performing the operation on selection based on call request, as illustrated in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “an independent operation part which is provided with the identifier and which is configured to perform an operation related to the DSC communication” in the instant application),
the identifier of the independent operation part being unchangeable by the changing section (paragraph [0034] lines 1-11; Examiner’s Notes: the identifier of digital resource 138 is published in 3P publisher system 108, as depicted in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the identifier of the independent operation part being unchangeable by the changing section” in the instant application),
the changing section being configured to, when the identifier of the independent operation part is the high-priority identifier, change the identifier of the operation part provided with the high-priority identifier to the non-high-priority identifier (paragraphs [0039] lines 1-19 & [0070] lines 1-19; Examiner’s Notes: when the identifier of digital resource 138 is in the high priority, e.g., a highest priority, function tuner 116 modifying/reducing the identifier priority for the previous content operation, as illustrated in FIG. 1A, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the changing section being configured to, when the identifier of the independent operation part is the high-priority identifier, change the identifier of the operation part provided with the high-priority identifier to the non-high-priority identifier” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 3, Kraus et al. teach the radio device, further comprising a high priority setting section configured to, in a case where the identifier of the independent operation part is the non-high-priority identifier, set the independent operation part so that the independent operation part is treated as having the high-priority identifier (paragraphs [0034] lines 1-29 & [0070] lines 1-19; Examiner’s Notes: content selection system 104 depicted in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a high priority setting section;”
when the identifier of digital resource 138 is in the reduced priority, content selection system 104 setting/modifying the identifier of digital resource 138 to a highest priority, as illustrated in FIG. 1A, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a high priority setting section configured to, in a case where the identifier of the independent operation part is the non-high-priority identifier, set the independent operation part so that the independent operation part is treated as having the high-priority identifier” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 4, Kraus et al. teach the radio device, further comprising an operation authority setting section configured to provide one operation part that has first performed the operation among the plurality of operation parts and the independent operation part, with operation authority that allows the one operation part to preferentially perform the operation until the operation ends (paragraphs [0039] lines 1-19 & [0070] lines 1-19; Examiner’s Notes: viewer delivery agent 110 illustrated in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “an operation authority setting section;”
in fact, viewer delivery agent 110 allowing/delivering the content item first performed until the content item ends among multiple content items including the item in digital resource 138, as illustrated in FIG. 1A, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “an operation authority setting section configured to provide one operation part that has first performed the operation among the plurality of operation parts and the independent operation part, with operation authority that allows the one operation part to preferentially perform the operation until the operation ends” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 6, Kraus et al. teach the non-transitory storage medium storing a communication control program for causing a computer to function as the radio device according to claim 1 (paragraphs [0030] lines 1-20 & [0090] lines 1-32; Examiner’s Notes: both data processing system 102 illustrated in FIG. 1A and computer system 600 illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a computer to function as the radio device” in the instant application;
main memory 615 in computer system 600 illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “non-transitory storage medium;”
see details in the claim 1 rejection above).
Regarding claim 7, Kraus et al. teach the communication control method comprising the steps of:
when one of a plurality of operation parts (paragraph [0036] lines 1-20; Examiner’s Notes: multiple content items in data repository 118, as illustrated in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of operation parts” in the instant application) each of which is provided with an identifier and each of which is configured to perform an operation related to a task for digital selective calling (DSC) communication is selected (paragraph [0036] lines 1-20; Examiner’s Notes: the content item for selection based on call request in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a task for digital selective calling (DSC) communication;”
in fact, each content item with an identifier of the digital resource, e.g., web page domain address, and performing the operation on each content item for selection based on call request, as illustrated in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “each of which is provided with an identifier and each of which is configured to perform an operation related to a task for digital selective calling (DSC) communication” in the instant application),
(i) changing the identifier provided to the operation part selected to a high-priority identifier indicating that the operation part selected is allowed to preferentially perform the operation (paragraphs [0039] lines 1-19 & [0070] lines 1-19; Examiner’s Notes: when the content item is selected, e.g., a call-to-action content, function tuner 116 modifying/updating the identifier priority, e.g., to a highest priority for the content operation, as illustrated in FIG. 1A, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a changing section configured to, when one of the plurality of operation parts is selected, (i) change the identifier of the operation part selected to a high-priority identifier indicating that the operation part selected is allowed to preferentially perform the operation” in the instant application) and
(ii) changing the identifier of another operation part unselected among the plurality of operation parts to a non-high-priority identifier other than the high-priority identifier (paragraph [0070] lines 1-19; Examiner’s Notes: when the content item is selected, e.g., a call-to-action content, function tuner 116 modifying/reducing identifier priority for the another content operation, as illustrated in FIG. 1A, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “changing the identifier of another operation part unselected among the plurality of operation parts to a non-high-priority identifier other than the high-priority identifier” in the instant application); and
accepting the operation performed by the operation part provided with the high-priority identifier and executing the task (paragraph [0039] lines 1-19; Examiner’s Notes: accepting the content item/operation, e.g. with the highest priority identifier and steaming the content, as illustrated in FIG. 1A, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “an execution section configured to accept an operation performed by the operation part provided with the high-priority identifier and execute the task” in the instant application).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
11. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraus et al. (US 2022/0270201) in view of Chen et al. (US 2022/0129556).
Regarding claim 5, Kraus et al. teach the radio device, further comprising a recognition section configured to, when communication performed by the plurality of operation parts and communication performed by the independent operation part are in effect, recognize the plurality of operation parts and the independent operation part (paragraph [0039] lines 1-19; Examiner’s Notes: action requestor 114 illustrated in FIG. 1A in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a recognition section;”
in fact, when communication performed by content items in data repository 118 and digital resource 138 are selected/in effect, action requestor 114 recognizing the content items in data repository 118 and digital resource 138, as illustrated in FIG. 1A, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a recognition section configured to, when communication performed by the plurality of operation parts and communication performed by the independent operation part are in effect, recognize the plurality of operation parts and the independent operation part” in the instant application).
Kraus et al. teach the radio device without explicitly teaching when the recognition section recognizes neither the plurality of operation parts nor the independent operation part any longer, canceling the operation authority provided to one of the plurality of operation parts and the independent operation part.
Chen et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, the operation authority setting section being configured to, when the recognition section recognizes neither the plurality of operation parts nor the independent operation part any longer, cancel the operation authority provided to one of the plurality of operation parts and the independent operation part (paragraph [0037] lines 1-20; Examiner’s Notes: recognizing/finishing the sequence of processes in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the recognition section recognizes neither the plurality of operation parts nor the independent operation part any longer;”
in fact, while recognizing/finishing the sequence of processes, stopping the event processes in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the operation authority setting section being configured to, when the recognition section recognizes neither the plurality of operation parts nor the independent operation part any longer, cancel the operation authority provided to one of the plurality of operation parts and the independent operation part” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Chen et al. in the system of Kraus et al.
The motivation for implementing when the recognition section recognizes neither the plurality of operation parts nor the independent operation part any longer, canceling the operation authority provided to one of the plurality of operation parts and the independent operation part, is to further enhance the mechanism for the computer system that includes a central processing unit (CPU), a plurality of dedicated processing units (DPUs) for transferring therebetween event descriptors for allocating CPU processings to the DPUs, wherein the computer system includes a plurality of event controllers each associated a corresponding one of the DPUs or CPU, and the event controller receives the event descriptors issued by the DPUs and enters the event descriptors in a representative-vent queue in the order of the priority of the event descriptors.
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
Amerga et al. (US 2013/0294318) is generally directed to various aspects of the method for transmitting a downlink signal at a base station in a wireless communication system includes generating a user equipment (UE)-specific reference signal sequence and mapping the generated sequence to resource elements (REs) predetermined according to antenna port groups;
Ying et al. (US 2018/0279327) is cited for the UE that includes receiving circuitry configured to receive a radio resource control message including first information used for indicating a periodicity, wherein the receiving circuitry is also configured to receive on a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), downlink control information (DCI) with CRC scrambled by a first Radio Network Temporary Identifier (RNTI), the DCI including information indicating a time domain resource.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEI ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-5672. The examiner can normally be reached from 8:00AM to 5:00PM Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JAE Y. LEE can be reached on 57127231826. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WEI ZHAO/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights