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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This non-final office action is in response to the Application filed on 03/29/2024, CON of PCT/CN2022/121375 Filing Date 09/26/2022 with priority to CN202111162025.8 Filing Date 09/30/2021.
Claim(s) 1-19 are pending for examination. Claim(s) 1, 8, 10, 17-19 is/are independent claim(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 8, 17, 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Based upon consideration of all of the relevant factors with respect to the claim as a whole, claim(s) 8, 17, 19 is/are determined to be directed to a judicial exception, i.e. an abstract idea without significantly more. The rationale for this determination is explained below.
The claim(s) is/are directed toward the abstract idea of starting an interface screen by receiving a request. The claim(s) do/does not contain any improvement to a technology or field, nor do they contain any additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because there are not sufficient limitations beyond linking the abstract idea to a computer.
In analyzing the Applicant’s claims for subject matter eligibility we use the Alice Mayo framework.
See MPEP 2106 - Patent Subject Matter Eligibility.
In step 1 we determine that the claims are a "process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter", (claim 8 is a method), so we move to step 2A.
Step 2A is a two-prong inquiry, in Prong One we determine whether a claim recites a judicial exception, and if so, then we determine in Prong Two if the recited judicial exception is integrated into a practical application of that exception.
In step 2A, Prong One we determine that the “receiving an interface startup request” and “starting an interface”, limitations in the claims are directed to a judicial exception, namely the abstract idea of starting an interface screen by receiving a request, which falls under the abstract idea grouping of methods of organizing human activity [mental processes, mathematical concepts] as described in MPEP 2106.04(a).
This moves us to Prong Two.
In step 2A, Prong Two we use the factors discussed in 2106.04(d)(I) to determine that the abstract idea is not integrated to a practical application. Specifically the claims take the abstract idea of starting an interface screen by receiving a request and merely include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(f). This moves us to step 2B.
In step 2B, we determine that the claims do not recite significantly more than the judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(A)-(B)).
In claim 17, the Applicant performs these steps on a "system", in claims 19 the Applicant stores these steps on a “medium”, which does nothing more than link the abstract idea to a computer.
Although the applicant adds the idea of starting an interface screen by receiving a request to a computing device, the addition of a computing device does not add "something more" to the claims. This merely takes the abstract idea and simply adds the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, e.g., a limitation indicating that a particular function such as creating and maintaining electronic records is performed by a computer, as discussed in Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 225-26, 110 USPQ2d at 1984 (see MPEP § 2106.05(f));
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-4, 6-8, 10-13, 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon; Jaegu et al. US Pub. No. 2022/0009513 (Yoon).
Claim 1:
Yoon teaches:
A communication method, performed by a source system in a vehicle, wherein the source system is any of a plurality of systems in the vehicle [¶ 0003, 12, 77, 83, 235, 238] (in-car entertainment (ICE) or in-vehicle infotainment (IVI). The ICE or the IVI may be referred to as vehicle hardware and software that provide audio or video entertainment) [¶ 0192] (rear seat entertainment (RSE)), and the method comprises:
monitoring an interface startup request of an application, wherein the interface startup request comprises identification information of a target screen to be started [¶ 0217-220] (FIG. 13 is a diagram for illustrating a workload distribution scenario between SoCs) [¶ 0211, 222] (When the components are initialized (S1410), the SoC #1 launches the fault manager to initialize the PCIe communication SW, and monitors the PCIe NT link);
determining, based on the identification information, whether a target system corresponding to the target screen is the source system [¶ 0028, 221-227] (FIG. 14 is a diagram for illustrating component initialization in a workload distribution scenario between SoCs, determine client mode or server mode);
in response to the target system corresponding to the target screen being the source system, starting an interface of the application on the target screen [¶ 0208-209, 221-227] (FIG. 14 is a diagram for illustrating component initialization in a workload distribution scenario between SoCs, server mode); and
in response to the target system corresponding to the target screen not being the source system, sending the interface startup request to the target system, to enable the target system to start the interface of the application on the target screen [¶ 0208-209, 221-227] (FIG. 14 is a diagram for illustrating component initialization in a workload distribution scenario between SoCs, client mode) [¶ 0009, 216, 226, 233, 245] (resource manager may also manage information on the priority for forced termination (e.g., from level 1 to level 5, and the level 5 have the lowest priority)).
Yoon teaches all the elements of the claim, however some of these elements may by in different embodiments and use different terminology, for example Yoon teaches screen initialization and the claims recite “startup”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the different embodiments of Yoon and that the difference in terminology is an obvious variant.
The reason, rationale, and motivation for this combination would have been to increase support and performance [Yoon: ¶ 0004].
ALTENRNATE REJECTION:
Claim(s) 1, 10, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon; Maria et al. US Pub. No. 2023/0059417 (Moon).
Claim 1:
Moon teaches:
A communication method, performed by a source system in a vehicle, wherein the source system is any of a plurality of systems in the vehicle [¶ 0068-69, 77-79] (rear screen UI may also include information about in-vehicle entertainment, map information, riding tips, etc. The rear screen UI in this scenario also provides one or more controls (e.g., Help, Pull Over and/or A/C environmental controls)), and the method comprises:
monitoring an interface startup request of an application, wherein the interface startup request comprises identification information of a target screen to be started [¶ 0010, 60-77] (first user interface may be a peripheral user interface and the second user interface may be a rider active user interface, FIG. 8B, because both the front and rear screen UIs are rider active, a rider in either the front seat or rear seat may be able to start the ride by pressing the Start Ride button on their respective in-vehicle display);
determining, based on the identification information, whether a target system corresponding to the target screen is the source system [¶ 0010, 60-77] (first user interface may be a peripheral user interface and the second user interface may be a rider active user interface, FIG. 8B, because both the front and rear screen UIs are rider active, a rider in either the front seat or rear seat may be able to start the ride by pressing the Start Ride button on their respective in-vehicle display);
in response to the target system corresponding to the target screen being the source system, starting an interface of the application on the target screen [¶ 0010, 60-77] (first user interface may be a peripheral user interface and the second user interface may be a rider active user interface, FIG. 8B, because both the front and rear screen UIs are rider active, a rider in either the front seat or rear seat may be able to start the ride by pressing the Start Ride button on their respective in-vehicle display); and
in response to the target system corresponding to the target screen not being the source system, sending the interface startup request to the target system, to enable the target system to start the interface of the application on the target screen [¶ 0010, 60-77] (first user interface may be a peripheral user interface and the second user interface may be a rider active user interface, FIG. 8B, because both the front and rear screen UIs are rider active, a rider in either the front seat or rear seat may be able to start the ride by pressing the Start Ride button on their respective in-vehicle display).
Moon teaches all the elements of the claim, however some of these elements may by in different embodiments and use different terminology, for example Moon teaches mirroring and the claims recite “startup”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the different embodiments of Moon and that the difference in terminology is an obvious variant.
Claim 2:
Yoon teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the source system comprises at least one screen, and monitoring the interface startup request of the application comprises:
monitoring the interface startup request of the application on any screen [¶ 0217-220] (FIG. 13 is a diagram for illustrating a workload distribution scenario between SoCs) [¶ 0211, 222] (When the components are initialized (S1410), the SoC #1 launches the fault manager to initialize the PCIe communication SW, and monitors the PCIe NT link) [¶ 0028, 221-227] (FIG. 14 is a diagram for illustrating component initialization in a workload distribution scenario between SoCs).
Claim 3:
Yoon teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the source system comprises a remote vehicle service, and monitoring the interface startup request of the application comprises:
starting the remote vehicle service [¶ 0003, 12, 77, 83, 235, 238] (in-car entertainment (ICE) or in-vehicle infotainment (IVI). The ICE or the IVI may be referred to as vehicle hardware and software that provide audio or video entertainment) [¶ 0192] (rear seat entertainment (RSE)); and
monitoring the interface startup request of the application through the remote vehicle service [¶ 0217-220] (FIG. 13 is a diagram for illustrating a workload distribution scenario between SoCs) [¶ 0211, 222] (When the components are initialized (S1410), the SoC #1 launches the fault manager to initialize the PCIe communication SW, and monitors the PCIe NT link).
Claim 4:
Yoon teaches:
The method of claim 3, wherein the target system comprises a target remote vehicle service and sending the interface startup request to the target system comprises:
sending the interface startup request to the target remote vehicle service of the target system through the remote vehicle service [¶ 0028, 221-227] (FIG. 14 is a diagram for illustrating component initialization in a workload distribution scenario between SoCs).
Claim 6:
Yoon teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining a target communication service between the source system and the target system based on a preset correspondence between system types and communication services that are performed between systems [¶ 0209] (manage information such as an IP and a port for a socket, and an adapter number, a node ID, a segment ID, and the like for a SISCI, thereby enabling a connection therebetween with only a unique key) [¶ 0231-232] (SoC #2 waits for a launch request from the server (S1575). The SoC #2 that has received the application launch request launches the application using the updated Unique ID); and
wherein sending the interface startup request to the target system comprises:
sending the interface startup request to the target system through the target communication service [¶ 0013, 196-210] (input/output interface may be a peripheral component interconnect express (PCIe)).
Claim 7:
Yoon teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of systems comprise a plurality of systems on chip [¶ 0196] (FIG. 9, a plurality of SoCs (System on Chips, 910 to 920) are connected to each other through a PCIe switch 930 to be subjected to the domain centralization, and each of which may control a plurality of (e.g., 4) displays).
Claim 8:
Yoon teaches:
A communication method, performed by a target system in a vehicle, wherein the target system is any of a plurality of systems in the vehicle, and the method comprises:
receiving an interface startup request of an application sent by a first system in a vehicle, wherein the first system is different from the target system, the interface startup request comprises identification information of a target screen to be started, and the first system is a system in which the application is installed [¶ 0209] (manage information such as an IP and a port for a socket, and an adapter number, a node ID, a segment ID, and the like for a SISCI, thereby enabling a connection therebetween with only a unique key) [¶ 0231-232] (SoC #2 waits for a launch request from the server (S1575). The SoC #2 that has received the application launch request launches the application using the updated Unique ID) [¶ 0028, 221-227] (FIG. 14 is a diagram for illustrating component initialization in a workload distribution scenario between SoCs, determine client mode or server mode); and
starting an interface of the application on the target screen based on the identification information [¶ 0003, 12, 77, 83, 235, 238] (in-car entertainment (ICE) or in-vehicle infotainment (IVI). The ICE or the IVI may be referred to as vehicle hardware and software that provide audio or video entertainment) [¶ 0192] (rear seat entertainment (RSE)).
Claims 10-13, 15-19:
Claim(s) 10, 18 is/are substantially similar to claim 1 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim 1 is a “method” claim, claim 10 is a “system” claim and claim 18 is a “medium” claim, but the steps or elements of each claim are essentially the same.
Claim(s) 17, 19 is/are substantially similar to claim 8 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim 8 is a “method” claim, claim 17 is a “system” claim and claim 19 is a “medium” claim, but the steps or elements of each claim are essentially the same.
Claim(s) 11 is/are substantially similar to claim 2 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 12 is/are substantially similar to claim 3 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 13 is/are substantially similar to claim 4 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 15 is/are substantially similar to claim 6 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 16 is/are substantially similar to claim 7 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 5, 9, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon; Jaegu et al. US Pub. No. 2022/0009513 (Yoon) in view of Thorsell; Jonas US Pub. No. 20180186239 (Thorsell).
Claim 5:
Yoon teaches: [¶ 0013, 196-210] (input/output interface may be a peripheral component interconnect express (PCIe)).
The method of claim 4, wherein the interface startup request further comprises launching parameters for the application, and before sending the interface startup request to the target remote vehicle service of the target system through the remote vehicle service, the method further comprises:
parsing the interface startup request by the remote vehicle service to obtain the identification information of the target screen and the launching parameters for the application [¶ 0209] (manage information such as an IP and a port for a socket, and an adapter number, a node ID, a segment ID, and the like for a SISCI, thereby enabling a connection therebetween with only a unique key) [¶ 0231-232] (SoC #2 waits for a launch request from the server (S1575). The SoC #2 that has received the application launch request launches the application using the updated Unique ID); and …
Yoon does not appear to explicitly disclose “serialized data”.
However, the disclosure of Thorsell teaches:
[Examiner Interpretation: One interpretation of the term serializing is encoding, see published specification ([0088] The “serializing” processing means a process of encoding data structures or objects.)]
serializing the identification information of the target screen and the launching parameters for the application by the remote vehicle service to obtain serialized data [¶ 0013, 39, 43] (encode the information that the software application is requesting to be decoded and then displayed within the secondary in-vehicle display); and
wherein sending the interface startup request to the target remote vehicle service of the target system through the remote vehicle service comprises:
sending the serialized data to the target remote vehicle service of the target system by the remote vehicle service [¶ 0013, 39, 43] (encode the information that the software application is requesting to be decoded and then displayed within the secondary in-vehicle display).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of vehicle displays in Yoon and the method of encoding data for vehicle displays in Thorsell, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The know technique of encoding data for vehicle displays in Thorsell could be applied to the vehicle displays in Yoon. Thorsell and Yoon are similar devices because each display data for vehicle displays. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, for “improving the operational safety of the vehicle, while still enable a high level of flexibility for using later installed apps” or “improved computing security to the vehicle” or “improve the situation for the vehicle operator” [Thorsell: ¶ 0007, 14, 46].
Claim 9:
Thorsell teaches:
The method of claim 8, wherein the target system comprises a target remote vehicle service, and after receiving the interface startup request of the application sent by the first system, the method further comprises:
deserializing the interface startup request by the target remote vehicle service to obtain the identification information of the target screen and launching parameters for the application [¶ 0013, 39, 43] (encode the information that the software application is requesting to be decoded and then displayed within the secondary in-vehicle display); and …
Yoon teaches:
starting an interface of the application on the target screen based on the identification information of the target screen and the launching parameters for the application [¶ 0209] (manage information such as an IP and a port for a socket, and an adapter number, a node ID, a segment ID, and the like for a SISCI, thereby enabling a connection therebetween with only a unique key) [¶ 0231-232] (SoC #2 waits for a launch request from the server (S1575). The SoC #2 that has received the application launch request launches the application using the updated Unique ID) [¶ 0028, 221-227] (FIG. 14 is a diagram for illustrating component initialization in a workload distribution scenario between SoCs, determine client mode or server mode).
Claim(s) 14:
Claim(s) 14 is/are substantially similar to claim 5 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Please See PTO-892: Notice of References Cited.
Evidence of the level skill of an ordinary person in the art for Claim 1:
Strandberg; Mats US 20200257418 activation of auxiliary device, activation; remotely controlling vehicle functions and applications accessed by touch controls displayed on a vehicle touchscreen using mirrored touch controls rendered at an auxiliary device.
van Laack; Alexander et al. US 20170329411 command for shifting visual information shown in a first display area to at the second display area.
Yoon; Jaegu et al. US 20240143360 control such that a plurality of displays in a vehicle displays identical images in a synchronized state; System on Chip, SOC, CAN communication.
Rush; Victoria et al. US 20200218487 start activity; control displays and shared-experience displays in a vehicle. System on Chip, SOC.
MATSUMOTO; Arihiro et al. US 20130215332 application program is activated; plurality of kinds of display output are performed in a form distributed among a plurality of video display means.
Citations to Prior Art
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for all that it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed were instead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968". In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323,75 USPQ2d 1213,1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264,23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807,10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385,1390,163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN J SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-3825. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11:00 - 7:30 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ADAM QUELER can be reached at (571) 272-4140. 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.
/Benjamin Smith/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172 Direct Phone: 571-270-3825
Direct Fax: 571-270-4825
Email: benjamin.smith@uspto.gov