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 .
This action is response to the application filed on 04/08/2024. Claims 1-17 are pending and herein considered.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Oath/Declaration
The receipt of oath/declaration is acknowledged.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 04/08/2024. These drawings are reviewed and accepted by the Examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 04/08/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CRR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 is a system claim and should be amended to read as suggest below for a clearer claim as well as avoid for fails to disclose the corresponding structure to perform claims function:
1. A wireless communication system for executing a wireless communication between a master device and at least one slave device using a communication channel, which is sequentially selected from a plurality of communication channels, the at least one slave device including a plurality of slave devices, and the master device performing the wireless communication with each of the plurality of slave devices, the wireless communication system comprising:
a master device having at least one of (i) a circuit and (ii) a processor with a memory storing computer program code executable by the processor; and at least one slave device having at least one of (i) another circuit and (ii) another processor with another memory storing computer program code executable by the processor;
a communication channel determination unit that determines a communication quality of each communication channel for each slave device when the master device communicates wirelessly with the plurality of slave devices, and determines the communication channel to be used for the wireless communication based on a determination result of the communication quality of each communication channel;
a channel map share unit that causes the master device to transmit a channel map indicating the communication channel determined by the communication channel determination unit to the at least one slave device, and shares the channel map between the master device and the at least one slave device;
a slave device determination unit that determines the at least one slave device as a sharing target to which sharing of the channel map with the master device is executed by the channel map share unit according to a communication state of the wireless communication between the master device and each of the plurality of slave devices; and
a timing change unit that advances a timing to execute sharing the channel map by the channel map share unit as a whole of slave devices determined as the sharing target in a case where a numerical number of slave devices determined by the slave device determination unit is small, compared with a case where the numerical number of slave devices determined by the slave device determination unit is large.
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 following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: Claims limitation “a communication channel determination unit that determines”, “a channel map share unit that causes”, “a slave device determination unit that determines”, “a timing change unit that advances” and “configured to transmit”, “determination unit is configured to determine”, “change unit is configured to shift” and “change unit is configured to delays” in claims 1-3, 6, 8, 10-13 and 14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends 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 remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
References cited but not used
The prior arts made or record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosures. Tabrizi et al. (U.S 9,037,147), discloses a wireless communication network access point, a master wireless device as a hotspot to provide communication services for a slave wireless device. The assignment may be based on first channel quality information and second channel quality information. The first channel quality information may be associated with a first communication channel between the master wireless device and the access point. The second channel quality information may be associated with a second communication channel between the master wireless device and the slave wireless device.
Farhadi et al. (U.S 2014/0080534), discloses method of signaling to enable tethering among wireless devices may include receiving, at a master wireless device, assignment information from a wireless communication access point. The assignment information may indicate that the master wireless device is designated as a hotspot for a slave wireless device.
Ma et al. (U.S 2005/0148298), discloses channel quality evaluation method applicable to Bluetooth wireless network sends a first channel detecting format packet from the Bluetooth master to the Bluetooth slave. The master verifies if the slave recognizes the first channel detecting format packet from the response from the slave. If the Bluetooth slave does not recognize the first format detecting packet, the Bluetooth master will send a second channel detecting format packet. The error rate is to be calculated according to the response from the Bluetooth slave to obtain an estimate of the channel qualify.
Lee et al. (U.S 2023/0217301), discloses the communication device as a master device may receive data that a slave device receives from the base station using mmWave communication in a downlink via a D2D communication connection, and transmit data to the base station via an uplink of the slave device.
Su et al. (US 2022/0240069), discloses an RSSI/PER of a combined signal can be directly used as a basis for channel quality evaluation, to improve reliability of channel quality determining. In the Bluetooth system, in AFH, master and slave devices perform frequency hopping to select a channel with “good” quality for communication.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 are allowed if rewritten or amended to overcome any objection claims set forth in this Office action.
Claims 16-17 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claims 16 and 17 are allowed because the Prior Art of record, singly or in combination fails to teach the feature of claim(s) limitations in the context of claims 16 and 17 as a whole. Specially, inter alia, it fails to show or render obvious a communication channel determination function for determining a communication quality of each communication channel for each slave device when the master device communicates wirelessly with the plurality of slave devices, and determining the communication channel to be used for the wireless communication based on a determination result of the communication quality of each communication channel; a channel map share function for causing the master device to transmit a channel map indicating the communication channel determined by the communication channel determination function to the at least one slave device, and shares the channel map between the master device and the at least one slave device; a slave device determination function for determining the slave device as a sharing target to which sharing of the channel map with the master device is executed by the channel map share function according to a communication state of the wireless communication between the master device and each of the plurality of slave devices; and a timing change function for advancing a timing to execute sharing the channel map by the channel map share function as a whole of slave devices determined as the sharing target in a case where a numerical number of slave devices determined by the slave device determination function is small, compared with a case where the numerical number of slave devices determined by the slave device determination function is large as recited in the context of claims 16 and 17. Therefore, the claims are allowable over the cited prior arts.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAN-HUONG TRUONG whose telephone number is (571) 270-5829. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Ricky Ngo can be reached on 571-272-3139. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/LAN-HUONG TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464
04/04/20256
Prosecution Insights