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
Current application, US Application No. 18/629,564, is filed on 04/08/2024.
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to the application filed on 04/08/2024. Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: As per par. [0036], the phrase “Thus, the new polling interval is a reduced frequency from the maximum frequency resulting in the BMC 140 polling the temperature sensor at a lower frequency when the device temperature is within the lower and upper thresholds” should be replaced with “Thus, the new polling interval is an increased frequency from the minimum frequency resulting in the BMC 140 polling the temperature sensor at ahigher frequency when the device temperature is not equal to mid-point between the lower and upper thresholds” for correct interpretation of the equation “
S
n
e
w
=
S
-
|
T
-
K
|
K
S
“ because
S
n
e
w
is less than
S
if T is not equal to K. Accordingly, the phrase “An additional condition is that if Snew is less than 1, then a lowest interval value such as 1 second is used as Snew to ensure that polling does not fall below a safety floor” should be replaced with a correct phrase to be consistent with the disclosed equations.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 3 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: As per claim 3, the limitation “the first temperature sensor is internal to the first heat generating component” should be replaced with “the first temperature sensor is internally positioned to the first heat generating component” or with an appropriate phrase for clarity and consistency with claim 4. As per claim 13, the limitation “the first temperature sensor is internal to the first heat generating component” should be replaced with “the first temperature sensor is internally positioned to the first heat generating component” or with an appropriate phrase for clarity and consistency with the following limitation “or externally positioned in proximity to the first heat generating component”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation – 35 USC 112(f)
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) 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) 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.
The current application includes limitations in claims 1, 6, 8, 10 and 20 that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because of the following reasons:
Claims 1, 6, 8, 10 and 20 include limitation/element that uses generic placeholders, “management controller”, that are coupled with functional language, “polling”, “configured to determine”, providing”, “configured to change”, and/or “configured to set” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The physical structure of the management controller is interpreted as a component of a general computer system (see specification – FIG. 1 is a block diagram of components of an example computer system requiring temperature monitoring of the components by a management controller, block diagram of the components of a computer system 100 that includes a management controller [0015, 0022, Fig. 1])
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to nonstatutory subject matter. The claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Specifically, representative claim 1 recites:
“A temperature monitoring system in a computing system, (1.A) the temperature monitoring system comprising:
a first temperature sensor measuring temperature of a first heat generating component; (1.B)
and a management controller coupled to the first temperature sensor, the management controller polling the first temperature sensor at a new interval, (1.C.1)
wherein the management controller is configured to determine the new interval by modifying a maximum interval by a value determined by the measured temperature and a safety constant determined from a first upper temperature threshold and a first lower temperature threshold for the first heat generating component. (1.C.2)”
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements”.
Under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (Process).
Under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exception. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the grouping of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that covers mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations), and mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion).
For example, highlighted limitation/step (1.C.2) is treated by the Examiner as belonging to Mathematical Concept grouping or a combination of Mathematical Concept and Mental Process groupings as the limitations include Mathematical Calculations/Equations, or show Mathematical Relationship combined with optional Mental evaluations/judgements.
Next, under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
The above claims comprise the following additional elements: (Side Note: duplicated elements are not repeated)
In Claim 1: “A temperature monitoring system in a computing system”, “a first temperature sensor measuring temperature of a first heat generating component” and “a management controller coupled to the first temperature sensor, the management controller polling the first temperature sensor at a new interval”;
In Claim 2: “the management controller is a baseboard management controller and the computing system is a server”;
In Claim 3: “the first temperature sensor is internal to the first heat generating component”;
In Claim 4: “the first temperature sensor is externally positioned in proximity to the first heat generating component”;
In Claim 5: “the first heat generating component is one of a processor, a memory device, an expansion card, or a power source”;
In Claim 6: “a fan coupled to the management controller for providing a level of air flow, wherein the management controller is configured to change the level of air flow based on the measured temperature”;
In Claim 7: “the memory stores the first lower temperature threshold, the first upper temperature threshold, and the maximum interval of the first heat generating component”;
In Claim 8: “a second heat generating component; a second temperature sensor coupled to the management controller”;
In Claim 9: “a bus coupled to the first temperature sensor, the second temperature sensor, and the management controller, the bus communicating polling requests and measured temperatures”;
In Claim 11: “a method of dynamically altering the interval of polling a first temperature sensor for a first heat generating component in a computing system” and “reading a first lower temperature threshold, a first upper temperature threshold, and a maximum interval for the first heat generating component”;
As per claim 1, the additional element in the preamble “A temperature monitoring system in a computing system” is not a meaningful limitation because the preamble simply links a system in a general computer with an abstract idea, i.e. temperature monitoring, and fails to link the system with a particular operation or a field of use.
The limitation/step “a first temperature sensor measuring temperature of a first heat generating component” is a standard element in the art and it is not particular.
The limitation/element/step “a management controller coupled to the first temperature sensor, the management controller polling the first temperature sensor at a new interval” represent a standard temperature measurement step using a standard element in the art and only adds insignificant extra solution to the judicial exception.
As per claim 2, the limitations/elements “the management controller is a baseboard management controller and the computing system is a server” can be interpreted as a mental observation describing about the management controller and the computing system. Even if the elements are not interpreted as the mental observation, the limitations/elements “a baseboard management controller” and “a server” are standard elements in the art and they are not particular.
As per claim 3, the limitation/step “the first temperature sensor is internal to the first heat generating component” can be interpreted as a mental observation describing about the sensor position. Even if the limitations are not interpreted as the mental observation, the step “positioning the first temperature sensor internal to the first heat generating component” is not particular and only adds insignificant extra solution to the judicial exception.
As per claim 4, the limitation/step “the first temperature sensor is externally positioned in proximity to the first heat generating component” can be interpreted as a mental observation describing about the sensor position. Even if the limitations are not interpreted as the mental observation, the step “positioning the first temperature sensor externally in proximity to the first heat generating component” is not particular and only adds insignificant extra solution to the judicial exception.
As per claim 5, the limitation “the first heat generating component is one of a processor, a memory device, an expansion card, or a power source” can be interpreted as a mental observation describing about the first heat generating component. Even if the limitation is not interpreted as the mental observation, the elements “a processor, a memory device, an expansion card, or a power source” are standard elements in the art and they are not particular.
As per claim 6, the limitation “a fan coupled to the management controller for providing a level of air flow, wherein the management controller is configured to change the level of air flow based on the measured temperature” represent a standard cooling component and cooling step in the art. The fan is not particular and changing the level of air flow only adds insignificant extra solution to the judicial exception.
As per claim 7, the limitation “the memory stores the first lower temperature threshold, the first upper temperature threshold, and the maximum interval of the first heat generating component” represents a standard temperature data storing step in the art and only adds insignificant extra solution to the judicial exception.
As per claim 8, the limitations “a second heat generating component; a second temperature sensor coupled to the management controller” represents mere duplication of standard elements in the art and they are not particular.
As per claim 9, the element “a bus coupled to the first temperature sensor, the second temperature sensor, and the management controller, the bus communicating polling requests and measured temperatures” represents a standard element and communication step in the art. The bus is not particular and communication step only adds insignificant extra solution to the judicial exception.
As per claim 11, the additional element in the preamble “a method of dynamically altering the interval of polling a first temperature sensor for a first heat generating component in a computing system” is not a meaningful limitation because the preamble simply links a method with an abstract idea, i.e. dynamically altering the interval of polling a first temperature sensor for a first heat generating component in a computing system, and fails to link the method with a particular operation or a field of use.
The limitation/step “reading a first lower temperature threshold, a first upper temperature threshold, and a maximum interval for the first heat generating component” represents a standard temperature data collection step in the art and only adds insignificant extra solution to the judicial exception.
As per claim 20, the additional element in the preamble “a computer server” is not qualified as a meaningful limitation because the computer server, which can be interpreted as a general computer, and even fails to link the server with a particular operation or a field of use. The components that the server comprising are standard components of the general computer and they are not particular.
In conclusion, the above additional elements, considered individually and in combination with the other claim elements as a whole do not reflect an improvement to the computer technology or other technology or technical field, and, therefore, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. No particular machine or real-world transformation are claimed. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B.
Under Step 2B analysis, the above claims fail to include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as shown in the prior art of record.
The limitations/elements listed as additional elements above are well understood, routine and conventional steps/elements in the art according to the prior art of record. (See Hu ‘617, Kulau, Lin, Teng, Heo and others in the list of prior art cited below)
Claims 1-20, therefore, are not patent eligible.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 11-14, 16-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu (CN 115617617 A), hereinafter “Hu ‘617” in view of Kulau (Kulau, Ulf, and et al. "Dynamic sample rate adaptation for long-term IoT sensing applications." In 2016 IEEE 3rd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), pp. 271-276. IEEE, 2016), hereinafter “Kulau”.
As per claim 1, Hu ‘617 discloses
A temperature monitoring system in a computing system
Hu ‘617 (state monitoring … device [abs], server … cloud computing [pg. 2 line 12-14 ], computer [pg. 4 line 13-31, Fig. 1]) the temperature monitoring system comprising:
a first temperature sensor measuring temperature of a first heat generating component; (processor core temperature read by DTS ‘Digital Thermal Sensor, Digital Sensitive Sensor’ in the system amin processor [pg. 5 line 21-23])
and a management controller (Baseboard Management Controller ‘BMC’ [pg. 5 line 11-31]) coupled to the first temperature sensor, (maintaining the sensor data of sensor condition, thermal sensor [pg. 5 line 11-31]) the management controller polling the first temperature sensor at a new interval, (adjusting the preset polling time interval … of the target device … monitor the operation state of the target device [pg. 2 line 30-33, pg. 3 line 38-40], step S206, adjusting the preset polling time interval the target device according to the target time interval [pg. 9 line 23-24])
Hu ‘617 further discloses
wherein the management controller is configured to determine the new interval by modifying a maximum interval by a value determined by the measured temperature (when the target time interval less than the preset … polling time interval the target device is adjusted to target time interval when the target time is interval less than the preset polling time interval, BMC [pg. 9 line 27 – pg. 10 line 15], BMC .. maintaining the sensor data of sensor condition in the description system, polling … CPU to decide how to provide peripheral … service [pg. 5 line 11-31], BMC for monitoring … state of CPU … CPU temperature, preset temperature threshold, obtaining the target time interval [pg. 12 line 18-28]), but is silent regarding determining the new interval by modifying the maximum interval by a valued determined by the measured temperature and a safety constant determined from a first upper temperature threshold and a first lower temperature threshold for the first heat generating component.
Kulau discloses determining the new interval by modifying the maximum interval by a valued determined by the measured temperature and a safety constant determined from a first upper temperature threshold (
t
w
a
i
t
t
,
∆
b
b
(
t
)
[pg 273 left col par. 2-6 eq. 5-7]).
Kulau is also concerned about adjusting the polling interval of a temperature sensor like Hu ‘617. (see Kulau – a temperature sensor, upper … and lower … bands, sample rates [pg. 272 right col par 1 from the bottom, Fig. 2])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time when invention is filed before the effective filing date of the current application to modify the teachings of Hu ‘617 in view of Kulau to configure the management controller to determine the new interval by modifying a maximum interval by a value determined by the measured temperature and a safety constant determined from a first upper temperature threshold and a first lower temperature threshold for the first heat generating component with a rationale to provide a robust and stable state monitoring of the computing device using an energy efficient and high quality sensor polling time interval (see Hu ‘617 – correctly obtain the state of the hardware device … no … error alarm information [pg. 2 line 15-19]) (see Kulau - hard to select a predefined sample rate that guarantees both, high data quality and energy efficiency. [abs])
As per claim 11, Hu ‘617 discloses
A method of dynamically altering the interval of polling a first temperature sensor for a first heat generating component in a computing system, (monitoring method, solves the technical problem that … cannot adaptively set the polling time interval [abs, pg. 2 line 21-24], CPU temperature, temperature sensor [pg. 7 line 27-36]) the method comprising:
reading a temperature threshold, and a maximum interval for the first heat generating component; (sample database [pg. 3 line 11-21, pg. 8 line 27-36, pg. 11 line 4 – pg. 12 line 8], monitoring state of the CPU, CPU temperature, preset temperature threshold [pg. 12 line 18-28])
However, Hu ‘617 is silent regarding reading a first lower temperature threshold, a first upper temperature threshold.
Kulau discloses determining a lower temperature band, a upper temperature bad and a maximum polling time interval (data-trace of a temperature sensor, upper … and lower … bands [pg. 272 right col par 1 from the bottom, Fig. 2], define a maximum waiting period tmax [pg. 273 left col par. 2]).
Kulau is also concerned about monitoring and controlling of temperature reading using a temperature sensor like Hu ‘617.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time when invention is filed before the effective filing date of the current application to modify the teachings of Hu ‘617 in view of Kulau to read a first lower temperature threshold, a first upper temperature threshold, and a maximum interval for the first heat generating component with a rationale to provide a robust and stable state monitoring of the computing device with an energy efficient and high quality sensor polling time interval.
Hu ‘617 further discloses
polling the first temperature sensor to measure temperature of the first heat generating component; (obtaining the first operation data of the target device at 26 the target polling moment [pg. 2 line 25-33], first operation data collected by the sensor [pg. 3 line 1-3], obtaining the first running data of the CPU at the target polling time, CPU temperature [pg. 12 line 17-28])
receiving the measured temperature from the first temperature sensor; (processor core temperature read by … thermal sensor [pg. 5 line 11-31])
and determining a new interval for polling the first temperature sensor via a management controller by modifying the maximum interval by a value determined by the measured temperature (when the target time interval less than the preset … polling time interval the target device is adjusted to target time interval when the target time is interval less than the preset polling time interval, BMC [pg. 9 line 27 – pg. 10 line 15], BMC .. maintaining the sensor data of sensor condition in the description system, polling … CPU to decide how to provide peripheral … service [pg. 5 line 11-31], BMC for monitoring … state of CPU … CPU temperature, preset temperature threshold, obtaining the target time interval [pg. 12 line 18-28])
However, Hu ‘617 is silent regarding modifying the maximum interval of the second heat generating component by a value determined by a safety constant determined from the second upper temperature threshold and the lower temperature threshold.
Kulau discloses determining the new interval by modifying the maximum interval by a valued determined by the measured temperature and a safety constant determined from a first upper temperature threshold (
t
w
a
i
t
t
,
∆
b
b
(
t
)
[pg 273 left col par. 2-6 eq. 5-7]).
Kulau is also concerned about adjusting the polling interval of a temperature sensor like Hu ‘617. (see Kulau – a temperature sensor, upper … and lower … bands, sample rates [pg. 272 right col par 1 from the bottom, Fig. 2])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time when invention is filed before the effective filing date of the current application to modify the teachings of Hu ‘617 in view of Kulau to configure the management controller to determine the new interval by modifying a maximum interval by a value determined by the measured temperature and a safety constant determined from a first upper temperature threshold and a first lower temperature threshold for the first heat generating component with a rationale to provide a robust and stable state monitoring of the computing device using an energy efficient and high quality sensor polling time interval.
As per claims 2 and 12, Hu ‘617 and Kulau disclose claims 1 and 11 set forth above.
Hu ‘617 further discloses the management controller is a baseboard management controller and the computing system is a server (BMC “Baseboard management controller” [pg. 2 line 15-19, pg. 5 line 11-14], server [pg. 2 line 9-19, pg. 5 line 11-39]).
As per claims 3 and 13, Hu ‘617 and Kulau disclose claims 1 and 11 set forth above.
Hu ‘617 further discloses the first temperature sensor is internal to the first heat generating component (temperature is read by DTS ‘Digital Thermal Sensor’ … in the system amin processor [pg. 5 line 21-23]).
Kulau also discloses the first temperature sensor is internal to the first heat generating component s (DS1631, temperature sensor to measure the soil temperature [pg. 275 left col par. 1, Fig. 8]).
As per claims 4 and 13, Hu ‘617 and Kulau disclose claims 1 and 11 set forth above.
Kulau further discloses the first temperature sensor is externally positioned in proximity to the first heat generating component (sensor, MLX90614, Infra-red temperature sensor to allow a non-invasive measurement of the surface temperature [pg. 275 left col par. 1, Fig. 8]).
As per claims 5 and 14, Hu ‘617 and Kulau disclose claims 1 and 11 set forth above.
Hu’ 617 further discloses the first heat generating component is one of a processor, a memory device, an expansion card, or a power source (processor core, CPU [pg. 5 line 11-31], hardware operation data, case inner temperature, CPU temperature and state, power supply … state, memory state, main board state [pg. 7 line 23-26, pg. 14 line 7-12]).
As per claims 7 and 16, Hu ‘617 and Kulau disclose claims 1 and 11 set forth above.
HU ;617 discloses a memory device storing a maximum interval, a temperature threshold for the heat generating component; (memory … for storing data [pg. 6 line 24-25], memory … may include a high speed random memory [pg. 6 line 37-38], sample database [pg. 3 line 11-21, pg. 8 line 27-36, pg. 11 line 4 – pg. 12 line 8], monitoring state of the CPU, CPU temperature, preset temperature threshold [pg. 12 line 18-28])
However, Hu ‘617 is silent regarding storing a first lower temperature threshold, a first upper temperature threshold.
Kulau discloses determining a lower temperature band, a upper temperature bad and a maximum polling time interval (data-trace of a temperature sensor, upper … and lower … bands [pg. 272 right col par 1 from the bottom, Fig. 2], define a maximum waiting period tmax [pg. 273 left col par. 2]).
Kulau is also concerned about monitoring and controlling of temperature reading of the temperature sensor like Hu ‘617.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time when invention is filed before the effective filing date of the current application to modify the teachings of Hu ‘617 in view of Kulau to store a first lower temperature threshold, a first upper temperature threshold, and a maximum interval in a memory for the first heat generating component with a rationale to provide a robust and stable state monitoring of the computing device using an energy efficient and high quality sensor polling time interval.
As per claims 8 and 17, Hu ‘617 and Kulau disclose claims 1 and 11 set forth above.
The set forth combined prior art is not explicit on comprising “a second heat generating component and a second temperature sensor”, which is called “a second elements” hereinafter, coupled to the management controller and the management controller is configured to determine the new interval for the second elements, which would be easily duplicated as same as determining the new interval for the first elements, i.e. “a first heat generating component and a first temperature sensor”.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to comprise the second elements since it has been held that
mere duplication of the essential working elements of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
As per claim 20, Hu ‘617 discloses
A computer server (server [pg. 2 line 9-19, pg. 5 line 11-13, line 35-39]) comprising:
a heat generating component; (processor core, CPU [pg. 5 line 11-31])
a temperature sensor measuring heat from the heat generating component; (Thermal Sensor [pg. 5 line 22])
a memory device storing a maximum interval, a temperature threshold for the heat generating component; (memory … for storing data [pg. 6 line 24-25], memory … may include a high speed random memory [pg. 6 line 37-38], sample database [pg. 3 line 11-21, pg. 8 line 27-36, pg. 11 line 4 – pg. 12 line 8], monitoring state of the CPU, CPU temperature, preset temperature threshold [pg. 12 line 18-28])
However, Hu ‘617 is silent regarding reading a first lower temperature threshold, a first upper temperature threshold.
Kulau discloses determining a lower temperature band, a upper temperature bad and a maximum polling time interval (data-trace of a temperature sensor, upper … and lower … bands [pg. 272 right col par 1 from the bottom, Fig. 2], define a maximum waiting period tmax [pg. 273 left col par. 2]).
Kulau is also concerned about monitoring and controlling of temperature reading using a temperature sensor like Hu ‘617.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time when invention is filed before the effective filing date of the current application to modify the teachings of Hu ‘617 in view of Kulau to read a first lower temperature threshold, a first upper temperature threshold, and a maximum interval for the first heat generating component with a rationale to provide a robust and stable state monitoring of the computing device with an energy efficient and high quality sensor polling time interval.
Hu ‘617 further discloses
a baseboard management controller coupled to the temperature sensor and memory device, (BMC, maintaining the sensor data of sensor condition, Thermal Sensor [pg. 5 line 11-23], monitoring the server running state, generally using the BMC 1 monitoring serve, embodiment application, computer device, memory [pg. 6 line 1-32])
the baseboard management controller polling the temperature sensor at a new interval determined by modifying a current interval by a value determined by the measured temperature (BMC, maintaining the sensor data of sensor condition, Thermal Sensor [pg. 5 line 11-23], when the target time interval less than the preset … polling time interval the target device is adjusted to target time interval when the target time is interval less than the preset polling time interval, BMC [pg. 9 line 27 – pg. 10 line 15], BMC .. maintaining the sensor data of sensor condition in the description system, polling … CPU to decide how to provide peripheral … service [pg. 5 line 11-31], BMC for monitoring … state of CPU … CPU temperature, preset temperature threshold, obtaining the target time interval [pg. 12 line 18-28]), but is silent regarding determining the new interval by modifying the maximum interval by a valued determined by the measured temperature and a safety constant determined from a first upper temperature threshold and a first lower temperature threshold for the first heat generating component.
Kulau discloses determining the new interval by modifying the maximum interval by a valued determined by the measured temperature and a safety constant determined from a first upper temperature threshold (
t
w
a
i
t
t
,
∆
b
b
(
t
)
[pg 273 left col par. 2-6 eq. 5-7]).
Kulau is also concerned about adjusting the polling interval of a temperature sensor like Hu ‘617. (see Kulau – a temperature sensor, upper … and lower … bands, sample rates [pg. 272 right col par 1 from the bottom, Fig. 2])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time when invention is filed before the effective filing date of the current application to modify the teachings of Hu ‘617 in view of Kulau to configure the baseboard management controller to poll the temperature sensor at a new interval determined by modifying a current6 interval by a value determined by the measured temperature and a safety constant determined from a first upper temperature threshold and a first lower temperature threshold for the first heat generating component with a rationale to provide a robust and stable state monitoring of the computing device using an energy efficient and high quality sensor polling time interval.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu ‘617 and Kulau in view of Lin (US 20130058794 A1)
As per claims 6 and 15, Hu ‘617 and Kulau disclose claims 1 and 11 set forth above.
Hu ‘617 discloses monitoring fan rotating speed ( [pg. 7 line 24, 34-35, pg. 14 line 10, 20-22]), but is silent regarding change the level of air flow of the fan based on the measured temperature.
Lin discloses changing the level of air flow of the fan based on the measured temperature (a fan, produces air glow to remove heat from the components [0005], monitors the temperature of the CPU with temperature sensors, outputs signal values … to fan rotation speed controller [0006, Fig. 6]).
Lin is in the same art of monitoring and controlling the temperature of the computer component like Hu ‘617.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time when invention is filed before the effective filing date of the current application to modify the teachings of the combined prior art in view of Lin to change the level of air flow of the fan based on the measured with a rationale to provide a robust and stable temperature control of the computing device using an energy efficient and high quality sensor polling time interval.
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu ‘617 and Kulau in view of Teng (CN 221667117 U).
As per claims 9 and 18, Hu ‘617 and Kulau disclose claims 8 and 17 set forth above.
The set forth combined prior art is silent regarding further comprising a bus coupled to the first temperature sensor, the second temperature sensor, and the management controller, the bus communicating polling requests and measured temperatures.
Teng discloses a bus coupled to the first temperature sensor, the second temperature sensor, and the management controller, the bus communicating polling requests and measured temperatures (temperature sensing controller is connected to a plurality of temperature sensors based on an RS485 bus [pg. 3 line 1-2 ], temperature measurements [pg. 3 line 22-31], temperature sensing controllers 120 for receiving the measurement data of the temperature sensors obtained by the plurality of temperature sensing controllers [pg. 6 line 16-19], polling times request, polling period [pg. 13 line 1-15]).
Teng is also in the temperature polling measurement art for monitoring and control temperature of the computing device like Hu ‘617.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time when invention is filed before the effective filing date of the current application to modify the teachings of the combined prior art in view of Teng to comprise a bus coupled to the first temperature sensor, the second temperature sensor, and the management controller, the bus communicating polling requests and measured temperatures with a rationale to provide a robust and stable state monitoring of the computing device using an energy efficient and high quality sensor polling time interval.
Claims 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu ‘617 and Kulau in view of Heo (Heo, Seonyeong, and et al. "Rt-ifttt: Real-time iot framework with trigger condition-aware flexible polling intervals." In 2017 IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS), pp. 266-276. IEEE, 2017).
As per claim 10 and 19, Hu ‘617 and Kulau disclose claims 1 and 11 set forth above.
The set forth combined prior art is silent regarding set the new interval at a minimum threshold interval if the new interval is below the minimum threshold interval.
Heo discloses the polling intervals of the related sensors cannot exceed the preset intervals (the polling intervals of the related sensors cannot exceed the evaluation intervals. Thus, the SPI function finds the minimum interval for a senor among the maximum evaluation intervals of its relevant applets [pg. 272 left col par. 2], framework should keep the kth polling interval I(k)si less than the deadline Daj, while maximizing the other polling intervals to reduce battery power consumption of the sensor [pg. 270 left col par. 3], finds an efficient sensor polling interval for each sensor, reflecting current sensor values, … and real time constraints [pg. 275 right col par. 3]).
Heo is also concerned about setting the sensor polling interval like Hu ‘617.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time when invention is filed before the effective filing date of the current application to modify the teachings of the combined prior art in view of Heo to configure the management controller to set the new interval at a minimum threshold interval if the new interval is below the minimum threshold interval with a rationale to provide a robust and stable state monitoring of the computing device using an energy efficient and high quality sensor polling time interval.
Notes with regard to Prior Art
The prior arts made of record are provided as additional references relevant to the current claims.
Kitano (US 20140079533 A1) discloses (determines the presence or absence of a temperature increasing trend based on the plurality of measured temperatures and the latest measured temperature that are stored, shortens the time interval between temperature measurements from the current time interval when it is determined that the temperature increases [0016-0017, claims 1 and 5], an electronic device, a temperature control [abs], temperature … monitored [0030).
Hu (CN 117493106 A), hereinafter “Hu ‘106” discloses (dynamic adjusting method … for reading temperature period [title, abs], the temperature control of the memory by changing the period of the memory controller polling memory temperature sensor to control the power consumption of the memory [abs])
Aucel (US 4527231 A) discloses (the variation of the sampling period as a function of the different operating temperatures [col 2 line 13-14], variation of the sampling period function of the temperature [col 6 line 14-15, col 9 line 7-11]).
Chang (CN 117687483 A) discloses (fan control at a temperature polling time interval register on-chip temperature sensor [abs]).
Liu (CN 114840391 A) discloses (multiple temperature collection polling periods are set [claim 3], the set number is matched with the temperature collection polling period of the storage component [claim 5])
Nakajima (JP 2001245368 A) discloses (bus [pg. 6 line 2-7 ], controller, temperature sensor [pg. 6 line 8-10 ], temperature measurement command [pg. 17 line 23-29], data request command ‘polling’ [pg. 21 line 2])
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS KAY, whose telephone number is (408) 918-7569. The examiner can normally be reached on M, Th & F 8-5, T 2-7, and W 8-1.
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, Arleen M Vazquez can be reached on 571-272-2619. 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.
/DOUGLAS KAY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights