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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 19 recites “a data processing system” in lines 5-6, which renders the claim indefinite as the claim previously recites “a data processing system” in line 1. The lack of proper antecedence renders it unclear if this limitation is meant to reference the prior data processing system of line 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 8, 9, 12, 15, 16, 17, 19, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lagnado et al. (Lagnado) (US 2023/0204703).
As to claim 1, Lagnado discloses a method for managing operation of a data processing system (paragraph 9), the method comprising:
obtaining, by a management controller of the data processing system (tracking device 202 within host device 216, see Fig. 2, paragraph 32-34) and via an out-of-band channel, a request (receiving wireless commands from other external devices via transceiver 238, paragraph 26, 40-41), the request specifying sound information for the data processing system (request for device to perform “sounding” and output a sound, audio alert, ringing, tone, etc.; paragraph 21, 41);
performing a verification process using the request to determine whether the request is from a trusted source (confirming requesting device privileges; paragraph 27, 36-41);
in an instance of performing the verification process where the request is determined to be from the trusted source:
processing, by the management controller, a payload of the request to identify an action set to be performed (received signal is determined to have particular account identifier and indicated command; paragraph 21, 26-27, 41);
identifying, by the management controller, a sound system hosted by hardware resources of the data processing system to perform the action set (sounding to be performed by included audio speaker system; paragraph 21, 32-34, 41); and
providing, by the management controller and using a direct interface to the sound system (device 202 integrated, coupled, soldered, or plugged into the host device; paragraph 33), instructions to perform the action set in order to provide computer-implemented services by generating an auditory signal (tracking device 202 directing commands to host device circuitry, see Fig. 2, to perform the sounding; paragraph 21, 32-34).
As to claim 8, Lagnado discloses wherein processing the payload comprises: identifying a message of the payload (identifying the type of received command and associated account; paragraph 26-27, 41), the message specifying instructions to execute a sound file by the data processing system at a point in time (sounding command to begin emitting a sound; paragraph 21, 41); and
using the instructions to identify the action set to be performed (performing the sounding if approved for the account; paragraph 21, 41).
As to claim 9, Lagnado discloses wherein the action set comprises:
obtaining, by the management controller and using the out-of-band channel, first location data for the data processing system (paragraph 13, 32);
obtaining, by the management controller and using the out-of-band channel, second location data for the trusted device (paragraph 21);
performing, by the management controller, a comparison process using the first location data and the second location data to determine whether a difference between the first location data and the second location data falls within a proximity threshold (“For instance, a sound may be output when a remote device is within a range (e.g., wireless communication range), and/or a sound may change based on a degree of proximity of the remote device”; paragraph 21);
in a first instance of the comparison process where it is determined that the difference between the first location data and the second location data falls within the proximity threshold:
initiating performance of a sound alert by the identified sound system in order to allow a user to locate the data processing system (proximity based sounding; paragraph 21).
As to claim 12, Lagnado discloses wherein the request is provided to the management controller by a network module of the data processing system via the out-of-band communication channel (commands from remote devices; Fig. 2; paragraph 26, 40-41).
As to claim 15, Lagnado discloses wherein the out-of-band communication channel runs through the network module (WI-FI communications with external devices; paragraph 14, 28), and an in-band communication channel that services the hardware resources also runs through the network module (internal communications between 202 and 216; Fig. 2; paragraph 32-34).
As to claim 16, Lagnado discloses wherein the network module hosts a transmission control protocol/internet protocol (TCP/IP) stack to facilitate network communications via the out-of-band communication channel (WI-FI communications which are inherently built upon and uses TCP/IP; paragraph 14, 28).
As to claim 17, Lagnado discloses a non-transitory machine-readable medium having instructions stored therein, which when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations for managing operation of a data processing system (paragraph 9, 32-34), the operations comprising:
obtaining, by a management controller of the data processing system (tracking device 202 within host device 216, see Fig. 2, paragraph 32-34) and via an out-of-band channel, a request (receiving wireless commands from other external devices via transceiver 238, paragraph 26, 40-41), the request specifying sound information for the data processing system (request for device to perform “sounding” and output a sound, audio alert, ringing, tone, etc.; paragraph 21, 41);
performing a verification process using the request to determine whether the request is from a trusted source (confirming requesting device privileges; paragraph 27, 36-41);
in an instance of performing the verification process where the request is determined to be from the trusted source:
processing, by the management controller, a payload of the request to identify an action set to be performed (received signal is determined to have particular account identifier and indicated command; paragraph 21, 26-27, 41);
identifying, by the management controller, a sound system hosted by hardware resources of the data processing system to perform the action set (sounding to be performed by included audio speaker system; paragraph 21, 32-34, 41); and
providing, by the management controller and using a direct interface to the sound system (device 202 integrated, coupled, soldered, or plugged into the host device; paragraph 33), instructions to perform the action set in order to provide computer-implemented services by generating an auditory signal (tracking device 202 directing commands to host device circuitry, see Fig. 2, to perform the sounding; paragraph 21, 32-34).
As to claim 19, Lagnado discloses a data processing system, comprising:
a processor (240); and
a memory coupled to the processor to store instructions (222 storing 236), which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform operations for managing operation of a data processing system (Fig. 2, paragraph 9, 32-34), the operations comprising:
obtaining, by a management controller of the data processing system (tracking device 202 within host device 216, see Fig. 2, paragraph 32-34) and via an out-of-band channel, a request (receiving wireless commands from other external devices via transceiver 238, paragraph 26, 40-41), the request specifying sound information for the data processing system (request for device to perform “sounding” and output a sound, audio alert, ringing, tone, etc.; paragraph 21, 41);
performing a verification process using the request to determine whether the request is from a trusted source (confirming requesting device privileges; paragraph 27, 36-41);
in an instance of performing the verification process where the request is determined to be from the trusted source:
processing, by the management controller, a payload of the request to identify an action set to be performed (received signal is determined to have particular account identifier and indicated command; paragraph 21, 26-27, 41);
identifying, by the management controller, a sound system hosted by hardware resources of the data processing system to perform the action set (sounding to be performed by included audio speaker system; paragraph 21, 32-34, 41); and
providing, by the management controller and using a direct interface to the sound system (device 202 integrated, coupled, soldered, or plugged into the host device; paragraph 33), instructions to perform the action set in order to provide computer-implemented services by generating an auditory signal (tracking device 202 directing commands to host device circuitry, see Fig. 2, to perform the sounding; paragraph 21, 32-34).
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 2-5, 11, 18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lagnado in view of Mahaffey et al. (Mahaffey) (US 2016/0066189).
As to claim 2, 18, 20, while Lagnado discloses wherein the action set specifies the output of a sound, they fail to specifically disclose an identifier of a sound file and parameters in which the sound file is to be performed.
In an analogous art, Mahaffey discloses a system for transmitting remote commands to a mobile device (Fig. 1-2, paragraph 89-95) wherein the command specifies an identifier of a sound file (specifying recorded sound to be output; Fig. 19-20, paragraph 142-150) and parameters in which the sound file is to be performed (volume, time period, repetition rate; paragraph 142-143) so as to enable the user to select the particular sound and how it is output (paragraph 142-144, 146-148).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lagnado’s system to include an identifier of a sound file and parameters in which the sound file is to be performed, as taught in combination with Mahaffey, for the typical benefit of providing a more user friendly system enabling the user to select their preferred sound and how it will be output (paragraph 142-144, 146-148).
As to claim 3, Lagnado and Mahaffey disclose wherein the management controller caches a copy of the sound file in a sound file cache (default sound file previously stored or newly acquired sound which is stored/cached to be repeatedly played; see Mahaffey at paragraph 143).
As to claim 4, Lagnado and Mahaffey disclose wherein the sound file cache comprises sound files that are used by remote entities to initiate performance of sounds to alert users of the data processing system to conditions impacting the data processing system (see Lagnado at paragraph 21 and see Mahaffey at paragraph 142).
As to claim 5, Lagnado and Mahaffey disclose wherein the conditions impacting the data processing system comprises at least one condition from a list of conditions consisting of:
a location of the data processing system being unknown to the users of the data processing system (see Lagnado at paragraph 21 and see Mahaffey at paragraph 142);
security of the data processing system being compromised; and
safety of the users of the data processing system being compromised.
As to claim 11, while Lagnado discloses wherein the action set comprises:
initiating performance of a sound file by the identified sound system in order to allow a user to utilize the sound system of the data processing system (see paragraph 21), they fail to specifically disclose wherein the sound file is selected by the user using the trusted device and provided to the management controller via a remote cloud server and using the out-of-band channel.
In an analogous art, Mahaffey discloses a system for transmitting remote commands to a mobile device (Fig. 1-2, paragraph 89-95) wherein the command specifies an identifier of a sound file (specifying recorded sound to be output; Fig. 19-20, paragraph 142-150) wherein the sound file is selected by the user using the trusted device (user selections at computer, such as via webpage; paragraph 142-144, 187) and provided to the mobile device via a remote cloud server and using the out-of-band channel (transmitted to the mobile device through a server; Fig. 19-24, paragraph 142-150, 187) so as to enable the user to select the particular sound and how it is output (paragraph 142-144, 146-148) while ensuring the selection is from the authorized user (paragraph 187).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lagnado’s system to include an identifier of a sound file and parameters in which the sound file is to be performed, as taught in combination with Mahaffey, for the typical benefit of providing a more user friendly system enabling the user to select their preferred sound and how it will be output (paragraph 142-144, 146-148) while ensuring the selection is from the authorized user (paragraph 187).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lagnado in view of Henkel et al. (Henkel) (US 12,068,958).
As to claim 13, Lagnado fails to disclose wherein the network module is adapted to separately advertise network endpoints for the management controller and hardware resources of the data processing system, the network endpoints being usable by a server to address communications to the hardware resources using an in-band communication channel and the management controller using the out-of-band communication channel.
In an analogous art, Henkel discloses a method for advertising service endpoints in a network cluster or network node 170A by using a network control module 32 to advertise a service endpoint 58 in network node 170A, wherein the advertised service endpoint being usable by a second network node 170B to address communications to the service endpoint 58 in the network node 170A (see Henkel, col 24, In 25-51).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lagnado to include wherein the network module is adapted to separately advertise network endpoints for the management controller and hardware resources of the data processing system, the network endpoints being usable by a server to address communications to the hardware resources using an in-band communication channel and the management controller using the out-of-band communication channel, as taught in combination with Henkel, for the typical benefit of enabling advertising and managing service endpoints in the network node/cluster in a more efficient manner compared to using a conventional DNS server (see Henkel col 23, In 2-21).
Claims 6, 7, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lagnado in view of Thangaraj et al. (Thangaraj) (US 2018/0260342).
As to claim 6, while Lagnado discloses wherein the device 202 may be integrated, coupled, soldered, or plugged in to directly interface with the host device resources (Fig. 2, paragraph 32-33), they fail to specifically disclose wherein the direct interface is a side band channel used to transmit data from the management controller to the sound system, the side band channel being a point to point link.
In an analogous art, Thangaraj discloses a device (Fig. 1, paragraph 22-25) including a management controller and network module (processor 135 controlling wireless sideband interface 105; paragraph 26) which will connect to another device via a wired direct interface comprising is a side band channel used to transmit data, the side band channel being a point to point link (paragraph 24-25) so as to take utilize widely known and established standards for wired device connections (paragraph 24-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lagnado to include wherein the direct interface is a side band channel used to transmit data from the management controller to the sound system, the side band channel being a point to point link, as taught in combination with Thangaraj, for the typical benefit of utilizing already known types of wired connections conforming to existing standards (paragraph 24-25).
As to claim 7, while Lagnado discloses wherein the device 202 may be integrated, coupled, soldered, or plugged in to directly interface with the host device resources (Fig. 2, paragraph 32-33), they fail to specifically disclose wherein the direct interface is a communication bus through which information is transmitted to at least one component comprising the sound system.
In an analogous art, Thangaraj discloses a device (Fig. 1, paragraph 22-25) including a management controller and network module (processor 135 controlling wireless sideband interface 105; paragraph 26) which will connect to another device via a wired direct interface comprising a communication bus through which information is transmitted to at least one component (paragraph 24-25) so as to take utilize widely known and established standards for wired device connections (paragraph 24-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lagnado to include wherein the direct interface is a communication bus through which information is transmitted to at least one component comprising the sound system, as taught in combination with Thangaraj, for the typical benefit of utilizing already known types of wired connections conforming to existing standards (paragraph 24-25).
As to claim 14, Lagnado fails to disclose wherein the management controller and the network module are on separate power domains from the hardware resources so that the management controller and the network module are operable while the hardware resources are inoperable.
In an analogous art, Thangaraj discloses a device (Fig. 1, paragraph 22-25) including a management controller and network module (processor 135 controlling wireless sideband interface 105; paragraph 26) which are on separate power domains from hardware resources so that the management controller and the network module are operable while the hardware resources are inoperable (paragraph 38-39) so as to enable the wireless interface to be configured to “wake-up” the powered down device or report when the device is inoperative (paragraph 39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lagnado to include wherein the management controller and the network module are on separate power domains from the hardware resources so that the management controller and the network module are operable while the hardware resources are inoperable, as taught in combination with Thangaraj, for the typical benefit of enabling the wireless interface to be configured to “wake-up” the powered down device and report when the device is inoperative (paragraph 39).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lagnado in view of Smith (US 11,681,987).
As to claim 10, while Lagnado discloses wherein the action set comprises: initiating performance of a sound alert by the identified sound system in order to notify a user (paragraph 21), they fail to specifically disclose notifying a user of a scheduled event; wherein the sound alert is based on pre-configured settings corresponding to a user’s calendar indicating upcoming events.
In an analogous art, Smith discloses a system wherein a device will receive an instruction (user device sending calendar entries to calendar device; Fig. 4-5, column 8, line 3-41) to initiate performance of a sound alert by a sound system in order to notify a user of a scheduled event (column 6, line 6-19, column 8, line 42-58), wherein the sound alert is based on pre-configured settings corresponding to a user’s calendar indicating upcoming events (audible alerts of upcoming events; column 6, line 6-19, column 8, line 42-58) so as to help remind the user about appointments, events, and more before the particular event so that the user might not forget the event (column 3, line 29-35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lagnado to include notifying a user of a scheduled event; wherein the sound alert is based on pre-configured settings corresponding to a user’s calendar indicating upcoming events, as taught in combination with Smith, for the typical benefit of helping to remind the user about appointments, events, and more before the particular event so that the user might not forget the event (column 3, line 29-35).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James R Sheleheda whose telephone number is (571)272-7357. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm CST.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at (571) 272-3982. 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.
/James R Sheleheda/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424