Counterfeiters
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
1. This action is response to application filed on 04/30/2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Allowable Subject Matter
2. Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The allowable subject matter in claim 8 is “assembling the broadband antenna card to cause the broadband antenna card to have: a nonconductive frame that has a dummy edge finger configured for mechanically engaging an expansion connector of the expansion slot; a planar antenna printed in conductive material on a dielectric substrate, wherein the planar antenna is supported by the nonconductive frame in a location that is offset laterally from the dummy edge finger towards a center of the expansion slot for additional clear space from additional expansion cards in adjacent expansion slots; and a radiofrequency connector electrically connected to the planar antenna and to the EMI scanning system”. Elberbaum (US 20210376585) teaches connectors are representative connectors, as any type of existing passive connectors can be used to replace the shown connector that are shown in the processed installation ([0157]). Antenna connectors are dual audio connectors also known as RCA jack installed into the “standard plug-in device” having dual circle support for the RCA jack. The dual antenna connectors shown mounted on a square metal holder ([0158]). And Mori et al. (US 20200365371) teaches an electric field sensor for detecting an electric field of microwaves in generating surface wave plasma by emitting microwaves transmitted through a microwave transmission path into a chamber through slots of a planar slot antenna (Mori [0007]). But combination of the Elberbaum and the Mori does not teach assembling the broadband antenna card to cause the broadband antenna card to have: a nonconductive frame that has a dummy edge finger configured for mechanically engaging an expansion connector of the expansion slot; a planar antenna printed in conductive material on a dielectric substrate, wherein the planar antenna is supported by the nonconductive frame in a location that is offset laterally from the dummy edge finger towards a center of the expansion slot for additional clear space from additional expansion cards in adjacent expansion slots; and a radiofrequency connector electrically connected to the planar antenna and to the EMI scanning system as claimed.
3. Claim 13 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The allowable subject matter in claim 13 is “the broadband antenna card is an assembly comprising: a nonconductive frame that has a dummy edge finger configured for mechanically engaging an expansion connector of the expansion slot; a monopole antenna supported by the nonconductive frame in a location that is offset laterally from the dummy edge finger towards a center of the expansion slot; and a radiofrequency connector electrically connected to the monopole antenna and to the radio receiver”. Elberbaum (US 20210376585) teaches connectors are representative connectors, as any type of existing passive connectors can be used to replace the shown connector that are shown in the processed installation ([0157]). Antenna connectors are dual audio connectors also known as RCA jack installed into the “standard plug-in device” having dual circle support for the RCA jack. The dual antenna connectors shown mounted on a square metal holder ([0158]). And Fenn et al. (US 20170229787) teaches the loop antennas, monopole antennas may also be deployed on the housing. The monopole antenna also deployed from the end of a cubesat housing (see, [0053]; [0058]). But combination of the Elberbaum and the Fenn does not teach the broadband antenna card is an assembly comprising: a nonconductive frame that has a dummy edge finger configured for mechanically engaging an expansion connector of the expansion slot; a monopole antenna supported by the nonconductive frame in a location that is offset laterally from the dummy edge finger towards a center of the expansion slot; and a radiofrequency connector electrically connected to the monopole antenna and to the radio receiver as claimed.
3. Claim 17 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The allowable subject matter in claim 17 is “the broadband antenna cards individually comprise: a nonconductive frame that has a dummy edge finger configured for mechanically engaging an expansion connector of the expansion slot; a monopole antenna supported by the nonconductive frame near a lateral center of the expansion slot; and a radiofrequency connector electrically connected to the monopole antenna and to the radio receiver”. Elberbaum (20210376585) teaches connectors are representative connectors, as any type of existing passive connectors can be used to replace the shown connector that are shown in the processed installation ([0157]). Antenna connectors are dual audio connectors also known as RCA jack installed into the “standard plug-in device” having dual circle support for the RCA jack. The dual antenna connectors shown mounted on a square metal holder ([0158]). And Fenn et al. (US 20170229787) teaches the loop antennas, monopole antennas may also be deployed on the housing. The monopole antenna also deployed from the end of a cubesat housing (see, [0053]; [0058]). But combination of the Elberbaum and the Fenn does not teach the broadband antenna cards individually comprise: a nonconductive frame that has a dummy edge finger configured for mechanically engaging an expansion connector of the expansion slot; a monopole antenna supported by the nonconductive frame near a lateral center of the expansion slot; and a radiofrequency connector electrically connected to the monopole antenna and to the radio receiver as claimed. Claim 18 is also objected because it depends on objected claim 17.
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.
4. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the disk drive slot" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
5. Claim 8 recites the limitation "the expansion slot" in lines 4-5, 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
6. Claim 8 recites the limitation "the EMI scanning system" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
7. Claims 1, 10-11, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross et al. (US 10,685,226) in view of Rothrkemper et al. (US 20230113706) and further in view of Ramasamy et al. (US 11,513,569)
Regarding claim 1:
A method, comprising:
causing a target computer system to execute a test pattern of computer operations: (the antennas are placed at specific locations in and around a device under test: Gross column 4, lines 47-60);
taking readings of radiofrequency EMI through a broadband antenna card of the target computer system, wherein the radiofrequency EMI is generated by the target computer system during execution of the test pattern: (during operation, the system obtains target EMI signals, which were gathered by monitoring target electromagnetic interference (EMI) emissions generated by the target device using one or more target antennas positioned in proximity to the target device: Gross, abstract; column 3, lines 1-6);
detecting that hardware of the target computer system is behaving abnormally based on a dissimilarity between the readings of radiofrequency EMI and radiofrequency EMI for nominal operation of a reference computer system: (the system compares the target EMI fingerprint against a reference EMI fingerprint for the target device to determine whether the target device contains one or more counterfeit electronic components: Gross, abstract).
However, Gross does not explicitly teach generating an electronic alert that the hardware of the target computer system is behaving anomalously.
In similar art, Rothrkemper teaches monitoring the time series signals with an ML model trained to predict correct signal values to determine whether predicted and measured values of the time series agree, and indicating that the target device may contain a passive spychip where anomalies are detected, and generating an alarm, alert, or warning that the target electronic device being scanned is suspected to contain one or more passive spychips (see, Rothrkemper, abstract; [0020]; [0035]; [0042]; [0061]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Rothrkemper’s ideas into Gross’s system in order to provide an efficient secure network by incorporating spychip into an electronic device to determine if there is any malicious activities in the electronic device ([0001]).
However, Gross-Rothrkemper does not explicitly teach a broadband antenna card that is installed within a chassis of the target computer system.
In similar art, Ramasamy teaches information handling system chassis parts are more commonly designed with a metal structure. Various antenna types that are being developed for use with hardware associated with 5G communications. The antennas require spaces within the chassis of the ruggedized information handling system (see, column 2, lines 27-55).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Ramasamy’s ideas of the antennas require spaces within the chassis into Gross-Rothrkemper’s system in order to provide save resources and development time by implying Ramasamy’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper’s system.
Regarding claim 10
In addition to the rejection claim 1, Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy further teaches detecting that the target computer system is compromised in a particular way, wherein the particular way in which the target computer system is compromised is one of (i) incipient failure of a component, (ii) a spychip in a component, or (iii) inclusion of a counterfeit component; and including in the electronic alert an indication that the target computer system is compromised in the particular way: (Rothrkemper teaches indicating that the target device may contain a passive spychip where anomalies are detected, and generating an alarm, alert, or warning that the target electronic device being scanned is suspected to contain one or more passive spychips: Rothrkemper, abstract; [0020]; [0035]; [0042]; [0061]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Rothrkemper’s ideas into Gross-Ramasamy’s system in order to provide an efficient secure network by incorporating spychip into an electronic device to determine if there is any malicious activities in the electronic device ([0001]).
Regarding claim 11:
An EMI monitoring system, comprising:
an EMI scanning computer: (counterfeit-detection system: figure 1, item 100);
a target computer: (the target device: Gross, abstract; column 3, lines 1-6);
a broadband antenna card (one or more target antennas: Gross, abstract; column 3, lines 1-6);
a radio receiver electrically connected to the broadband antenna card and communicably coupled to the EMI scanning computer: (a set of antennas, which are coupled to AM/FM radiofrequency demodulators to gather EMI emissions. The digitized output from the radiofrequency demodulators is then consumed by a pattern-recognition system that performs “EMI fingerprint” detection operations to detect counterfeit components: Gross, column 4, lines 47-54); and
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media including computer-executable instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the EMI monitoring system, cause: the target computer to execute a test pattern of computer operations (the antennas are placed at specific locations in and around a device under test: Gross column 4, lines 47-60);
the EMI scanning computer to take readings from the radio receiver of EMI sensed by the broadband antenna card during execution of the test pattern: (during operation, the system obtains target EMI signals, which were gathered by monitoring target electromagnetic interference (EMI) emissions generated by the target device using one or more target antennas positioned in proximity to the target device: Gross, abstract; column 3, lines 1-6);
the EMI scanning computer to detect whether the target computer is emitting anomalous EMI based on a dissimilarity between the readings of EMI and EMI for nominal operation of a reference computer: (the system compares the target EMI fingerprint against a reference EMI fingerprint for the target device to determine whether the target device contains one or more counterfeit electronic components: Gross, abstract).
However, Gross does not teach generate an electronic alert that indicates whether the target computer is emitting anomalous EMI.
In similar art, Rothrkemper teaches monitoring the time series signals with an ML model trained to predict correct signal values to determine whether predicted and measured values of the time series agree, and indicating that the target device may contain a passive spychip where anomalies are detected, and generating an alarm, alert, or warning that the target electronic device being scanned is suspected to contain one or more passive spychips (see, Rothrkemper, abstract; [0020]; [0035]; [0042]; [0061]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Rothrkemper’s ideas into Gross’s system in order to provide an efficient secure network by incorporating spychip into an electronic device to determine if there is any malicious activities in the electronic device (Rothrkemper [0001]).
However, Gross-Rothrkemper does not explicitly teach a broadband antenna card installed in an expansion slot within a chassis of the target computer; a broadband antenna card within the chassis of the target computer.
In similar art, Ramasamy teaches information handling system chassis parts are more commonly designed with a metal structure. Various antenna types that are being developed for use with hardware associated with 5G communications. The antennas require spaces within the chassis of the ruggedized information handling system (see, column 2, lines 27-55).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Ramasamy’s ideas of the antennas require spaces within the chassis into Gross-Rothrkemper’s system in order to provide save resources and development time by implying Ramasamy’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper’s system.
Regarding claim 14:
In addition to the rejection claim 11, Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy further teaches the target computer to initiate execution of the test pattern in response to a test command received through the management network: (the antennas are placed at specific locations in and around a device under test: Gross column 4, lines 47-60); and the EMI scanning computer to initiate the taking of the readings in response to a scan command received through the management network: (during operation, the system obtains target EMI signals, which were gathered by monitoring target electromagnetic interference (EMI) emissions generated by the target device using one or more target antennas positioned in proximity to the target device: Gross, abstract; column 3, lines 1-6).
Regarding claim 16:
An EMI scanning system, comprising:
an EMI scanning computer (counterfeit-detection system: figure 1, item 100);
one or more broadband antenna cards (one or more target antennas: Gross, abstract; column 3, lines 1-6);
a radio receiver electrically connected to the broadband antenna cards and communicably coupled to the EMI scanning computer (a set of antennas, which are coupled to AM/FM radiofrequency demodulators to gather EMI emissions. The digitized output from the radiofrequency demodulators is then consumed by a pattern-recognition system that performs “EMI fingerprint” detection operations to detect counterfeit components: Gross, column 4, lines 47-54); and
one or more non-transitory computer readable media including computer-executable instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the EMI scanning computer cause the EMI scanning computer to: take readings from the radio receiver of EMI sensed by one of the broadband antenna cards during execution by the target computer of a test pattern of computer operations: (during operation, the system obtains target EMI signals, which were gathered by monitoring target electromagnetic interference (EMI) emissions generated by the target device using one or more target antennas positioned in proximity to the target device: Gross, abstract; column 3, lines 1-6);
detect that the target computer is emitting anomalous EMI based on a dissimilarity between the readings of EMI and EMI for nominal operation of a reference computer: (the system compares the target EMI fingerprint against a reference EMI fingerprint for the target device to determine whether the target device contains one or more counterfeit electronic components: Gross, abstract).
However, Gross does not teach generate an electronic alert that the target computer is emitting anomalous EMI.
In similar art, Rothrkemper teaches monitoring the time series signals with an ML model trained to predict correct signal values to determine whether predicted and measured values of the time series agree, and indicating that the target device may contain a passive spychip where anomalies are detected, and generating an alarm, alert, or warning that the target electronic device being scanned is suspected to contain one or more passive spychips (see, Rothrkemper, abstract; [0020]; [0035]; [0042]; [0061]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Rothrkemper’s ideas into Gross’s system in order to provide an efficient secure network by incorporating spychip into an electronic device to determine if there is any malicious activities in the electronic device ([0001]).
However, Gross- Rothrkemper does not explicitly teach a broadband antenna card configured to be installed in an expansion slot of a target computer; a broadband antenna card within a chassis of the target computer system.
In similar art, Ramasamy teaches an information handling system chassis parts are more commonly designed with a metal structure. Various antenna types that are being developed for use with hardware associated with 5G communications. The antennas require spaces within the chassis of the ruggedized information handling system (see, column 2, lines 27-55).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Ramasamy’s ideas of the antennas require spaces within the chassis into Gross-Rothrkemper’s system in order to provide save resources and development time by implying Ramasamy’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper’s system.
8. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy in view of Blair et al. (US 9,792,408) and further in view of Mochida (US 20160308601)
Regarding claim 2:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach installing the broadband antenna card within the chassis in an expansion slot of the target computing device.
In similar art, Blair teaches a motherboard includes additional slot connectors, allowing expansion or use with different antenna configurations (column 15, lines 23-32, lines 62-67; column 16, lines 1-15; column 25, lines 62-67; column 26, lines 1-15).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Blair’s ideas of the antennas require spaces within the chassis into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to provide save resources and development time by implying Blair’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
However, Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy-Blair does not explicitly teach installed, a position of the broadband antenna card is mechanically registered on a connector of the slot.
In similar art, Mochia teaches the installation position is registered ([0036]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Mochia’s ideas of the antennas require spaces within the chassis into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy-Blair’s system in order to provide save resources and development time by implying Mochia’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy-Blair’s system.
9. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy in view of Mochida (US 20160308601)
Regarding claim 3:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach installing the broadband antenna card within the chassis in an expansion slot of the target computing device.
In similar art, Mochida teaches the installation position is registered (Mochia [0036]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Mochida’s ideas of the antennas require spaces within the chassis into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to provide save resources and development time by implying Mochida’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
10. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy in view of Mochida (US 20160308601) and further in view of (Yum US 11,271,307)
Regarding claim 15:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 11, but does not explicitly teach one or more additional broadband antenna cards installed within the chassis of the additional target computers.
In similar art, Mochia teaches the installation position is registered (Mochia [0036]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Mochia’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to provide save resources and development time by implying Mochia’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
However, Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy-Mochia does not explicitly teach the radio receiver is electrically connected to the additional broadband antenna cards.
In similar art, Yum teaches radio reception module is configured to be electronically connected to NFC antenna (Yum abstract), and wherein the radio receiver is configured to automatically switch between the broadband antenna cards in response to a switch command. The radio reception circuit is configured to serves as an antenna for receiving a radio signal, (see, Yum column 1, lines 30-39).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Yum’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy-Mochia’s system in order to provide save resources and development time by implying Yum’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy-Mochia’s system.
11. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy in view of Degner et al. (US 20090251374)
Regarding claim 4:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach removing the broadband antenna card from the chassis of the target computer system after generating the electronic alert.
In similar art, Degner teaches when an antenna is removed, device may generate an alert for a user such as a visual alert message displayed on a screen (see, Degner [0077]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Degner’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Degner’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
12. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy in view of Hollender et al. (US 20200012270)
Regarding claim 5:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach response to the electronic alert, automatically taking the target computer system out of service.
In similar art, Hollender teaches the technical status data corresponds to or is derived from the one or more sensor signals, and to output an anomaly alert configured to enable deactivating of the advanced process controller in case of an anomaly detection for the industrial process system (Hollender [0012]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hollender’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Hollender’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
13. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy in view of Lihosit (US 20160255513)
Regarding claim 6:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach automatically initiating the execution of the test pattern on a repeated schedule.
In similar art, Lihosit teaches the set of tests are schedule to be repeated multiple times at a nominal frequency (Lihosit claim 7).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Lihosit’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Lihosit’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
14. Claims 7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy in view of Colter et al. (US 20250330845)
Regarding claim 7:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach automatically initiating the execution of the test pattern in the computer system by delivering a test command to management logic of the target computer system.
In similar art, Colter teaches sending test commands (Colter [0030]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Colter’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Colter’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
Regarding claim 20:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 16, but does not explicitly teach cause the execution of the test pattern in the target computer system to be automatically initiated by delivering a test command to management logic of the target computer system.
In similar art, Colter teaches sending test commands (Colter [0030]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Colter’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Colter’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
15. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy in view of Carrigan (US 20090070053) and further in view of Wang et al. (US 20240152735)
Regarding claim 9:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach dividing a broadband spectrum of the radiofrequency EMI into a plurality of frequency bins.
In similar art, Carrigan teaches frequency-limited broadband frequency spectrum collected/detected by the acquisition system. Each transform is divided into bins (see, Carrigan [0010]); and
sampling amplitude values from pre-selected frequency bins of the plurality of frequency bins that are selected to be representative of the reference computer system to form the readings of the radiofrequency EMI: (each bin could be set to span 1 Hz sections. Poynting vectors are then calculated for a given bin using the E and B field amplitude information associated with that bin. This is done for all bins: Carrigan [0010]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Carrigan’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Carrigan’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
However, Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy-Carrigan does not explicitly teach wherein the readings are formatted as a multivariate time series of the amplitude values from the pre-selected frequency bins.
In similar art, Wang teaches detecting an anomaly in a multivariate time series that includes at least one processor programmed or configured to receive a dataset of a plurality of data instances, wherein each data instance comprises a time series of data points, determine a set of target data instances based on the dataset (abstract).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Wang’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy-Carrigan’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Wang’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy-Carrigan’s system.
16. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy in view of Kim et al. (US 12,555,893)
Regarding claim 12:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach broadband antenna card is installed in an expansion slot of the target computer.
In similar art, Kim discloses a conductive bracket comprising housing and at least one conductive extension part. The conductive extension part having a length selected such that, when the antenna structure is installed in the conductive bracket, a gap remains between a portion of the conductive extension part (Kim, claim 1).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Kim’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Kim’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
17. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy in view of Carrigan (US 20090070053)
Regarding claim 19:
Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 16, but does not explicitly teach divide a broadband spectrum of the radiofrequency EMI into a plurality of frequency bins.
In similar art, Carrigan teaches frequency-limited broadband frequency spectrum collected/detected by the acquisition system. Each transform is divided into bins (Carrigan [0010]); and
sample amplitude values from pre-selected frequency bins of the plurality of frequency bins that are selected to be representative of the reference computer system to form the readings of the radiofrequency EMI (each bin could be set to span 1 Hz sections. Poynting vectors are then calculated for a given bin using the E and B field amplitude information associated with that bin. This is done for all bins: Carrigan [0010]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Carrigan’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Carrigan’s ideas into Gross-Rothrkemper-Ramasamy’s system.
Conclusions
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAN DAI T TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-7959. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 Am to 3:00 PM.
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, Follansbee John A can be reached on 571-272-3964. 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.
/LAN DAI T TRUONG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444