DETAILED ACTION
The Response to the Requirement for Restriction/Election filed on 3/2/26 has been entered. Claims 1-9 and 15-20 have been elected and claims 10-14 have been withdrawn.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
The Examiner recommends filing a written authorization for Internet communication in response to the present action. Doing so permits the USPTO to communicate with Applicant using Internet email to schedule interviews or discuss other aspects of the application. Without a written authorization in place, the USPTO cannot respond to Internet correspondence received from Applicant. The preferred method of providing authorization is by filing form PTO/SB/439, available at: https://www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms. See MPEP § 502.03 for other methods of providing written authorization.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I: claims 1-9 and 15-20 in the reply filed on 3/2/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-9 and 15-20 are presented for examination.
Paper Submitted
It is hereby acknowledged that the following papers have been received and placed of record in the file:
Information Disclosure Statement(s) as received on 5/30/24 are considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Typically abbreviations/acronyms are used after an expansion is provided to the abbreviations/acronyms. However, in the Specification, “LED,” “BLE,” “SoC,” “RAM,” “I/O,” “WLAN,” “IC,” “IEEE,” etc. are used before they are expanded. It is suggested to use expansions before using their abbreviations/acronyms. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 8-9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The limitation “…the second device…” in claim 8, line 3, should be “…the second wireless device…” (emphasis added) in order to resolve the lack of antecedent basis for the limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
All dependent claims are objected to as having the same deficiencies as the claims they depend from.
Note: For examination purposes, the claims will be interpreted based on the claim language suggested by the Examiner.
Examiner’s Comments
The Examiner provides the following comments regarding the interpretation of the claim limitations:
Claim 1, at least in part, recites “…in response to determining that the first wireless device is not available, storing the first message in a first queue of the second wireless device…” and claim 2, at least in part, recites “…in response to determining that the first device is available, sending the first message to the first wireless device without storing the first message in the first queue.” (emphasis added). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met (See MPEP 2111.04 (II)). In the instant case, the broadest reasonable interpretation of claims 1-2 requires only one determination to occur. The Examiner suggests amending the claim(s) to describe that one determination occurs for a first message and that the other determination occurs for a second message provided that there is enough support in the disclosure.
Claims 3-5 present similar issues as the ones described with respect to claims 1 and 2. The Examiner also suggests amending the claim(s) to describe that each determination occurs for different messages provided that there is enough support in the disclosure.
Note: For examination purposes, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation described above, the Examiner elects the determination recited in claim 2. Therefore, the Examiner is not required to address/examine any limitations (i.e., storing the first message…) or dependent claims (i.e., claims 3-6) that depend from the non-elected limitations (i.e., in response to determining that the first wireless device is not available…) because these limitations and dependent claims do not provide any patentable weight to the claimed invention. Furthermore, for examination and compact prosecution purposes, the Examiner will also provide an additional rejection for all of the required claim limitations/elements and the optional claim limitations/elements as indicated above. For the aforementioned reasons, applicant should address all of the rejections.
If the Applicant believes, for any reason, that personal communication will expedite prosecution of this application, the Applicant is invited to schedule an interview with the Examiner using the number provided below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
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 1-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Agarwal et al.” (US PGPUB 2020/0092390) (Hereinafter Agarwal).
With respect to claim 1, Agarwal teaches a method (Abstract) comprising:
receiving, in a second wireless device (first friend node 304; Fig. 3, [0046]) of a mesh network (wireless mesh network (WMN) 100; Fig. 1, [0023]), a first message directed to a first wireless device (low power node (LPN) 302; Fig. 3, [0046]) of the mesh network, wherein the second wireless device is designated as a mailbox device for the first wireless device (friend node receives and stores all incoming messages associated with LPN; Fig. 3, [0023], [0043], [0046]-[0047]);
determining whether the first wireless device is available (determining that a low power node (LPN) is in a low power state/mode or full power state/mode; [0042], [0045]-[0047]); and
in response to determining that the first wireless device is not available, storing the first message in a first queue of the second wireless device, the first queue associated with the first wireless device (Please see the Examiner’s Comments Section Above).
With respect to claim 2, Agarwal teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising in response to determining that the first device is available, sending the first message to the first wireless device without storing the first message in the first queue (when the LPN 302 transitions from a low power mode to an operational mode, LPN receives messages from the first friend node 304; [0047]).
The limitations of claims 3-6 are rejected based on the explanation provided in the Examiner’s Comments Section above.
With respect to claim 8, Agarwal teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising receiving a registration request message from the first wireless device, the registration request message to request that the second device be registered as the mailbox device to act as an intermediary device to accept one or more messages directed to the first wireless device when the first wireless device is unavailable (a low power node (LPN) sends a friend request acceptance message to a selected friend node, and the friend node sends a blank message that acts as an acknowledgement (ACK), thereby establishing a message caching friendship between the LPN and the selected friend node. The selected friend node maintains messages for the LPN while the LPN operates in low power mode; [0044], [0046]).
Claims 1-2, 6, 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Agarwal.
With respect to claim 1, Agarwal teaches a method (Abstract) comprising:
receiving, in a second wireless device (first friend node 304; Fig. 3, [0046]) of a mesh network (wireless mesh network (WMN) 100; Fig. 1, [0023]), a first message directed to a first wireless device (low power node (LPN) 302; Fig. 3, [0046]) of the mesh network, wherein the second wireless device is designated as a mailbox device for the first wireless device (friend node receives and stores all incoming messages associated with LPN; Fig. 3, [0023], [0043], [0046]-[0047]);
determining whether the first wireless device is available (determining that a low power node (LPN) is in a low power state/mode or full power state/mode; [0042], [0045]-[0047], [0070]); and
in response to determining that the first wireless device is not available, storing the first message in a first queue of the second wireless device, the first queue associated with the first wireless device (first friend node 304 maintains messages for the LPN 302 while the LPN 302 operates in low power mode; Fig. 3, [0042], [0046], [0070]).
With respect to claim 2, Agarwal teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising in response to determining that the first device is available, sending the first message to the first wireless device without storing the first message in the first queue (when the LPN 302 transitions from a low power mode to an operational mode, LPN receives messages from the first friend node 304; Fig. 3, [0045], [0047]).
With respect to claim 6, Agarwal teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a status message from the first wireless device, the status message to inform the second wireless device that the first wireless device is active; and in response to the status message, sending at least one message stored in the first queue to the first wireless device (when the LPN 302 transitions from a low power mode to an operational mode, LPN sends a polling message to first friend node 304 and LPN receives messages from the first friend node 304; Fig. 3, [0045], [0047]-[0048], [0071]-[0072]).
With respect to claim 8, Agarwal teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising receiving a registration request message from the first wireless device, the registration request message to request that the second device be registered as the mailbox device to act as an intermediary device to accept one or more messages directed to the first wireless device when the first wireless device is unavailable (a low power node (LPN) sends a friend request acceptance message to a selected friend node, and the friend node sends a blank message that acts as an acknowledgement (ACK), thereby establishing a message caching friendship between the LPN and the selected friend node. The selected friend node maintains messages for the LPN while the LPN operates in low power mode; [0044], [0046], [0067]).
With respect to claim 15, Agarwal teaches a system (wireless device 200; Fig. 2, [0033]) comprising:
at least one transceiver to transmit and receive radio frequency (RF) signals (transceiver 810 provides a means for communicating with various other apparatus over a transmission medium; Figs. 1-2 and 8, [0024], [0035], [0087]) with one or more wireless devices (mesh nodes/devices 102 and/or 104; Fig. 1, [0023], [0035], [0087]) in a mesh network (wireless mesh network (WMN) 100; Fig. 1, [0023]);
at least one memory (memory 206/806; Figs. 2 and 8, [0034], [0086]-[0087]);
at least one processor (processor(s) 202/804; Figs. 2 and 8, [0034], [0086]-[0087]) coupled to the at least one memory (bus 824 links together various circuits including one or more processors and/or hardware components, such as computer-readable medium/memory 806; Figs. 2 and 8, [0034], [0086]-[0087]), the at least one processor to execute instructions (Figs. 2 and 8, [0034], [0087]); and
a non-transitory storage medium coupled to the at least one processor, the non-transitory storage medium comprising the instructions which, when executed (processor 804 is responsible for execution of software stored on computer-readable medium/memory 806; Figs. 2 and 8, [0034], [0087]), cause the at least one processor to:
decode at least a portion of a first message received in the system to identify that a first wireless device (low power node (LPN) 302; Fig. 3, [0046]) is a destination of the first message (upon receipt of a new incoming message, the first friend node 504 determine whether to maintain the new incoming message based at least in part on the message address associated with LPN; Figs. 3 and 5, [0058]-[0059], [0069]), wherein the system is designated as a mailbox device for the first wireless device (friend node receives and stores all incoming messages associated with LPN; Fig. 3, [0023], [0043], [0046]-[0047], [0055], [0070]); and
determine whether the first wireless device is available (determining that a low power node (LPN) is in a low power state/mode or full power state/mode; [0042], [0045]-[0047], [0070]), and:
in response to determining that the first wireless device is available, send the first message directly to the first wireless device (when the LPN 302 transitions from a low power mode to an operational mode, LPN receives messages from the first friend node 304; Fig. 3, [0045], [0047]); and
in response to determining that the first wireless device is not available, store the first message in a mailbox database of the at least one memory (first friend node 304 maintains messages for the LPN 302 while the LPN 302 operates in low power mode; Fig. 3, [0042], [0046], [0070]).
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 of this title, 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 3-5 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal in view of “Sun et al.” (CN111385860A) (Hereinafter Sun) (Please refer to the Attached Translated Document of CN111385860A).
With respect to claim 3, Agarwal teaches the method of claim 1. Agarwal does not teach further comprising: determining whether a priority of the first message exceeds a priority threshold; and in response to determining that the first message priority exceeds the priority threshold, sending a wakeup message to the first wireless device to cause the first wireless device to wake up.
However, Sun teaches further comprising: determining whether a priority of the first message exceeds a priority threshold; and in response to determining that the first message priority exceeds the priority threshold, sending a wakeup message to the first wireless device to cause the first wireless device to wake up (a neighboring node receives a message sent to a low-power node and judges whether the real-time requirement of the received message is high. If the real-time requirement is high, neighbor node sends a wake-up message to the low-power node; [0011]-[0013], [0019]).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate sending a wakeup message based on message priority to Agarwal because Agarwal discloses determining message priority ([0060]) and Sun suggests sending a wakeup message based on message priority ([0019]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Sun in the Agarwal system in order to effectively meet the needs of different priority messages.
With respect to claim 4, Agarwal as modified teaches the method of claim 3. Sun further teaches further comprising in response to the determining that the first message priority does not exceed the priority threshold, not sending the wakeup message to the first wireless device (a neighboring node receives a message sent to a low-power node and judges whether the real-time requirement of the received message is high. If the real-time requirement is not high, neighbor node continues to cache the messages that do not require high real-time performance; [0011]-[0014]).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate caching messages based on message priority to Agarwal because Agarwal discloses determining message priority ([0060]) and Sun suggests caching messages based on message priority ([0013]-[0014]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Sun in the Agarwal system in order to effectively meet the needs of different priority messages.
With respect to claim 5, Agarwal as modified teaches the method of claim 3. Sun further teaches further comprising after the first wireless device is active in response to the wakeup message, sending the first message to the first wireless device (a neighboring node receives a message sent to a low-power node and judges whether the real-time requirement of the received message is high. If the real-time requirement is high, neighbor node sends a wake-up message to the low-power node and sends the received message to the low-power node; [0011]-[0013], [0019]-[0020], [0027]).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate sending a wakeup message based on message priority to Agarwal because Agarwal discloses determining message priority ([0060]) and Sun suggests sending a wakeup message based on message priority ([0019]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Sun in the Agarwal system in order to effectively meet the needs of different priority messages.
With respect to claim 16, Agarwal teaches the system of claim 15. Agarwal does not teach wherein the non-transitory storage medium further comprises instructions which, when executed, cause the at least one processor to: determine that a priority of the first message exceeds a priority threshold; and in response to determining that the first message priority exceeds the priority threshold, send a wakeup message to the first wireless device to cause the first wireless device to wake up.
However, Sun teaches wherein the non-transitory storage medium further comprises instructions which, when executed, cause the at least one processor to: determine that a priority of the first message exceeds a priority threshold; and in response to determining that the first message priority exceeds the priority threshold, send a wakeup message to the first wireless device to cause the first wireless device to wake up (a neighboring node receives a message sent to a low-power node and judges whether the real-time requirement of the received message is high. If the real-time requirement is high, neighbor node sends a wake-up message to the low-power node; [0011]-[0013], [0019]).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate sending a wakeup message based on message priority to Agarwal because Agarwal discloses determining message priority ([0060]) and Sun suggests sending a wakeup message based on message priority ([0019]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Sun in the Agarwal system in order to effectively meet the needs of different priority messages.
With respect to claim 17, Agarwal as modified teaches the system of claim 16. Sun further teaches wherein the non-transitory storage medium further comprises instructions, which when executed, cause the at least one processor, in response to determining that the first message priority does not exceed the priority threshold, not send the wakeup message to the first wireless device (a neighboring node receives a message sent to a low-power node and judges whether the real-time requirement of the received message is high. If the real-time requirement is not high, neighbor node continues to cache the messages that do not require high real-time performance; [0011]-[0014]).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate caching messages based on message priority to Agarwal because Agarwal discloses determining message priority ([0060]) and Sun suggests caching messages based on message priority ([0013]-[0014]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Sun in the Agarwal system in order to effectively meet the needs of different priority messages.
With respect to claim 18, Agarwal as modified teaches the system of claim 16. Agarwal further teaches wherein the non-transitory storage medium further comprises instructions which, when executed, cause the at least one processor to: receive a status message from the first wireless device, the status message to inform the system that the first wireless device is active; and in response to the status message, send at least one message stored in the mailbox database to the first wireless device (when the LPN 302 transitions from a low power mode to an operational mode, LPN sends a polling message to first friend node 304 and LPN receives messages from the first friend node 304; Fig. 3, [0045], [0047]-[0048], [0071]-[0072]).
With respect to claim 19, Agarwal as modified teaches the system of claim 16. Agarwal further teaches wherein the non-transitory storage medium further comprises instructions which, when executed, cause the at least one processor to: receive a registration request message from the first wireless device, the registration request message to request that the system act as the mailbox device for the first wireless device; and in response to the registration request message, register the first wireless device as a mailbox recipient (a low power node (LPN) sends a friend request acceptance message to a selected friend node, and the friend node sends a blank message that acts as an acknowledgement (ACK), thereby establishing a message caching friendship between the LPN and the selected friend node. The selected friend node maintains messages for the LPN while the LPN operates in low power mode; [0044], [0046], [0067]).
With respect to claim 20, Agarwal as modified teaches the system of claim 16. Sun further teaches wherein the non-transitory storage medium further comprises instructions which, when executed, cause the at least one processor to: receive an acknowledgement message from the first wireless device to indicate that the first wireless device received the first message; and send the acknowledgement message to a sender of the first message (a neighboring node receives a message sent by a relay node to a low-power node, sends the received message to the low-power node, receives a data confirmation message from the low-power node and sends the data confirmation message to the relay node; [0011]-[0014], [0027], [0032], [0035]).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate sending acknowledgement messages to Agarwal because Agarwal discloses sending acknowledgements ([0044]) and Sun suggests sending acknowledgement messages ([0035]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Sun in the Agarwal system in order to ensure a more reliable message delivery.
Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal in view of “Polo et al.” (US PGPUB 2016/0088424) (Hereinafter Polo).
With respect to claim 7, Agarwal teaches the method of claim 1. Agarwal does not teach further comprising receiving the first message from a third wireless device, the first wireless device and the third wireless device comprising intermittently available devices.
However, Polo teaches further comprising receiving the first message from a third wireless device, the first wireless device and the third wireless device comprising intermittently available devices (devices that control automation within a mesh network need not be mains powered, since the devices may issue a message (e.g., a command, status, or alert) to another device of the mesh network and then turn themselves off after issuing the message. These devices are not consistently active online and may not continuously provide data routing and forwarding functionality throughout the mesh network; [0038]-[0041]).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate sending messages between intermittently available devices to Agarwal because Agarwal discloses sending messages between device ([0023]) and Polo suggests sending messages between intermittently available devices ([0038]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Polo in the Agarwal system in order to optimize the power consumption of devices.
With respect to claim 9, Agarwal teaches the method of claim 8. Agarwal does not teach further comprising sending a broadcast message to one or more other wireless devices in the mesh network, the broadcast message to identify the second wireless device as the mailbox device for the first wireless device.
However, Polo teaches further comprising sending a broadcast message to one or more other wireless devices in the mesh network, the broadcast message to identify the second wireless device as the mailbox device for the first wireless device (Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) device 102F selects the BLE device 102E as its proxy device and adds the BLE device 102E to a white list of the BLE device 102F. To confirm the proxy node selection, the BLE device 102F transmits (e.g., broadcasts) a proxy query packet. Since the BLE device 102D is not selected as the associated proxy device of the BLE device 102F and the BLE device 102E is selected as the associated proxy device of the BLE device 102F, on reception of the proxy query packet by the BLE device 102D and the BLE device 102E, the BLE device 102D unloads the BLE device 102F from the white list of the BLE device 102D; Fig. 1, [0066]-[0067]).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate broadcasting messages with selection information to Agarwal because Agarwal discloses sending messages with selection information ([0044]) and Polo suggests broadcasting messages with selection information ([0066]-[0067]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Polo in the Agarwal system in order to reduce resource usage of non-selected devices.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Mallat et al. US 2024/0422839. Discloses transmitting queued messages from a friend node to a low power node.
Hans et al. US 2021/0022207. Discloses sharing information between nodes in a mesh network.
Kamp et al. US 2019/0174389. Discloses selecting a parent node in a wireless mesh network.
Di Marco et al. US 2022/0150831. Discloses receiving messages by a friend node intended for a low power node.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Johnny Aguiar whose telephone number is (571)272-3563. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 7:30 am - 5:30 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joon Hwang can be reached on (571) 272-4036. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/JOHNNY B AGUIAR/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2447
April 2, 2026
Prosecution Insights