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
This action is in response to communication filed on 12/1/2025.
Claims 1-18 are pending.
Claims 1-3, 6-9, 12-15 and 18 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument(s) filed on 12/1/2025 with respect to claim(s) 1-18 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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.
1. Claim(s) 1, 6, 7,12, 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yousaf in view of Yousaf (US 20170149665 A1) in view of Fang (US US20210192867A1).
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 1, a communication control system, comprising:
Yousafes teach at least one memory storing instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to do communication controlling, the communication controlling includes: (Yousaf, [0049], processor and memory. [0013], upon receiving the ISQ control packets the source node performs preemptive actions to reduce the level of congestion in proportion to the indicated congestion level or degree of congestion.)
identifying a bottleneck of a communication problem in a service provision system that provides a service from a provision source server to a mobile object; (Yousaf, [0005], another problem of the increasing heterogeneity and complexity of data networks is that the plurality of different types of resources may have a negative impact on the data transmission. For example, in wireless and wired networks the resources used for data transmission are the main resource bottleneck. For instance, in a wireless access network the shared radio spectrum needs to be distributed between transmitting and receiving user devices and traffic flows while in fixed access networks the capacity of a point-to-point link depends on the transmission medium such as fiber or copper lines or the like [0035], identification means operable to identify the locations of one or more possible and/or present bottlenecks and/or congestions in the network based on the congestion information. [examiner notes: any devices connect to wireless network are mobile object.])
deciding a control method in accordance with the bottleneck identified by the identifying; and (Yousaf, [0034], one or more actions are performed to avoid, mitigate, and/or to resolve the identified possible and/or present bottlenecks and/or congestions.)
Yousaf does not teach notifying, in response to identifying a processing load of the vehicle as the bottleneck, the vehicle of control to change a priority of applications on the vehicle.
Fang however in the same field of computer networking teaches notifying, in response to identifying a processing load of the vehicle as the bottleneck, the vehicle of control to change a priority of applications on the vehicle. (Fang, [0225], an example flow includes a related group of data (e.g., speed data, temperature data, audio-visual data, navigation data, etc.), a related group of functions (e.g., among vehicle functions, extra-vehicle functions such as service operations and/or data collection, aggregations between related vehicles, and/or combinations of these that are related for a particular system), a related group of devices (e.g., door actuators), and/or a related group of applications. Flows, as used herein, provide an organizing concept that may be utilized to relate certain data, certain end points, certain applications, and/or related functions of the vehicle or apart from the vehicle. In certain embodiments, a controller can utilize a flow to identify a data source, a data destination, permissions available for the flow, priority information related to the flow, or the like, to implement certain data regulating operations here. In certain embodiments, the utilization of the flow allows the controller to perform separate operations that may involve the same end points to support the desired network management. For example, a vehicle speed management application may have a high priority, and a speedometer end point may be associated with the vehicle speed management application. In the example, if the vehicle speed is being communicated to support the vehicle speed management application, then the controller applies a high priority to the vehicle speed message. However, if the vehicle speed is being communicated to support a trip planning flow (e.g., where a trip planning flow is present and does not have a high priority), the controller may apply a lower priority to the vehicle speed message. In a further example, a failure of a vehicle controller, portion of a network, or other off-nominal condition may result in the migration of the vehicle speed management application to another controller in the system, whereby the vehicle speed message is being communicated (e.g., where the backup controller is on another network) to support the vehicle speed management application, and the controller may apply a higher priority to the vehicle speed message.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the system/method of Yousaf to specify notifying, in response to identifying a processing load of the vehicle as the bottleneck, the vehicle of control to change a priority of applications on the vehicle as taught by Fang. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to control data collection, storage, and access, to reduce risks (Fang, [0010]).
Claim(s) 7 and 13 is/are substantially similar to claim 1, and is thus rejected under substantially the same rationale.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 6, the communication control system according to claims 1,
Yousaf- Fang teach wherein the identifying is identifying which one of a wireless communication section, the provision source server, and the vehicle causes the bottleneck and incurs the communication problem, and (Yousaf, [0003]- [0005], another problem of the increasing heterogeneity and complexity of data networks is that the plurality of different types of resources may have a negative impact on the data transmission. For example, in wireless and wired networks the resources used for data transmission are the main resource bottleneck. For instance in a wireless access network the shared radio spectrum needs to be distributed between transmitting and receiving user devices and traffic flows while in fixed access networks the capacity of a point-to-point link depends on the transmission medium such as fiber or copper lines or the like. [0037], resource bottlenecks and congestion can be reliably identified, the entities or nodes in the network or network domain on a flow's path that may be or are the cause of congestion can be reliably identified, the type of resource or resources forming a bottleneck that may lead towards or cause congestion can reliably be identified, an effective management of resources, in particular at traffic aggregation points like forwarding elements, can be enabled, and flows that satisfy user expected quality of experience (QoE) can be identified. Also according to systems and methods described herein, in a flexible way congestion avoidance rules, congestion mitigation rules and/or congestion resolving rules or policies can be applied to pro-actively avoid, mitigate and/or resolve the bottlenecks and/or congestions.)
the deciding includes deciding decides execution of predetermined wireless control as the control method in a case in which the wireless communication section causes the bottleneck,
(Yousaf, [0003]- [0005], identified resources lead bottlenecks and congestion. The resource including wireless communication section, the provision source server, and the mobile object. [0035], a system for managing data flows in a network with a plurality of forwarding elements routing flows between network entities of a network or network domain is defined. The system is characterized by at least one forwarding element operable to mark flows between network entities are marked with congestion information, preferably in form of resource utilization information, by at least one of the forwarding elements such that the highest congestion level prevailing on the respective flow path is indicated, and identification means operable to identify the locations of one or more possible and/or present bottlenecks and/or congestions in the network based on the congestion information, and action means operable to perform one or more actions to avoid, mitigate, and/or to resolve the identified possible and/or present bottlenecks and/or congestions. [0037], resource bottlenecks and congestion can be reliably identified, the entities or nodes in the network or network domain on a flow's path that may be or are the cause of congestion can be reliably identified, the type of resource or resources forming a bottleneck that may lead towards or cause congestion can reliably be identified, an effective management of resources, in particular at traffic aggregation points like forwarding elements, can be enabled, and flows that satisfy user expected quality of experience (QoE) can be identified.)
decides execution of predetermined server control as the control method in a case in which the provision source server causes the bottleneck, and (Yousaf, [0003]- [0005], identified resources lead bottlenecks and congestion. The resource including wireless communication section, the provision source server, and the mobile object. [0035], a system for managing data flows in a network with a plurality of forwarding elements routing flows between network entities of a network or network domain is defined. The system is characterized by at least one forwarding element operable to mark flows between network entities are marked with congestion information, preferably in form of resource utilization information, by at least one of the forwarding elements such that the highest congestion level prevailing on the respective flow path is indicated, and identification means operable to identify the locations of one or more possible and/or present bottlenecks and/or congestions in the network based on the congestion information, and action means operable to perform one or more actions to avoid, mitigate, and/or to resolve the identified possible and/or present bottlenecks and/or congestions. [0037], resource bottlenecks and congestion can be reliably identified, the entities or nodes in the network or network domain on a flow's path that may be or are the cause of congestion can be reliably identified, the type of resource or resources forming a bottleneck that may lead towards or cause congestion can reliably be identified, an effective management of resources, in particular at traffic aggregation points like forwarding elements, can be enabled, and flows that satisfy user expected quality of experience (QoE) can be identified.)
decides execution of predetermined vehicle control as the control method in a case in which the vehicle causes the bottleneck. (Yousaf, [0003]- [0005], identified resources lead bottlenecks and congestion. The resource including wireless communication section, the provision source server, and the mobile object. [0035], a system for managing data flows in a network with a plurality of forwarding elements routing flows between network entities of a network or network domain is defined. The system is characterized by at least one forwarding element operable to mark flows between network entities are marked with congestion information, preferably in form of resource utilization information, by at least one of the forwarding elements such that the highest congestion level prevailing on the respective flow path is indicated, and identification means operable to identify the locations of one or more possible and/or present bottlenecks and/or congestions in the network based on the congestion information, and action means operable to perform one or more actions to avoid, mitigate, and/or to resolve the identified possible and/or present bottlenecks and/or congestions. [0037], resource bottlenecks and congestion can be reliably identified, the entities or nodes in the network or network domain on a flow's path that may be or are the cause of congestion can be reliably identified, the type of resource or resources forming a bottleneck that may lead towards or cause congestion can reliably be identified, an effective management of resources, in particular at traffic aggregation points like forwarding elements, can be enabled, and flows that satisfy user expected quality of experience (QoE) can be identified.)
Claim(s) 12 and 18 is/are substantially similar to claim 6, and is thus rejected under substantially the same rationale.
2. Claim(s) 2, 4, 8, 10, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yousaf in view of Fang further in view of Takagi (US 20201258258 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 2, the communication control system according to claim 1,
Yousaf- Fang does not teach wherein the communication controlling further includes selecting a notification destination from among main control entities capable of executing control by the control method in accordance with a correspondence relationship between the control method decided by the deciding and the main control entities capable of executing the control.
Takagi however in the same field of computer networking teaches wherein the communication controlling further includes selecting the notification destination from among main control entities capable of executing control by the control method in accordance with a correspondence relationship between the control method decided by the deciding and the main control entities capable of executing the control. (Takagi, [0094]-[0098], whether to instruct the relay server or the sensing device SD to perform control to lighten the load of the relay server is determined on the basis of the network segment in which the performance has decreased and the load of the relay server, and it may therefore be said that the notification recipient is selected from the main control elements that are capable of executing the control in accordance with a correspondence relationship between the control method and the main control element.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the system/method of Yousaf to specify wherein the communication controlling further includes selecting the notification destination from among main control entities capable of executing control by the control method in accordance with a correspondence relationship between the control method decided by the deciding and the main control entities capable of executing the control as taught by Takagi. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to provide a network management technique that can realize efficient acquisition of various data items transmitted from sensing devices while reducing network congestion (Takagi, [0009]).
Regarding claim(s) 4, the communication control system according to claim 2,
Yousaf- Fang-Takagi teach wherein the selecting is selecting, as the notification destination, a main control entity capable of eliminating a factor that causes the bottleneck from among the main control entities capable of executable in accordance with the correspondence relationship. (Takagi, [0094]-[0098], whether to instruct the relay server or the sensing device SD to perform control to lighten the load of the relay server is determined on the basis of the network segment in which the performance has decreased and the load of the relay server, and it may therefore be said that the notification recipient is selected from the main control elements that are capable of executing the control in accordance with a correspondence relationship between the control method and the main control element.)
The same motivation to combine as the dependent claim 2 applies here.
Claim(s) 8 and 14 is/are substantially similar to claim 2, and is thus rejected under substantially the same rationale.
Claim(s) 10 and 16 is/are substantially similar to claim 4, and is thus rejected under substantially the same rationale.
3. Claim(s) 3, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yousaf in view of Fang in view of Takagi further in view of SZILAGYI (US 20180026896 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 3, the communication control system according to claim 2,
Yousaf-Fang-Takagi do not teach wherein the selecting is selecting the notification destination on a basis of the correspondence relationship and at least one of a time required for the control by the control method, an influence range exerted by the control by the control method, and a service quality required for the service.
SZILAGYI however in the same field of computer networking teaches wherein the selecting is selecting the notification destination on a basis of the correspondence relationship and at least one of a time required for the control by the control method, an influence range exerted by the control by the control method, and a service quality required for the service. (SZILAGYI, [0032], QoS and QoE enforcement may have selectable, based on the scope of the policies, modes of operation. The application scheduler may control (for example, take over responsibility for) resource management from congested resources to effectively pull the congestion point from an external bottleneck into the application scheduler's internal scheduler where the resource bottleneck may be resolved by for example redistributing available resources among competing flows and applications according to QoE requirements or the QoS principles selected by the policies. Congestion control may thus be incorporated into both QoS and QoE enforcement, which may be an integral and/or inseparable capability. [0041], the application scheduler 300 may include a congestion detection component 318. The congestion detection component 318 may be configured to detect fully utilized resource bottlenecks in the system. The detection may be sent to manager 310, so that it may trigger/configure scheduler actions in order to enforce the QoS/QoE within the existing system resource limitations. [examiner notes: the manager interprets to be the notification destination.])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the system/method of Yousaf to specify wherein the selecting is selecting the notification destination on a basis of the correspondence relationship and at least one of a time required for the control by the control method, an influence range exerted by the control by the control method, and a service quality required for the service as taught by SZILAGYI. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to improve the overall QoS/QoE management efficiency SZILAGYI, [0073]).
Claim(s) 9 and 15 is/are substantially similar to claim 3, and is thus rejected under substantially the same rationale.
4. Claim(s) 5, 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yousaf in view of Fang view of Takagi further in view of Long (US 20150286521 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 5, the communication control system according to claim 2,
Yousaf-Fang-Takagi do not teach wherein the selecting includes determining whether or not a factor that causes the bottleneck can be eliminated in a case in which the provision source server is selected as the main control entity capable of executing in accordance with the correspondence relationship, and selecting one notification destination from a management node that manages the provision source server and a plurality of other servers which are different from the provision source server and capable of providing the service in a case in which it is determined that the factor can not be eliminated.
Long however in the same field of computer networking teaches wherein the selecting includes determining whether or not a factor that causes the bottleneck can be eliminated in a case in which the provision source server is selected as the main control entity capable of executing in accordance with the correspondence relationship, and selecting one notification destination from a management node that manages the provision source server and a plurality of other servers which are different from the provision source server and capable of providing the service in a case in which it is determined that the factor can not be eliminated. (Long, [0007], in the case the first selected File Repair Server is unable to engage in the file repair procedure, and the UE has to select a new File Repair Server and send a new request for file repair, an increased delay will occur from when the UE determines that it needs to request the file repair procedure until the file repair procedure has been successfully performed. Further, additional signaling over the air is introduced since the UE has to send more than one request for file repair and at least one File Repair Server has to send an error message to the UE.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the system/method of Yousaf to specify wherein the selecting includes determining whether or not a factor that causes the bottleneck can be eliminated in a case in which the provision source server is selected as the main control entity capable of executing in accordance with the correspondence relationship, and selecting one notification destination from a management node that manages the provision source server and a plurality of other servers which are different from the provision source server and capable of providing the service in a case in which it is determined that the factor can not be eliminated as taught by Long. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to reduce the signaling load over the air (Long, [0019]).
Claim(s) 11 and 17 is/are substantially similar to claim 5, and is thus rejected under substantially the same rationale
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WUJI CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0365. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, VIVEK SRIVASTAVA can be reached on (571) 272-7304. 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.
/WUJI CHEN/
Examiner, Art Unit 2449
/VIVEK SRIVASTAVA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights