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 .
Claims 1-15 are presented for examination.
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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 14, the limitation “transmitting, by the computational function block, the information on the preparedness of the computational function block for updating” recites “the information on the preparedness,” which lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 14 earlier recites only “determining, by the computational function block, a preparedness of the computational function block for updating the computational function block,” which introduces “a preparedness” but does not introduce “information on the preparedness.” Because “the information on the preparedness” is a definite reference to an element that was not previously set forth in the claim, the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be ascertained, rendering the claim indefinite.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-6 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockwell (US 9,639,344 B2) in view of Coffee (US 2004/0039504 A1), and further in view of Shionoya (US 2021/0201599 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Rockwell (US 9,639,344 B2) teaches
An apparatus for controlling an update process of a computational function block in a vehicle, the apparatus comprising: at least one interface that, in operation, communicates with the computational function block; and one or more processors that, in operation, determine information on a preparedness of the computational function block for updating the computational function block, wherein the information on the preparedness indicates the preparedness of the computational function block; and trigger an update of the computational function block if the information on the preparedness indicates that the computational function block is in a state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated (Abstract, “A vehicle may receive a software update to be installed to a vehicle electronic control unit (ECU); perform compatibility testing for vehicle ECUs according to tokens from the vehicle ECUs indicating respective software version levels of the vehicle ECUs to determine a compatibility result; and switch the software update into active use on the vehicle when the compatibility result indicates an allowable configuration of software version levels”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell discloses an apparatus in a vehicle that controls the update process of an ECU (computational function block) by determining preparedness information (compatibility based on individual ECU tokens indicating version levels) and triggering the update (switching the software update into active use) when the preparedness information indicates the configuration is allowable, the vehicle bus serving as the at least one interface for communicating with the ECU.
Rockwell did not specifically teach
determine the information on the preparedness based on a ruleset for determining the preparedness of a plurality of computational function blocks based on a state of the computational function block and on a state of the vehicle
wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state.
However, Coffee (US 2004/0039504 A1) teaches determine the information on the preparedness based on a ruleset for determining the preparedness of a plurality of computational function blocks based on a state of the computational function block and on a state of the vehicle. (Paragraph [0015], “a method and apparatus are disclosed for automatically determining and reporting events from a vehicle to an owner or dispatcher of the vehicle at a remote location. Events to be reported are changes in status of vehicle operation, location, or measurements of vehicle systems or cargo. A computer (tracking computer, generally referred to herein as the tracker) installed on the vehicle is connected to various sensors which measure parameters of interest to the dispatcher or owner and reports critical changes in parameters over the wireless TDMA network. Computers at a fixed location display these status changes for use by the dispatcher or record the data for later analysis”) Examiner Comments: Coffee teaches using a ruleset to determine the individual status (preparedness) of a function block (e.g., truck drum as a computational module) based on vehicle state (location, stationary) and block state (rotation speed), which indicates if the block is ready for an action (analogous to update when not in use).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rockwell's teaching into Coffee's in order to enable updates when the function block is not actively in use, thereby reducing vehicle downtime and allowing timely updates without waiting for global vehicle inactivity, by identifying location and direction of movement of each vehicle in the fleet in real-time and automatic communication directly with management offices to report its location and heading, and status of predetermined events in which the vehicle may be engaged (Abstract/Summary).
Rockwell and Coffee did not specifically teach
wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state.
However, Shionoya (US 2021/0201599 A1) teaches wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state. (Paragraph [0058], “When the night-time download is being performed, the activation switch 64 is OFF and the battery 60 cannot be charged. Therefore, even though the OTA manager 20 is being driven, the night-time download is performed in a state where the other ECUs 16 are stopped”) Examiner Comments: Shionoya teaches that the software update of an ECU (computational function block) is performed when the ECU is stopped, that is, when the activation switch is OFF and the ECU is not executing its control functions, which corresponds to the ECU being in an idle, shutdown, or deactivated state, and therefore that such a stopped state is the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Shionoya into the system of Rockwell so that the triggering of the update of the computational function block occurs when the computational function block is in a stopped, idle, shutdown, or deactivated state, in order to apply the update at a time when the computational function block is not actively executing its control functions, thereby avoiding interruption of active functions and loss of data and allowing the update to be applied without disrupting operation of the vehicle (Shionoya, Paragraph [0058]).
Regarding Claim 2, Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya teach
The apparatus according to claim 1.
Rockwell further teaches wherein the one or more processors, in operation, obtain, from the computational function block, the information on the preparedness of the computational function block for updating the computational function block. (Column 1, lines 25-33, “receive tokens from other of the vehicle ECUs indicating respective software version levels of the other vehicle ECUs”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches obtaining the preparedness information (tokens indicating version levels for compatibility) directly from the individual ECU (computational function block).
Regarding Claim 3, Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya teach
The apparatus according to claim 2.
Rockwell further teaches wherein the apparatus, in operation, controls the update process of a plurality of computational function blocks of the vehicle, wherein the one or more processors, in operation, determine information on a preparedness of the plurality of computational function blocks for updating the plurality of computational function blocks by obtaining the information on the preparedness of the plurality of computational function block individually from each of the plurality of computational function blocks, and trigger an update of each of the computational function blocks if the information on the preparedness indicates that each of the computational function blocks is ready to be updated. (Column 1, lines 45-60, “receiving, by a vehicle ECU, tokens from other vehicle ECUs indicating respective software version levels of the other vehicle ECUs; determine whether the vehicle ECU is the most up-to-date ECU based on the tokens; and if so, determine a compatibility result indicative of compatibility of the version levels according to the tokens”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches controlling updates for multiple ECUs by obtaining individual preparedness information (tokens) from each ECU and triggering updates when each is ready (compatible).
Regarding Claim 4, Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya teach
The apparatus according to claim 3.
Rockwell further teaches wherein the computational function block or the plurality of computational function blocks signal their preparedness for updating. (Claim 1, “receive, from the other vehicle ECUs, identifiers of the ECUs and tokens indicating overall vehicle update levels for the ECUs”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches the ECUs signaling preparedness by providing tokens indicating update levels for the compatibility check.
Regarding Claim 5, Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya teach
The apparatus according to claim 4.
Rockwell further teaches wherein the one or more processors, in operation, read out a flag comprising the information on the preparedness from the computational function block or from each of the computational function blocks. (Claim 7, “the tokens include timestamp values corresponding to when software installed to the vehicle ECUs was compiled or signed”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches reading tokens (flags) comprising the preparedness information (version timestamps) from each ECU.
Regarding Claim 6, Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya teach
The apparatus according to claim 4.
Rockwell further teaches wherein the one or more processors, in operation, request the information on the preparedness from the computational function block or from each of the computational function blocks, and receive the information on the preparedness from the computational function block or from each of the computational function blocks in response to the request. (Claim 1, “receiving tokens from other vehicle ECUs indicating respective overall software update levels of the vehicle ECUs”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches requesting and receiving the preparedness information (tokens) from each ECU in response to the request.
Regarding Claim 9, Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya teach
The apparatus according to claim 1.
Rockwell further teaches wherein the one or more processors, in operation, override the information on the preparedness of the computational function block if the computational function block is deemed to be unresponsive. (Column 7, lines 17-28, “At operation 504, the vehicle ECU 104 determines whether the vehicle 102 configuration is compatible. In an example, the MMCF logic 210 may utilize the module compatibility matrix 208 to any received module IDs 204 that provided module tokens 206 that are incompatible with the software version levels of the vehicle ECUs 104”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches overriding the preparedness of an incompatible or non-responsive ECU by checking the compatibility matrix and proceeding with the update, treating unresponsiveness as incompatibility to be overridden.
Regarding Claim 10, Rockwell (US 9,639,344 B2) teaches
A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor of a computation device, cause the computation device to: provide a computational function block; communicate with an apparatus that controls an update process of the computational function block; and determine a preparedness of the computational function block for updating the computational function block; transmit information on the preparedness of the computational function block for updating to the apparatus that controls the update process (Claim 15; Column 1, lines 25-35, “A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, are configured to cause the at least one processor to maintain a compatibility matrix ... determine a compatibility result ... A vehicle electronic control unit (ECU) of a plurality of ECUs configured to receive tokens from other of the vehicle ECUs indicating respective software version levels of the other vehicle ECUs; determine whether the ECU is a most up-to-date ECU based on the tokens”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions executed by a processor of a computation device (ECU) that determine the preparedness of the ECU (version level via tokens) and provide that information to the apparatus controlling the update process.
Rockwell did not specifically teach
determine the information on the preparedness based on a ruleset for determining the preparedness of a plurality of computational function blocks based on a state of the computational function block and on a state of the vehicle
wherein the information on the preparedness indicates that the computational function block is in a state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated, and wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state.
However, Coffee (US 2004/0039504 A1) teaches determine the information on the preparedness based on a ruleset for determining the preparedness of a plurality of computational function blocks based on a state of the computational function block and on a state of the vehicle. (Paragraph [0015], “a method and apparatus are disclosed for automatically determining and reporting events from a vehicle to an owner or dispatcher of the vehicle at a remote location. Events to be reported are changes in status of vehicle operation, location, or measurements of vehicle systems or cargo. A computer (tracking computer, generally referred to herein as the tracker) installed on the vehicle is connected to various sensors which measure parameters of interest to the dispatcher or owner and reports critical changes in parameters over the wireless TDMA network. Computers at a fixed location display these status changes for use by the dispatcher or record the data for later analysis”) Examiner Comments: Coffee teaches using a ruleset to determine the individual status (preparedness) of a function block (e.g., truck drum as a computational module) based on vehicle state (location, stationary) and block state (rotation speed), which indicates if the block is ready for an action (analogous to update when not in use).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rockwell's teaching into Coffee's in order to enable updates when the function block is not actively in use, thereby reducing vehicle downtime and allowing timely updates without waiting for global vehicle inactivity, by identifying location and direction of movement of each vehicle in the fleet in real-time and automatic communication directly with management offices to report its location and heading, and status of predetermined events in which the vehicle may be engaged (Abstract/Summary).
Rockwell and Coffee did not specifically teach
wherein the information on the preparedness indicates that the computational function block is in a state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated, and wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state.
However, Shionoya (US 2021/0201599 A1) teaches wherein the information on the preparedness indicates that the computational function block is in a state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated, and wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state. (Paragraph [0058], “the night-time download is performed in a state where the other ECUs 16 are stopped”) Examiner Comments: Shionoya teaches that the update of the ECU (computational function block) is performed when the ECU is stopped, which corresponds to the computational function block being in an idle, shutdown, or deactivated state, and that this stopped state is the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Shionoya into Rockwell, for the same reasons set forth with respect to claim 1, so that the information on the preparedness indicates that the computational function block is in a stopped, idle, shutdown, or deactivated state in which it is ready to be updated, in order to apply the update without interrupting active functions or causing data loss (Shionoya, Paragraph [0058]).
Regarding Claim 11, Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya teach
The non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 10.
Rockwell further teaches wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed by the processor of the computation device, cause the computation device to indicate the information on the preparedness as a flag to the apparatus that controls the update process. (Claim 7, “the tokens include timestamp values corresponding to when software installed to the vehicle ECUs was compiled or signed”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches indicating the preparedness as a token (flag) to the controlling apparatus.
Regarding Claim 12, Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya teach
The non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 10.
Rockwell further teaches wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed by the processor of the computation device, cause the computation device to receive a request for the information on the preparedness from the apparatus that controls the update process, and transmit the information on the preparedness to the apparatus that controls the update process in response to the request. (Claim 8, “performing software update compatibility testing for a received software update using a most up-to-date vehicle electronic control unit (ECU) to determine a compatibility result, the most up-to-date vehicle ECU being determined using tokens from other vehicle ECUs indicating respective overall software update levels of the vehicle ECUs that increase across the vehicle ECUs for each version update or set of version updates to the vehicle ECUs”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches receiving a request and transmitting the preparedness (tokens) in response.
Regarding Claim 13, Rockwell (US 9,639,344 B2) teaches
A method for controlling an update process of a computational function block in a vehicle, the method comprising: determining information on a preparedness of the computational function block for updating the computational function block, wherein the information on the preparedness indicates the preparedness of the computational function block; and triggering an update of the computational function block if the information on the preparedness indicates that the computational function block is in a state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated (Abstract, “A vehicle may receive a software update to be installed to a vehicle electronic control unit (ECU); perform compatibility testing for vehicle ECUs according to tokens from the vehicle ECUs indicating respective software version levels of the vehicle ECUs to determine a compatibility result; and switch the software update into active use on the vehicle when the compatibility result indicates an allowable configuration of software version levels”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches the corresponding method of determining preparedness information (compatibility from individual ECU tokens) and triggering the update (switching the update into active use) when the preparedness indicates the configuration is allowable.
Rockwell did not specifically teach
determine the information on the preparedness based on a ruleset for determining the preparedness of a plurality of computational function blocks based on a state of the computational function block and on a state of the vehicle
wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state.
However, Coffee (US 2004/0039504 A1) teaches determine the information on the preparedness based on a ruleset for determining the preparedness of a plurality of computational function blocks based on a state of the computational function block and on a state of the vehicle. (Paragraph [0015], “a method and apparatus are disclosed for automatically determining and reporting events from a vehicle to an owner or dispatcher of the vehicle at a remote location. Events to be reported are changes in status of vehicle operation, location, or measurements of vehicle systems or cargo. A computer (tracking computer, generally referred to herein as the tracker) installed on the vehicle is connected to various sensors which measure parameters of interest to the dispatcher or owner and reports critical changes in parameters over the wireless TDMA network. Computers at a fixed location display these status changes for use by the dispatcher or record the data for later analysis”) Examiner Comments: Coffee teaches using a ruleset to determine the individual status (preparedness) of a function block (e.g., truck drum as a computational module) based on vehicle state (location, stationary) and block state (rotation speed), which indicates if the block is ready for an action (analogous to update when not in use).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rockwell's teaching into Coffee's in order to enable updates when the function block is not actively in use, thereby reducing vehicle downtime and allowing timely updates without waiting for global vehicle inactivity, by identifying location and direction of movement of each vehicle in the fleet in real-time and automatic communication directly with management offices to report its location and heading, and status of predetermined events in which the vehicle may be engaged (Abstract/Summary).
Rockwell and Coffee did not specifically teach
wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state.
However, Shionoya (US 2021/0201599 A1) teaches wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state. (Paragraph [0058], “the night-time download is performed in a state where the other ECUs 16 are stopped”) Examiner Comments: Shionoya teaches that the update of the ECU (computational function block) is performed when the ECU is stopped, corresponding to the computational function block being in an idle, shutdown, or deactivated state, and that this stopped state is the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Shionoya into the method of Rockwell, for the same reasons set forth with respect to claim 1, in order to apply the update at a time when the computational function block is not actively executing its control functions, thereby avoiding interruption of active functions and loss of data (Shionoya, Paragraph [0058]).
Regarding Claim 14, Rockwell (US 9,639,344 B2) teaches
A method for updating a computational function block for a vehicle, the method comprising: transmitting, by the computational function block, the information on the preparedness of the computational function block for updating to an apparatus including one or more processors (Column 1, lines 25-35, “A vehicle electronic control unit (ECU) of a plurality of ECUs configured to receive tokens from other of the vehicle ECUs indicating respective software version levels of the other vehicle ECUs; determine whether the ECU is a most up-to-date ECU based on the tokens”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches the ECU (computational function block) determining its preparedness (software version level via tokens) and transmitting that preparedness information to the apparatus that includes one or more processors for controlling the update.
Rockwell did not specifically teach
determining, by the computational function block, a preparedness of the computational function block for updating the computational function block
executing software corresponding to the computational function block within a runtime environment of a programmable hardware component;
wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state; and
updating program code within the computational function block responsive to triggering by the apparatus including one or more processors.
However, Coffee (US 2004/0039504 A1) teaches determine the information on the preparedness based on a ruleset for determining the preparedness of a plurality of computational function blocks based on a state of the computational function block and on a state of the vehicle. (Paragraph [0015], “a method and apparatus are disclosed for automatically determining and reporting events from a vehicle to an owner or dispatcher of the vehicle at a remote location. Events to be reported are changes in status of vehicle operation, location, or measurements of vehicle systems or cargo. A computer (tracking computer, generally referred to herein as the tracker) installed on the vehicle is connected to various sensors which measure parameters of interest to the dispatcher or owner and reports critical changes in parameters over the wireless TDMA network. Computers at a fixed location display these status changes for use by the dispatcher or record the data for later analysis”) Examiner Comments: Coffee teaches using a ruleset to determine the individual status (preparedness) of a function block (e.g., truck drum as a computational module) based on vehicle state (location, stationary) and block state (rotation speed), which indicates if the block is ready for an action (analogous to update when not in use).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rockwell's teaching into Coffee's in order to enable updates when the function block is not actively in use, thereby reducing vehicle downtime and allowing timely updates without waiting for global vehicle inactivity, by identifying location and direction of movement of each vehicle in the fleet in real-time and automatic communication directly with management offices to report its location and heading, and status of predetermined events in which the vehicle may be engaged (Abstract/Summary).
Rockwell and Coffee did not specifically teach
executing software corresponding to the computational function block within a runtime environment of a programmable hardware component;
wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state; and
updating program code within the computational function block responsive to triggering by the apparatus including one or more processors.
However, Shionoya (US 2021/0201599 A1) teaches
executing software corresponding to the computational function block within a runtime environment of a programmable hardware component (Paragraphs [0026] and [0027], The ECUs 16 include a processor such as a central processing unit (CPU) or micro-processing unit (MPU) ... The ROMs 18 store software programs, setting files, data, and various libraries to be executed by the ECUs 16) Examiner Comments: Shionoya teaches that each ECU (computational function block) includes a processor (programmable hardware component) that executes software programs stored in the ECU, which is executing software corresponding to the computational function block within a runtime environment of a programmable hardware component.
wherein the computational function block is in the state in which the computational function block is ready to be updated if the computational function block is in an idle state, a shutdown state, or a deactivated state (Paragraph [0058], the night-time download is performed in a state where the other ECUs 16 are stopped) Examiner Comments: Shionoya teaches that the update is performed when the ECU is stopped, which corresponds to the computational function block being in an idle, shutdown, or deactivated state in which it is ready to be updated.
updating program code within the computational function block responsive to triggering by the apparatus including one or more processors (Paragraphs [0032] and [0034], The software installation refers to expanding the downloaded update data 24 in the ROMs 18 of the ECUs 16 and setting the software to a state that can be executed by the ECUs 16 ... The OTA manager 20 expands the downloaded update data 24 in the ROMs 18, and installs the software in the ECUs 16) Examiner Comments: Shionoya teaches that the OTA manager (apparatus including one or more processors) triggers and performs the installation of the update data into the ROM of the ECU, which is updating program code within the computational function block responsive to triggering by the apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Shionoya into the method of Rockwell, for the same reasons set forth with respect to claim 1, so that the software corresponding to the computational function block is executed by a processor of the function block, the function block is ready to be updated when in a stopped, idle, shutdown, or deactivated state, and the program code of the function block is updated responsive to triggering by the apparatus, in order to apply the update without interrupting active functions or causing data loss (Shionoya, Paragraphs [0032], [0034], and [0058]).
Regarding Claim 15, Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya teach
A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a computer program that when executed by a processor, causes a computer to perform the method of claim 13. (Claim 15, “A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, are configured to cause the at least one processor to maintain a compatibility matrix ... determine a compatibility result”) Examiner Comments: Rockwell teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a computer program executed by a processor to perform the method, and the method of claim 13 is taught by Rockwell in view of Coffee and Shionoya as set forth above.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockwell (US 9,639,344 B2) in view of Coffee (US 2004/0039504 A1) and Shionoya (US 2021/0201599 A1), and further in view of Thornburg (US 10,140,783 B2).
Regarding Claim 7, Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya teach
The apparatus according to claim 1.
Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya did not specifically teach wherein the one or more processors, in operation, determine the information on the preparedness based on a ruleset for determining the preparedness of a plurality of computational function blocks based on a state of the computational function block and on a state of the vehicle, wherein the ruleset includes rules for determining the preparedness of the computational function blocks for updating on a per-computational function block basis.
However, Thornburg (US 10,140,783 B2) teaches wherein the one or more processors, in operation, determine the information on the preparedness based on a ruleset for determining the preparedness of a plurality of computational function blocks based on a state of the computational function block and on a state of the vehicle, wherein the ruleset includes rules for determining the preparedness of the computational function blocks for updating on a per-computational function block basis. (Column 9, lines 1-13, “The ECG 110 may receive a data request or software from a cloud server. The ECG 110 may send the software to a target ECU ... The ECG 110 may further monitor the vehicle buses 106 for a response, such as confirmation of receipt of the software update by the target ECU”) Examiner Comments: Thornburg teaches a central gateway determining preparedness (confirmation of receipt, readiness) for individual ECUs using rules obtained from a cloud server (repository) and based on vehicle state (bus monitoring), on a per-ECU basis.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya's teaching into Thornburg's in order to enable remote over-the-air updates and preparedness checks, improving efficiency and allowing updates without physical access by receiving raw data from an electronic control unit (ECU) via one of the vehicle buses, augmenting the raw data with availability, classification, and context information, publishing the raw data to a publish/subscribe topic hosted to the storage, and subscribing at least a second ECU of the vehicle to the topic.
Regarding Claim 8, Rockwell, Coffee, Shionoya, and Thornburg teach
The apparatus according to claim 7.
Thornburg further teaches wherein the computational function block originates from a software repository, wherein the one or more processors, in operation, obtain the ruleset for determining the preparedness of the computational function blocks from the software repository, and/or wherein the apparatus, in operation, controls the update process of the plurality of computational function blocks of the vehicle, wherein the one or more processors, in operation, determine information on the preparedness of the plurality of computational function blocks for updating the plurality of computational function blocks by determining the preparedness of each of the computational function blocks individually using the ruleset, and trigger the update of each of the computational function blocks if the information on the preparedness indicates that each of the computational function blocks is ready to be updated. (Column 4, lines 20-28, “The ECG 110 may receive a data request or software from a cloud server. The ECG 110 may send the software to a target ECU ... The ECG 110 may further monitor the vehicle buses 106 for a response, such as confirmation of receipt of the software update by the target ECU”) Examiner Comments: Thornburg teaches obtaining software and update rules from a repository (cloud server) for individual ECUs, determining preparedness (receipt confirmation) per ECU, and triggering updates on a per-ECU basis.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rockwell, Coffee, and Shionoya's teaching into Thornburg's in order to enable remote over-the-air updates and preparedness checks, improving efficiency and allowing updates without physical access by receiving raw data from an electronic control unit (ECU) via one of the vehicle buses, augmenting the raw data with availability, classification, and context information, publishing the raw data to a publish/subscribe topic hosted to the storage, and subscribing at least a second ECU of the vehicle to the topic.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection necessitated by Applicant's amendment, which relies on the newly cited Shionoya reference.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMIR SOLTANZADEH whose telephone number is (571)272-3451. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am - 5pm ET.
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, Wei Mui can be reached at (571) 272-3708. 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.
/AMIR SOLTANZADEH/Examiner, Art Unit 2191
/WEI Y MUI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2191
Prosecution Insights