DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10, 11, 13-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoshida et al. (US 2018/0331914).
Re claim 1: Yoshida teaches a network hardware device (102, 104, 106, 108, 110, 300, 400) serving as a distribution module (DM) device comprising a rigid case having a hollow interior (fig, 1); a system on chip (SoC)(402) coupled to a plurality devices such as a memory via a USB 3.0, SATA, or SD interface and multiple RF interfaces via HSCI interface and a PCIe bus (paragraphs 0066-0067), wherein the SoC and coupled devices together serving as a single-board computer (SBC) mounted within the rigid case; a first radio (404) configured to serve as an internet access point and communicably coupled within the rigid case to the SBC; and one or more other radios (408-416) with meshing capabilities and communicably coupled within the rigid case to the SBC (see figs. 1-4A; paragraph 0026-0043, 0065-0074).
Re claim 2: Wherein at least the first radio is configured to send and receive wireless signals in a first band of frequencies (e.g., 3G), and at least one of the one or more other radios is configured to send and receive wireless signals in a second band of frequencies that is different than the first band of frequencies (e.g., 5G).
Re claim 3: Wherein the first radio operates at about a 900 MHz bandwidth, about a 2.4 GHz bandwidth, about a 5 GHz bandwidth, or a about a 6 GHz bandwith and functions as a local access point for Wi-Fi-enabled devices (paragraphs 0020, 0069).
Re claim 4: Wherein at least one of the one or more other radios operates about a 900 MHz bandwidth, about a 2.4 GHz bandwidth, about a 5 GHz bandwidth, or a about a 6 GHz bandwith (paragraph 0073).
Re claim 5: Wherein the one or more other radios comprise a second radio with meshing capabilities and communicably coupled within the rigid case to the SBC, and a third radio with meshing capabilities and communicably coupled within the rigid case to the SBC, wherein the second radio and the third radio both operate at about a 5 GHz bandwidth (fig. 4, paragraph 0071).
Re claim 6: Wherein the second radio and the third radio communicate with one or more other DM devices in a mesh network arrangement (fig. 1 and 4A).
Re claim 7: Wherein the SBC and at least one of the second radio and the third radio are configured to at least one of automatically connect and automatically tune to a second DM device to work cooperatively together, automatically building a cooperative mesh backbone of networked DM devices (i.e., building new switch configuration based on the network condition, paragraph 0074).
Re claim 8: Wherein the second radio is wirelessly communicably coupled with a second DM device and the third radio is communicably coupled with a third DM device, wherein the DM device is at a remote location relative to at least one of the second DM device and the third DM device (i.e., the network hardware devices are remotely located each other as shown in figure 1).
Re claim 10: The DM device controlled by an operating system having an application processor (450) serving as a computing device communicably coupled with the SBC, the computing device having micro controller unit (MCU) driver (460) comprising multiple application programming interfaces (APIs)(462), firmware updater (466), and a message encoder/decoder (464) wherein MCU driver serving an overwatch software program operating thereon, wherein the overwatch software is configured to provide automatic reporting, trouble alerts, and notifications regarding the DM device to a user of the computing device or a display communicably coupled with the computing device (i.e., the error should be reported as quickly as possible to the application, paragraph 0088)(fig. 4B; paragraphs 0086-0089).
Re claim 11: Wherein the overwatch software program instructs the computing device to provide at least one of firmware updates, security software updates, and other software management activities to the SBC for operation and security of the DM device (paragraph 0087).
Re claim 13: Yoshida teaches a system for mesh networking communication in remote locations (i.e., network hardware devices (102-110, 300, 400) are remotely located each other as shown in figure 1), the system comprising two or more network hardware device serving as distribution module (DM) devices each comprising a rigid case (fig. 1) having a hollow interior, a system on chip (SoC)(402) coupled to a plurality devices such as a memory via a USB 3.0, SATA, or SD interface and multiple RF interfaces via HSCI interface and a PCIe bus (paragraphs 0066-0067), wherein the SoC and coupled devices together serving as a single-board computer (SBC) mounted within the rigid case, a first radio (404) configured to serve as an internet access point and communicably coupled within the rigid case to the SBC, a second radio (410) with meshing capabilities and communicably coupled within the rigid case to the SBC, a third radio (412) with meshing capabilities and communicably coupled within the rigid case to the SBC, wherein the second and third radios each operate at a higher bandwidth than the first radio (fig. 4A); and an operating system having an application processor (450) serving as a computing device communicably coupled with the two or more DM devices (102-110 in figure 1), wherein the computing device has a computer program operating thereon such as a micro controller unit (MCU) driver (460) comprising multiple application programming interfaces (APIs)(462), firmware updater (466), and a message encoder/decoder (464), wherein the computer program is configured for management of the SBC of any of the two or more DM devices (fig. 5; paragraphs 0086-0087)(see figs. 1-5; paragraph 0026-0043, 0065-0074; 0086-0091).
Re claim 14: Wherein the first radio operates at about a 2.4 GHz bandwidth and functions as a local access point for Wi-Fi-enabled devices (paragraphs 0020, 0069).
Re claim 15: Wherein the second radio and the third radio each operates at about a 5 GHz bandwidth (paragraph 0073).
Re claim 16: Wherein the computer program is the micro controller unit (MCU) driver (460) serving as an overwatch software program, wherein the overwatch software program is configured to provide automatic reporting, trouble alerts, and notifications regarding at least one of the two or more DM devices to a user of the computing device or a display communicably coupled with the computing device (i.e., the error should be reported as quickly as possible to the application, paragraph 0088)(fig. 4B; paragraphs 0086-0089).
Re claim 17: Wherein the overwatch software program instructs the computing device to provide at least one of firmware updates, security software updates, and other software management commands to the SBC of at least one of the two or more DM devices for operation and security thereof (paragraph 0087).
Re claim 18: Yoshida teaches a network hardware device (102-110, 300, 400) serving as a distribution module (DM) device comprising a rigid case (fig. 1) having a hollow interior; a system on chip (SoC)(402) coupled to a plurality devices such as a memory via a USB 3.0, SATA, or SD interface and multiple RF interfaces via HSCI interface and a PCIe bus (paragraphs 0066-0067), wherein the SoC and coupled devices together serving as a single-board computer (SBC) mounted within the rigid case; a first radio (404) configured to serve as an internet access point and communicably coupled within the rigid case to the SBC; a second radio (410) with meshing capabilities and communicably coupled within the rigid case to the SBC; a third radio (412) with meshing capabilities and communicably coupled within the rigid case to the SBC, wherein the second and third radios each operate at a higher bandwidth (5G) than the first radio (3G); and a plurality of ports (i.e., a power supply (436), a HSCI interface, and PCIe bus interface) extending through the rigid case and at least one of electrically and communicatively coupled with one or more of the SBC, the first radio, the second radio, and the third radio (paragraphs 0066, 0068); and a plurality of external antennae (422) each coupled to at least one of the plurality of ports (see figs. 1-5; paragraph 0026-0043, 0065-0074; 0086-0091).
Re claim 20: Wherein the first radio operates at about a 2.4 GHz bandwidth and the second and third radios each operates at about a 5 GHz bandwidth (paragraphs 0020, 0069, 0073).
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida.
The teachings of Yoshida have been discussed above.
Although, Yoshida teaches the network hardware devices having the rigid case as shown in figure 1, he fairly suggests that the hollow interior of the rigid case is at least twice the volume or twice the area occupied by the SBC, the first radio, and the one or more other radios.
However, it would have been an obvious design variation well within the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made failing to provide any unexpected results for choosing the particular size of the case for locating all components of the network hardware device inside of the case, that is, the size of case can be twice, triple, or quadruple volume/area occupied by all component of the network hardware device parts, and therefore an obvious expedient.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida in view of Miller et al. (US 9547607).
The teachings of Yoshida have been discussed above.
Although, Yoshida teaches the user device (1100) such as a network hardware device comprising an output device (1120) such as display (fig. 11; paragraph 0192-0194), he fairly suggests that the displaying user-selectable options for updating of the device.
However, Miller teaches a user computing device (210) comprising a display (216) displaying a consent request of updating firmware and initiating updating of firmware upon the receipt of user consent (see fig. 2; col. 12, line 66- col. 13, line 29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Miller to the teachings of Yoshida in order to ensure that the user device is in the proper state for updating firmware.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida in view of Barnett, Jr. (US 2020/0351117).
The teachings of Yoshida have been discussed above.
Although, Yoshida teaches the network hardware devices comprising the plurality of port, he fairly suggests that the one of port is coupled to a Power over Ethernet (PoE) injector.
Barnett, Jr. teaches a client device (500B) comprising a PoE injector (529) (see fig. 5B; paragraphs 0087-0093).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Barnett, Jr. to the teachings of Yoshida in order to provide both power and data to the network hardware device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEUNG H LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2401. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:00PM.
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, Steven Paik can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/SEUNG H LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876