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 the claimed listing filed in the Preliminary Amendment on 06/27/2024.
Claims 10, 13, and 23 are canceled. Claims 1-9, 11-12, 14-22 are pending.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11-12, 14, 15-18, 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Enomori et al., US PAP, Pub. No. US 2009/0235244 A1, in view of
Riverbed, “SteelConnect Manager User’s Guide”, 2017, version 2.8.2 , https://support.riverbed.com, 262 pages,
As per Claim 1: Enomori discloses the limitations in bold below, 1. A home appliance comprising:
a communication unit configured to communicate with a management server; and
a controller in which software is installed,
(See in FIG. 1A, #1: ‘communication unit’, #2: ‘management server’ , #13, #14, or #15: ‘a controller’)
wherein the communication unit is configured to:
transmit an inquiry message of upgrade software to the management server [ based on a preset upgrade schedule];
(See in FIG. 3, #1200, #1203, and FIG. 5: ‘transmit an inquiry message of upgrade software’, #2: ‘management server’ , #13, #14, or #15: ‘a controller’, and [0007]: ‘and
provided with an information equipment control unit that
requests a software version to the information equipment that
stores a software, and a service control unit that requests’ )
and
download upgrade software data transmitted from the management server based on the inquiry message (FIG. 4B)
Enomori has a user network that connects to appliances and communication devices connecting to a management server to transmit a request with information to the management server, and to receive upgrade software from the management server the software version inquiry.
Enomori does not explicitly show receiving the download software “based on a preset upgrade schedule”.
Riverbed discloses transmitting an inquiry message of upgrade software of “SteelConnect appliance” to the management server is “based on a preset upgrade schedule” (See Riverbed: p. 55, in “Upgrade overview”: ‘The network administrator can schedule the upgrade time and day and reschedule pending upgrades…..For more control, SteelConnect Manager (SCM) provides the ability to schedule firmware upgrades at a date and time of your choosing.’. See p. 58-60”, in “Scheduling firmware upgrades”.
Scheduling an upgrade/update is a conventional process where, with scheduling, it allows users to choose their time convenient, users simply provide software information and time for starting the upgrade/update process. It is as usual as any software upgrade/update operation.
Therefore, it would be obvious to an ordinary of skills in the art before the effective filing of the application to combine the teaching of Enomori for requesting appliance software upgrade with the teaching of Riverbed for making an upgrade schedule. The combination would yield predictable results because the scheduled software update/upgrade is a conventional process. It would be used when users need the process to occur at a convenient time.
As per Claim 2: Enomori and combining Riverbed, where Enomori discloses the limitations in bold below:
2. The home appliance of claim 1, wherein the communication unit is configured to:
transmit information about the software to the management server; and
(Enomori: FIG. 3, e.g. #1209, and data out to “User Management Server 2” from the straight line “Communication Device 12” )
receive and store [the upgrade schedule] transmitted from the management server based on the information about the software.
(Enomori: FIG. 3, e.g. #1212, and data in from “User Management Server 2” to the straight line “Communication Device 12”, and in FIG. 5, the transmitted data received and store in “User Terminal”)
Enomori does not explicitly address the limitation of receiving and storing “the upgrade schedule”, but rather the transmitted information about the software (E.g. see in FIG. 5).
Riverbed discloses receiving and storing the limitation of “the upgrade schedule” (Riverbed: p. 59, Figures, 6-6, 6-7, SCM, a local host GUI allow scheduling software upgraded. A submit button in Figure 6-7 will store scheduled information, where user is connected to internet to edit the GUI: See p. 53 within “Viewing site and appliance status”. See in p. 111, 112, in the Field with Keep-Alive and Hold Time)
As noted: Scheduling an upgrade/update is a conventional process where user can make a update schedule at a host site; thus both the host server and user can transmit or receive information of the update schedule.
Therefore, it would be obvious to an ordinary of skills in the art before the effective filing of the application to combine the teaching of Enomori for information about appliance software upgrades from the management server with the teaching of Riverbed for user communications using a schedule GUI for making an upgrade schedule. The combination would yield predictable results because transmitting and receiving information is a conventional process in network communications.
As per Claim 3: Enomori and combining Riverbed, where Enomori further discloses the limitations:
3. The home appliance of claim 2, wherein the information about the software includes version information and list information of the software.
(Enomori: FIG. 5. #115)
As per Claim 4: Enomori and combining Riverbed, where Enomori further discloses the limitations:
4. The home appliance of claim 1, wherein the communication unit includes a storage configured to store the upgrade software data.
(Enomori: FIG. 1B and FIG. 1C, the storage units)
As per Claim 5: Enomori and combining Riverbed, where Enomori further discloses the limitations:
5. The home appliance of claim 1, wherein the communication unit is configured to:
receive a download start request message from the management server;
transmit a download start response message, which is a response to the download start request message, to the management server; and
transmit a download start notification message to the controller and not transmit download start notification message to the management server before the download starts.
(Enomori: FIG. 3, User Terminal 11, Information Appliance-A 13, Communication Device 12, referred to the receive information )
As per Claim 7: Enomori and combining Riverbed, where Enomori discloses the limitations in bold below:
7. The home appliance of claim 1, wherein the upgrade software data includes at least one of [upgrade firmware data corresponding to at least one firmware] and upgrade content program data corresponding to at least one content program.
Enomori: FIGs. 2E-2F, show the update software data (data shown #803 , #903) to include version numbers and ‘xxxxx” as update contents and ‘XXXXX’ as the upgrade software with control information corresponding in the same product ID rows, but
Enomori does not explicitly address the upgrade software data includes at least one of
“upgrade firmware data corresponding to at least one firmware”.
Riverbed discloses “upgrade firmware data corresponding to at least one firmware” (See Figure 6-13, in p. 62).
It should be noted that firmware is also software, and it is for controlling.
Therefore, it would be obvious to an ordinary of skills before the effective filing of the application to modify the type of controlling software in the teaching of Enomori to the teaching of upgrading firmware of Riverbed; the modification would be obvious because firmware is only specific software used for home appliance.
As per Claim 8: Enomori and combining Riverbed, where Enomori discloses the limitations in bold below:
8. The home appliance of claim 1, wherein the upgrade software data includes upgrade firmware data corresponding to firmware and upgrade content program data executed on the firmware,
(Enomori: FIGs. 2E-2F, show the update software data (data shown #803 , #903) to include update contents ‘xxxxx’ and ‘XXXXX’ or control information corresponding in the same product ID rows. The update content is components of update software for appliances connected with home network (see in [0006, 0007].
and the upgrade content program data is data on a new content program not installed in the home appliance (Enomori: See claim 2, in the p. 8 “….the first communications process unit transmits an update request of the information equipment to the terminal device, when the software version stored in the first server is newer than the software version stored in the information appliance.”).
Enomori does not explicitly address the upgrade software data includes at least one of
“upgrade firmware data corresponding to firmware”.
Riverbed discloses “upgrade firmware data corresponding to firmware” (See Figure 6-13, in p. 62).
It should be noted that Firmware is also software and it is for controlling.
Therefore, it would be obvious to an ordinary of skills before the effective filing of the application to modify the type of controlling software in the teaching of Enomori to the upgrade firmware of Riverbed; the modification would be obvious because firmware is only specific software used for home appliance.
As per Claim 9: Enomori and combining Riverbed, where Enomori discloses the limitations:
9. The home appliance of claim 1, wherein the communication unit writes the downloaded upgrade software data in the controller, and the upgrade software is installed in the controller.
(Enomori: in [0091] ‘When the software should be updated, the software is once downloaded at the user management server 2 to be able to install in each information appliance by adapting with a
control system of each information appliance’)
As per Claim 11: Claim is directed to a method that is performs the functionality provided in accordance to the limitations in bold below that corresponding to the limitation of claim 1.
Regarding,
Riverbed discloses A method of upgrading software of a home appliance performed by the home appliance, comprising:
checking whether upgrade software is present in a management server based on a preset schedule;
automatically downloading and storing upgrade software data from the management server when the upgrade software data corresponding to the upgrade software is registered in the management server;
(See in FIG. 3, #1200, #1203, FIG. 4A #2000, #2001,
and FIG. 5: ‘transmit an inquiry message of upgrade software’, #2: ‘management server’ , #13, #14, or #15: ‘a controller’, and [0007]: ‘and
provided with an information equipment control unit that
requests a software version to the information equipment that
stores a software, and a service control unit that requests’ ) and
writing the downloaded upgrade software data in the controller of the home appliance and upgrading the software.
(Enomori: FIG. 4B, and in [0091] ‘When the software should be updated, the software is once downloaded at the user management server 2 to be able to install in each information appliance by adapting with a control system of each information appliance’)
Enomori does not explicitly show receiving the download software based on: “based on a preset schedule”.
Riverbed discloses transmitting an inquiry message of upgrade software of “SteelConnect appliance” to the management server is “based on a preset schedule” (See Riverbed: p. 55, in “Upgrade overview”: ‘The network administrator can schedule the upgrade time and day and reschedule pending upgrades…..For more control, SteelConnect Manager (SCM) provides the ability to schedule firmware upgrades at a date and time of your choosing.’. See p. 58-60”, in “Scheduling firmware upgrades”.
Scheduling an upgrade/update is a conventional process where, with scheduling, it allows users to choose their time convenient, users simply provide software information and time for starting the upgrade/update process. It is as usual as any software upgrade/update operation.
Therefore, it would be obvious to an ordinary of skills in the art before the effective filing of the application to combine the teaching of Enomori for requesting appliance software upgrade with the teaching of Riverbed for making an upgrade schedule. The combination would yield predictable results because the scheduled software update/upgrade is a conventional process. It would be used when users need the process to occur at a convenient time.
As per Claim 12: Enomori and combining Riverbed, where Enomori further discloses the limitations:
12. The method of claim 11, further comprising notifying the management server of the completion of the download of the upgrade software data after the downloading and storing,
(Enomori: FIGs. 4A, 4B)
wherein the upgrading includes writing the downloaded upgrade software data in the controller and upgrading the software based on a selection event of a user.
(Enomori: in [0091] ‘When the software should be updated, the software is once downloaded at the user management server 2 to be able to install in each information appliance by adapting with a
control system of each information appliance’)
As per Claim 14: Enomori and combining Riverbed,
Enomori does not explicitly address the limitations below, where
Riverbed discloses,
14. The method of claim 11, wherein the downloading and storing includes taking over and storing the upgrade software by re-trying the download of the upgrade software after a predetermined time has elapsed when the download of the upgrade software is interrupted
(Riverbed: p. 157 in ‘Overview’: ‘…maintains uninterrupted service in the event of a power, hardware, software, or WAN uplink failure…’ , and
p.169: in item 3, ‘….If the appliance is online, but the status indicates that the upgrade has failed, select the 5030 node. Click Actions, select Retry Upgrade, and click Confirm’.
Enomori does not explicitly mention the interrupt issue, but interruption is an issue in online software upgrading, and the retry is only confirming to a regulation and the requirement for an incompletion recognized by developers.
Therefore, it would be obvious to an ordinary of skills in the arts before the effective filing of the application to include in the appliance software upgrade in the teaching of Enomori with resolving software upgrading in the interruption of Riverbed to conform to a regulation and requirement in the software upgrading process that is recognized by developers.
As per claims 15: Claim 15 is directed to a management server coupled to the home appliance of claim 1. Claim 15 recites the limitations that have functionality correspondingly to the limitations of claim 1. The claim would be rejected with the same rationales corresponding to the rationales addressed in claim 1.
As per claims 16-17: Claims 16-17 are directed to a management server coupled to the home appliance of claims 2, 3. Claims 16-17 recite the limitations that have functionality correspondingly to the limitations of claims 2-3. The claims would be rejected with the same rationales corresponding to the rationales addressed in claims 2-3.
As per claim 18:
Enomori and combining Riverbed as of claim 15, where Enomori further discloses the limitations:
18. The management server of claim 15, wherein the communication unit is configured to:
transmit an inquiry response message, which is a response to the inquiry message,
(See in FIG. 3, #1203 and #1204)
to the home appliance and then transmit a download start request message to the home appliance (See in FIG. 3, #1205, #1206, #1207)
receive a download start response message, which is a response to the download start request message, from the home appliance; and
(See in FIG. 3, #1215)
upload the upgrade software data to the home appliance based on the reception of the download start response message.
(See in FIG. 3, #1216)
As per claims 20-21, 22: Claims 20-21 and Claim 22 are directed to a management server coupled to the home appliance of claims 7- 8 and claim 5, respectively. Claims 20-21, 22 recite the limitations that have functionality correspondingly to the limitations of claims 7-8, and claim 5. The claims would be rejected with the same rationales corresponding to the rationales addressed in claims 7-8, 5.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ted T Vo whose telephone number is (571)272-3706. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm 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 Y 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.
TTV
July 10, 2026
/Ted T. Vo/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2191
Prosecution Insights