DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to 8/12/2024.
Claims 1-11 are pending.
Claims 1-2, 4-11 are rejected.
Claim 3 is objected to.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in the instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/12/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-5, 7, 9, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 line 3 “the cluster nodes” should be corrected to “the cluster member nodes”
Claims 3 line 1 “nodes” should be corrected to “node”
Claim 4 line 2 “GJO” should be written as Golden Jackal Optimization (GJO) as it is the first instance of the acronym being used in the claims
Claim 5 line 2 “TDMA” should be written as Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) as it is the first instance of the acronym being used in the claims
Claim 7 line 10 “includes” should be corrected to “including”
Claim 7 line 25 should be corrected to include “and” for form of listing
Claim 9 line 2 “anyone or more” should be corrected to “any one or more”
Claim 11 line 1 “UAV” should be written as Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) as it is the first instance of the acronym being used in the claims
line 4 “EH” should be written as energy harvesting (EH) as it is the first instance of the acronym being used in the claims
line 7 “Jackel” should be written as “Jackal”
line 9 TDMA should be written as Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) as it is the first instance of the acronym being used in the claims
line 15 “A method” should be removed
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 2, 4, 7-8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “if energy of a node is greater than zero” in line 2-3. It is not clear to which node the limitation “a node” refers to. For the purposes of examination, it will be understood as referring to each of “the cluster member nodes”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the selected CH" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the selection of CH” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the cellular network connection” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 7, the phrase "like" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 7, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the threshold value” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “the EH enabled sensor nodes” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites “the sensor nodes” in line 1. It is not clear to which nodes the limitation refers to. For the purposes of examination, it will be understood as referring to the “underwater sensor nodes”
Claim 11 recites “if energy of node is greater than zero” in line 8-9 and “the node” in line 10. It is not clear to which node the limitation refers to. For the purposes of examination, it will be understood as referring to each of the “underwater sensor nodes”.
Claim 11 recites “the nodes” in line 18. It is not clear to which node the limitation refers to. For the purposes of examination, it will be understood as referring to each of the “underwater sensor nodes”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 5, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Z. Liu, X. Meng, Y. Yang, K. Ma and X. Guan, "Energy-Efficient UAV-Aided Ocean Monitoring Networks: Joint Resource Allocation and Trajectory Design,” hereinafter Liu, in view of R. Ma, R. Wang, G. Liu, W. Meng and X. Liu, "UAV-Aided Cooperative Data Collection Scheme for Ocean Monitoring Networks," hereinafter Ma.
Regarding Claim 1, Liu discloses a system for establishing energy-optimized UAV-assisted underwater wireless sensor network comprising
plurality of underwater sensor nodes, said sensor nodes are clustered, whereby cluster member nodes send data to a cluster head (CH) node (Liu Fig. 1; Section III, A discloses M sensor clusters; the cluster heads (CHs) of each group process and transmit data packets acquired from member nodes to their exclusively paired surface sinks);
plurality of energy harvesting (EH)-enabled nodes deployed over surface of the water for receiving data sent from said CH node (Liu Fig. 1; Section III, A discloses the cluster heads (CHs) of each group process and transmit data packets acquired from member nodes to their exclusively paired surface sinks);
one or more Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) for receiving data from said CH node or said EH enabled nodes (Liu Fig. 1; Section III, A discloses that data are forwarded to a periodically flying rotary-wing UAV; Section VI, A discloses a simulation setup where CHs transmit data to their corresponding surface buoys while the buoys upload data to a flying UAV);
a UAV traffic controller (UTC) to control the UAVs including connecting the UAVs to cellular network (Liu Fig. 1; Section I discloses data transmission from sinks (buoys) to a terrestrial control center; further discloses energy efficiency of sensors and buoys with space-air-ground-ocean integrated networks (in the sixth generation communication systems) for a possible solution).
Liu fails to explicitly disclose energy harvesting (EH)-enabled nodes.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ma more specifically discloses energy harvesting (EH)-enabled nodes (Ma Section II, D discloses that SNs deployed on sea surface are easy to be recharged via solar).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the buoys (sinks) of Liu with the sink nodes (SNs) of Ma as recharging surface level SNs are more cost effective when compared to that of underwater sensor nodes.
Regarding Claim 5, Liu in view of Ma discloses the system of claim 1. In the obvious combination, Liu further discloses wherein the sensor nodes are clustered based on TDMA scheduling to enhance the network's efficiency and energy utilization (Liu see at least Fig. 2 disclosing Sensor-to-Buoy Information Transfer; Section III, A discloses that before the UAV taking off, the transmit power and time scheduling of buoys and underwater CH sensors, as well as the UAV’s trajectory are all optimized to maximize the system EE during the complete mission period Ttotal).
Regarding Claim 5, Liu in view of Ma discloses the system of claim 1. In the obvious combination, Ma more specifically discloses wherein the sensor nodes are clustered based on TDMA scheduling to enhance the network's efficiency and energy utilization (Ma at least Section II, A discloses to ensure timely end-to-end data collection (i.e., a two-segment transmission between the USNs to SNs to UAV) and, at the same time, to reduce co-channel interference, USNs in the same cluster perform their transmissions in FDMA manner and to improve efficiency; however, USNs in different clusters can reuse the same underwater acoustic channel).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the buoys (sinks) of Liu with the sink nodes (SNs) of Ma as recharging surface level SNs are more cost effective when compared to that of underwater sensor nodes.
Regarding Claim 9, Liu in view of Ma discloses the system of claim 1. In the obvious combination, Liu further discloses wherein the sensor nodes include anyone or more of acoustic sensors, pressure sensors, temperature sensors, salinity sensors, dissolved oxygen sensors, turbidity sensors, chemical sensors (Liu at least Section I discloses underwater acoustic sensor networks).
Regarding Claim 10, Liu in view of Ma discloses the system of claim 1. In the obvious combination, Ma more specifically discloses wherein the EH enabled nodes are powered through solar-harvesting method (Ma Section II, D discloses that SNs deployed on sea surface are easy to be recharged via solar).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the buoys (sinks) of Liu with the sink nodes (SNs) of Ma as recharging surface level SNs are more cost effective when compared to that of underwater sensor nodes.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Ma as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of J. Geng et al., "Coverage optimization of wireless sensor networks with improved golden jackal optimization," hereinafter Geng.
Regarding Claim 4, Liu in view of Ma discloses the system of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the selection of CH is done using GJO method which includes Search Behavior, Population-Based Approach, creating an Objective Function, Foraging and Hunting, Movement and Interaction, Exploration and Exploitation, Memory and Learning and finally Termination Criteria.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Geng more specifically discloses wherein the selection of CH is done using GJO method which includes Search Behavior, Population-Based Approach, creating an Objective Function, Foraging and Hunting, Movement and Interaction, Exploration and Exploitation, Memory and Learning and finally Termination Criteria (Geng at least Section I discloses distribution of wireless sensor network nodes and network coverage optimization model based on: the Golden jackal optimization – a novel population-based algorithm inspired by the cooperative foraging mechanism of golden jackals proposed by Chopra et al.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Liu in view of Ma with the teachings of Geng for providing better network coverage.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Ma as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Lamego et al. US 20210022676 A1, hereinafter Lamego.
Regarding Claim 6, Liu in view of Ma discloses the system of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose includes Battery Fuel Gauge ICs to measure energy levels of the EH enabled nodes and cluster member nodes.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lamego more specifically discloses includes Battery Fuel Gauge ICs to measure energy levels of the EH enabled nodes and cluster member nodes (Lamego at least [0004-0006, 0013] discloses a monitoring device, including sensors, with a fuel gauge system that is used to measure the battery life of the device; Fig. 3, [0164] discloses components in the device including the power management circuitry 312, including energy harvesting circuitries, batteries, and/or battery fuel gauge circuitries).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Liu in view of Ma with the teachings of Lamego for better monitoring and estimation of battery life in devices including sensors.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Ma as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of G. Han, Z. Zhou, Y. Zhang, M. Martínez-García, Y. Peng and L. Xie, "Sleep-Scheduling-Based Hierarchical Data Collection Algorithm for Gliders in Underwater Acoustic Sensor Networks," hereinafter Han.
Regarding Claim 8, Liu in view of Ma discloses the system of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein cluster-member nodes including the nodes which are closely located to each other, one of two such nodes, is put to sleep mode until its energy gets lower than the threshold value using sleep-scheduling mechanism.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Han more specifically discloses wherein cluster-member nodes including the nodes which are closely located to each other, one of two such nodes, is put to sleep mode until its energy gets lower than the threshold value using sleep-scheduling mechanism (Han Section IV, A discloses a Sleep-Scheduling Algorithm where nodes in one cube (i.e., a divided section in the underwater network) are in standby, while those in the adjacent cube are operation; the nodes sleep and work alternately according to a schedule, to save their energy).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Liu in view of Ma with the teachings of Han for the benefit of energy efficiency.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is 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.
Claims 2, 7, and 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Popescu D, Stoican F, Stamatescu G, Chenaru O, Ichim L. A Survey of Collaborative UAV-WSN Systems for Efficient Monitoring
Somula R, Cho Y, Mohanta BK. SWARAM: Osprey Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy-Efficient Cluster Head Selection for Wireless Sensor Network-Based Internet of Things
Fink et al. US 20260172846 A1
Kohno et al. US 20240405890 A1
Xian et al. US 20240422714 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEWON KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-6524. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, GARY MUI can be reached at (571)270-1420. 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.
/Y.K./ Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/GARY MUI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights