DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to Application No. 18/808,417 filed on 8/19/2024. Claims 1-20 have been examined.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/14/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 9-10, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jimenez et al. (hereinafter Jimenez)(US 2022/0407786).
Regarding claims 1 and 17, Jimenez teaches as follows:
A first apparatus (interpreted as the IoT electronic device 110 in figure 7), comprising: a processing circuit (700 in figure 7); and a communication interface (interpreted as the network interface 720 in figure 7)(FIG. 7 is a block diagram of an IoT electronic device 110 containing elements that are configured according to some embodiments. The IoT electronic device 110 can include one or more network interfaces 720, one or more processors 700, and one or more memories 710 containing program code 712, see, ¶ [0147] and figure 7),
wherein the communication interface is configured to receive first signaling from a second apparatus (interpreted as the IoT service orchestrator device 150 in figure 2) indicating one or more of a type of a computing power capability (interpreted as hardware characteristics of resources used in a computing device) that the first apparatus is to report (the IoT service orchestrator device 150 generates 230 a LwM2M request message containing a LwM2M object identifying a group of hardware resources for which characteristics are requested. The IoT service orchestrator device 150 communicates 232 the LwM2M request message (equivalent to applicant’s first signal) through the Internet 180 directed toward an identified IoT electronic device 110 (equivalent to applicant’s first apparatus) among the IoT electronic devices, see, ¶ [0038] and figure 2); and
the processing circuit is configured to report the computing power capability to the second apparatus based on the first signaling (the identified IoT electronic device 110 generates 238 a response message containing information identifying the characteristics of the group of hardware resources of the IoT electronic device 110 which are determined through the LwM2M interface access. The identified IoT electronic device 110 then communicates 240 the response message through the Internet 180 directed toward the IoT service orchestrator device 150, see, ¶ [0040] and figure 2).
Regarding claims 2, 10, and 18, Jimenez teaches as follows:
Wherein the type of the computing power capability comprises at least one of: a processor of the first apparatus, storage space of the first apparatus, a memory of the first apparatus, or a state of charge of the first apparatus (example characteristics of hardware resources that can be determined by the IoT electronic device 110 responsive to the LwM2M command can include, but are not limited to any one or more of: random access memory (RAM) type, storage size, available capacity, read and/or write speed, etc.; read only memory (ROM) type, storage size, available capacity, read and/or write speed, etc.; mass memory storage type, storage size, available capacity, read and/or write speed, etc.; speed of processor (e.g., CPU, GPU, DSP, etc.); maximum speed of processor; wired and/or wireless network interface input and/or output data rate; hardware manufacturer identifier; hardware model identifier; hardware unique identifier (e.g., serial number); available power sources; maximum battery charge capacity; remaining battery capacity; communication quality of service; and/or other hardware component metrics, identifiers, and/or other characteristics, see, ¶ [0039]).
Regarding claims 3, 11, and 19, Jimenez teaches as follows:
Wherein the granularity of the computing power capability comprises at least one of: a granularity of the storage space reported by the first apparatus, a granularity of the memory reported by the first apparatus, or a granularity of the state of charge reported by the first apparatus (some embodiments of the present disclosure are directed to using two new LwM2M Objects to enable an orchestrator node to discover hardware characteristics of IoT hardware devices, the new LwM2M Objects can be: HW-INFO and UNIKERNEL-DATA, which will contain respectively information of the hardware resources disposable on the device (HW-INFO) and the aggregate of that information with the connectivity, battery and other environment characteristics (UNIKERNEL-DATA), see, ¶ [0058])(memory usage ratio, ¶ [0084])(the battery level resource contains the current battery level as a percentage (with a range from 0 to 100, see, ¶ [0128]).
Regarding claim 9, Jimenez teaches the second apparatus (interpreted as the IoT service orchestrator device 150 in figure 2) as presented above. Therefore, Jimenez teaches all limitations as presented above.
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 4-5, 7, 12-13, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jimenez et al. (hereinafter Jimenez)(US 2022/0407786).
Regarding claims 4, 12, and 20, Jimenez teaches as follows:
Receiving second signaling from the second apparatus comprising identification information that identifies a computing power resource, wherein the second signaling indicates the first apparatus to report a usage status of the computing power resource corresponding to the computing power capability of the first apparatus (the LwM2M object contained in the LwM2M request message is a UNIKERNEL data object that identifies at least one of manufacturer of the IoT electronic device; model of the IoT electronic device; and serial number (equivalent to applicant’s identification information) of the IoT electronic device, as the requested characteristic of hardware resources of the IoT electronic device, see, ¶ [0045]); and
sending third signaling (interpreted as the response message) to the second apparatus comprising information about the usage status of the computing power resource (the LwM2M object contained in the LwM2M request message is a UNIKERNEL data object that identifies at least one of: connectivity; network throughput; network latency; memory usage ratio; thermal history; battery level; bootup time; and image size, as the requested characteristic of hardware resources of the IoT electronic device, see, ¶ [0047])(the IoT service orchestrator device 150 receives 242 the response message, through the Internet from the identified IoT electronic device, containing information identifying the characteristics of the group of hardware resources, see, ¶ [0040]).
Jimenez teaches the LwM2M message (first signaling) comprising the identification information and the response message (third signaling) comprising the usage status as presented above.
Jimenez does not explicitly teach receiving the second signaling different from the first signaling to transmit the identification information separately.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jimenez to include receiving or transmitting a separate signaling in order to efficiently reduce a size of the first signaling and reduce transmission delay.
Regarding claims 5 and 13, Jimenez teaches as follows:
Wherein the usage status of the computing power resource comprises a utilization ratio of the computing power resource (the LwM2M object contained in the LwM2M request message is a UNIKERNEL data object that identifies at least one of: connectivity; network throughput; network latency; memory usage ratio; thermal history; battery level; bootup time; and image size, as the requested characteristic of hardware resources of the IoT electronic device, see, ¶ [0047])(the IoT service orchestrator device 150 receives 242 the response message, through the Internet from the identified IoT electronic device, containing information identifying the characteristics of the group of hardware resources, see, ¶ [0040]).
Regarding claims 7 and 15, Jimenez teaches as follows:
Sending the third signaling to the second apparatus when the utilization ratio of the computing power resource exceeds a configured threshold (the orchestrator node 220 could set an observation to the battery level object ‘/3/0/9’ and the signal strength ‘/4/0/2’, obtained as characteristics of a IoT electronic device, so that when the battery is below 30% or the Signal Strength is above −80 decibels (dbM) a notification is sent, see, ¶ [0128]).
Claims 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jimenez et al. (hereinafter Jimenez)(US 2022/0407786) in view of Pinos et al. (hereinafter Pinos)(US 10,644,954).
Regarding claims 6 and 14, Jimenez teaches all limitations as presented above except for the identification information of resource configuration.
Pinos teaches as follows:
Resource monitor 114 may monitor one or more operational parameters of resources in the set of networked resources 105, such as physical resources 120 and cloud resources 140. In some embodiments, resource monitor 114 may include one or more of configuration identifier 360, utilization tracker 362, and resource logger 364. In various embodiments, configuration identifier 360 may be utilized to detect a configuration of a set of networked resources (see, col. 8, lines 36-56 and figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jimenez with Pinos to include the configuration identifier as taught by Pinos in order to efficiently detect a configuration of physical resources of monitored networked resources.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jimenez et al. (hereinafter Jimenez)(US 2022/0407786) in view of Bai et al. (hereinafter Bai)(US 2024/0429986).
Regarding claims 8 and 16, Jimenez teaches as follows:
The identified IoT electronic device 110 then communicates 240 the response message (interpreted as applicant’s third signaling) through the Internet 180 directed toward the IoT service orchestrator device 150. The IoT service orchestrator device 150 receives 242 the response message, through the Internet from the identified IoT electronic device, containing information identifying the characteristics of the group of hardware resources (see, ¶ [0040] and figure 2).
Jimenez does not explicitly teach the specific layer of the signaling.
Bai teaches as follows:
After transmitting the capability value list, the UE may transmit a report that includes a capability set identifier. For example, the UE may transmit information identifying the capability set identifier with a CSI-RS resource indicator (CRI), an SSB indicator (SSBI), a layer 1 (L1) reference signal received power (RSRP), or a signal-to-interference-and-noise ratio (SINR), among other examples in a L1 beam report occasion (see, ¶ [0064] and figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jimenez with Bai to include the Layer (physical layer) 1 signaling as taught by Bai in order for low-latency control of physical transmission.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeong S Park whose telephone number is (571)270-1597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00-4:30 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, Glenton B Burgess can be reached at 571-272-3949. 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.
/JEONG S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454
June 19, 2026
Prosecution Insights