DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited in the information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/10/2025 and 06/01/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
(Step 2A, Prong One)
Independent claim 1 recites, “determining, by an in-bag detection agent of the data processing system and using the system data and the ambient temperature data to determine, whether the data processing system is stored in a bag”.
Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, if a claim limitation covers performance that can be executed in the human mind, but for the recitation of generic electronic devices or generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Under their broadest reasonable interpretation and based on the description provided in the Specification, such as paragraphs [0023] and [0031], for instance, the identifying function is a mental process that can be performed through observation, evaluation and judgement based on the obtained system data and ambient temperature data. That is, other than reciting an “an in-bag detection agent of the data processing system” (a generic electronic device or generic computer component), a person may perform, through observation, evaluation and judgement, the features enunciated above.
Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
(Step 2A, Prong Two)
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional limitations of, “obtaining, by the data processing system, system data from a basic input/output system (BIOS) of the data processing system; obtaining, by the data processing system, ambient temperature data from an ambient temperature sensor installed at an air intake portion of the data processing system; … and performing, by the data processing system and in response to determining that the data processing system is stored in the bag, one or more in-bag actions to alleviate a burden placed on the data processing system by the data processing system being in the bag”.
Each of the additional limitation of “obtaining, by the data processing system, system data from a basic input/output system (BIOS) of the data processing system” or “obtaining, by the data processing system, ambient temperature data from an ambient temperature sensor installed at an air intake portion of the data processing system” is an insignificant extra-solution activity under MPEP 2106.05(g), without imposing meaningful limits. The limitation amounts to necessary data gathering. (i.e., all uses of the recited judicial exception require such data gathering or data output).
The practical application requires an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. When so evaluated, the additional limitation of “performing, by the data processing system and in response to determining that the data processing system is stored in the bag, one or more in-bag actions to alleviate a burden placed on the data processing system by the data processing system being in the bag” is merely adding the word performing with the judicial exception that attempts to cover a solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words "apply it", and does not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, and therefore is not indicative of integration into a practical application, see MPEP 2106.05(f). The claim does not recite an improvement in a technology as set forth in MPEP 2106.04(d) and MPEP 2106.05(a). Accordingly, the additional limitations recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
In view of the foregoing, the additional limitations are not sufficient to demonstrate integration of a judicial exception into a practical application.
(Step 2B)
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
The obtain functions represents functions that is recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, for instance, as demonstrated in KOSUGI et al. (US 2019/0073023 A1) paragraph [0062] The temperature of the chassis surface is detected using the embedded controller 31 and the temperature sensor 33 described above, for example. The temperature of the chassis surface may be directly detected by the temperature sensor 33 disposed on the chassis surface or may be a temperature presumed based on the temperature detected by the temperature sensor 33 disposed in a place other than the chassis surface.”) and paragraph [0063] (“Moreover, the mode control portion 40 brings the state into the operating state (S0 state) having low upper limit power consumption (PW_L) periodically by a timer of the embedded controller 31 or by the detection of the reception by the WLAN card 26, and then executes the background processing in the modern standby mode. Moreover, the mode control portion 40 brings the state into the S0ix state when the execution of the background processing is completed in the modern standby mode.”), Ringuette et al. (US 2023/0120233 A1) paragraph [0038] (“FIG. 4 is a schematic flow chart diagram illustrating a method 400 for measuring a parameter to determine a threshold to detect changes in the enclosed space 104 of the computing device 102. The method 400 measures a parameter 402 selected from the group consisting of an airflow rate Q, an air temperature T, and a current supply J at an inlet 112 of a computing device 102. The method 400 may operate over time to determine when a portable electronic device is moved within an enclosed space 104 and may determine 404 when the parameter at the inlet has reached a calibrated threshold. The method may send and/or transmit a signal 406 in response to the parameter reaching the threshold.”), and Meza Arellano et al. (US 2024/0370078 A1) paragraph [0058] (“FIG. 6 depicts a flowchart of an example process for use in the computing system 200 of FIG. 2, consistent with the sequence diagram of FIG. 5, according to various embodiments. Operation 600 determines whether the host (e.g., CPU) enters a low power state such as the S0ix deep idle state. If the answer is false (F), the operation is repeated. If the answer is true (T), the FW of the host notifies the EC via the eSPI bus of the entrance to the low power state, at operation 602. In response, at operation 604, the EC queries the FW via the eSPI to obtain count data and CPU temperature data. Also, at operation 606, the EC obtains skin temperature and battery charge data. In one approach, the EC determines a discharge rate of the battery from multiple data samples of the charge level of the battery. At operation 608, the EC uses the data it has obtained to determine whether it detects a sleep state anomaly. If the answer is true, the EC sets a fail safe mode at operation 610. If the answer is false, the flow continues at operation 600.”)
The additional limitation of “performing, by the data processing system and in response to determining that the data processing system is stored in the bag, one or more in-bag actions to alleviate a burden placed on the data processing system by the data processing system being in the bag” is merely adding the word performing (or “to apply”) with the judicial exception, and does not impose a meaningful limit on practicing the abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Thus, when taken alone, the individual additional limitations do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually.
Therefore, the additional claimed features do not amount to significantly more and the claim is not patent eligible.
The recitations of claims 2-7, 12-15 and 17-20 simply add more detail to or are cumulative to the abstract idea of claims 1, 11 and 16, respectively. Thus, claims 2-7, 12-15 and 17-20 are not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 8, the determining limitation simply add more detail to or are cumulative to the abstract idea of claims. The resetting limitation is directed to applying the judicial exception to generic electronic devices or computer component, the in-bag counter, and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and does not amount to significantly more. Thus, claim 8 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 9, the obtaining limitation add more detail to or are cumulative to the extra-solution activity of data gathering. The determining limitation simply add more detail to or are cumulative to the abstract idea of claims 1. Thus, claim 9 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 10, is merely adding the word performing, alerting or placing with the judicial exception that attempts to cover a solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words "apply it", and does not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, and therefore is not indicative of integration into a practical application and does not amount to significantly more. Thus, claim 10 is not patent eligible.
Examiner’s remark regarding the 101 rejection: Examiner submits that incorporating some features of claim 10 into claim 1 would overcome the 101 rejection of claim 1. More specifically, incorporating either one of … “performing a graceful shutdown of the data processing system” and “placing the data processing system into a low power mode” would overcome the 101 rejection of claim 1 (and similarly claims 11 and 16).
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, 10-11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOSUGI et al. (US 2019/0073023 A1) (“Kosugi”), in view of Ringuette et al. (US 2023/0120233 A1 (“Ringuette”).
Regarding independent claim 1, Kosugi teaches:
A method for managing a data processing system, the method comprising: (Kosugi: [0001] “The present invention relates to an information processing device, a control method, and a program.”)
obtaining, by the data processing system, system data from a basic input/output system (BIOS) of the data processing system; (Kosugi: [0045] “The embedded controller 31 has a temperature table showing the temperature conditions for notifying state changes by monitoring the temperatures detected by the temperature sensor 33 and outputs a notification to the BIOS when predetermined temperature conditions are satisfied based on the temperature table.”) (Kosugi: [0053] “In FIG. 2, the service/utility, the driver, and the BIOS are realized by reading of programs stored in the HDD 23 or the BIOS memory 22 in the main memory 12, and then execution of the programs by the CPU 11. Herein, the power management service portion 41 and the operating environment detecting portion 42 correspond to the service/utility and the power management driver 43 and the power setting processing portion 45 correspond to the driver. The temperature control portion 44 and the temperature event generation portion 46 correspond to the BIOS.”) [The data from the BIOS, such as the data received by the power management driver 43 and power setting processing portion 45, as illustrated in FIG. 2, reads on “obtaining … system data from a basic input/output system (BIOS)”.]
obtaining, by the data processing system, ambient temperature data from an ambient temperature sensor … ; (Kosugi: [0047] “The temperature sensor 33 is disposed in the periphery of a heat source, such as the periphery of the CPU 11, and detects the temperature, for example. The temperature sensor 33 is used when detecting the temperature of the chassis surface, for example.”) [The chassis surface temperature reads on “an ambient temperature”.]
performing, by the data processing system and in response to determining that the data processing system is stored in the bag, one or more in-bag actions to alleviate a burden placed on the data processing system by the data processing system being in the bag. (Kosugi: [0098] “In FIG. 6, the initial state of the Laptop PC 1 is in the modern standby mode and in the S0 state and in the state in which the background processing is executed. The upper limit power consumption in the S0 state is set so that the temperature of the chassis surface is equal to or lower than the temperature TH1 in the case of the usual operating environment, and therefore the temperature does not exceed the temperature TH1 in this state. However, in a sealed state in which the Laptop PC 1 is stored in a bag or the like, for example, no heat transfer occurs, and therefore the temperature of the chassis surface exceeds the temperature TH1 in some cases. An example illustrated in FIG. 6 herein describes processing in the modern standby mode when the Laptop PC 1 is stored in a bag or the like as described above.”) [The sealed state when the laptop is in the bag reads on “… is stored in the bag”. Putting the laptop in the standby mode as the temperature of the chassis surface exceeds the temperature TH1 reads on “one or more in-bag actions to alleviate a burden …”.]
Kosugi does not expressly teach: obtaining, by the data processing system, ambient temperature data from an ambient temperature sensor installed at an air intake portion of the data processing system; determining, by an in-bag detection agent of the data processing system and using the system data and the ambient temperature data to determine, whether the data processing system is stored in a bag.
Ringuette teaches:
obtaining, by the data processing system, ambient temperature data from an ambient temperature sensor installed at an air intake portion of the data processing system; determining, by an in-bag detection agent of the data processing system and using the system data and the ambient temperature data to determine, whether the data processing system is stored in a bag. (Ringuette: [0003] “In one embodiment, a system is described as having a processor, a sensor, and memory. The processor controls the sensor, and the memory stores code executable by the processor to determine when a portable electronic device is moved within an enclosed space. The system measures a parameter of airflow rate, air temperature, or current supply at an inlet of a computing device and determines when the measured parameter at the inlet reaches a threshold. In response to the sensor determining that the parameter reached the threshold, the system sends a signal.”) (Ringuette: [0014] “In this example, the present disclosure detects restricted airflow based on parameters in the surrounding environment. The system may detect when a computing device, e.g., laptop, is placed within an enclosed space, such as a laptop bag, based on changes to the set of operating parameters, such as the operating temperature of the processor. The system may detect the restricted airflow within the bag by monitoring the inlet air temperature, the fan RPM for current load, and/or the airflow rate through the enclosed system. In other words, the system may detect measured parameters of the surrounding environment related to the internal parameters to control the operation of the computing device and/or processor. When a relative threshold measurement (e.g., the difference between inlet and outlet temperatures) reaches or exceeds a threshold, the system may decrease the system power to the processor to reduce or maintain operating temperatures within the enclosed bag. This may reduce user discomfort, e.g., when removing the laptop from a bag. The system may then restore system power when the temperature (or other relevant parameters) are within the threshold values.”) (Ringuette: [0017] The system 100 determines when a portable or an electronic computing device 102, e.g., laptop 116, is moved within an enclosed space 104, such as the laptop bag 128. Similarly, the system 100 detects when the desktop 118 is covered with a desktop cover 130 and/or airflow to the server 120 is obstructed by the server rack 132 or other debris. The system 100 determines when the measured parameter at the inlet 112 reaches a threshold and sends a signal in response to the sensor 110 determining that the parameter reached the threshold. As used herein, the threshold is a relative and/or absolute parameter value that establishes a limit or tolerance value for the parameter. For example, the system 100 may include an absolute threshold value for the airflow rate Q and/or the air temperature T at the inlet 112 and/or the current supply J to a fan 134 that cools the computing device 102. Also, the system 100 may include relative threshold values of the airflow rate Q, the air temperature T, and/or the RPM of the fan 134 related to the current supply J. As another example, the system 100 may include a relative threshold for the difference of one or more parameters at the inlet 112 and the outlet 114.”) [The inlet temperature reads on “an air intake portion …”. The threshold values read on the system data”. The process of determining that the portable electronic device has been placed within the bag, as illustrated in FIG. 4 step 402, executed on the processor, reads on “an in-bag detection agent”.]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Kosugi and Ringuette before them, to modify the operation of the information processing device at lower power mode to prevent temperature rise when the information processing device is stored in the bag, to incorporate determining that the information processing device is indeed stored in the bag.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to do this modification because it would allow for setting the efficient performance mode of the information processing device based on the determined state of the information processing device being in the bag. (Ringuette: [0012] “Changes in the computing environment of a computing device may increase the operating temperature, speed of the processor, current/voltage distributed to components of the computing device, and/or fan rotations per minute (RPM). Measurement of a parameter related to the airflow rate, air temperature, or current supply of the environment surrounding the computing device over time may enable the detection of changes to the environment and/or enclosed space surrounding the computing device. The computing device may operate in an enclosed space, such as a bag, at a safe but elevated temperature that is uncomfortable to the touch. The temperature at which the computing device becomes “uncomfortable” may not be a universal absolute value. For example, sensing an absolute thermal limit when the device is in the bag may limit the performance metrics for the computing device. Similarly, an incorrect determination of the placement of the computing device, e.g., detecting that it is outside a bag when it is within the bag, may result in inefficient performance.”)
Regarding claim 10, Kosugi and Ringuette teach all the claimed features of claim 1. Kosugi further teaches:
wherein the one or more in-bag actions comprise at least one of performing a graceful shutdown of the data processing system, alerting a user of the data processing system, or placing the data processing system into a low power mode. (Kosugi: [0098] as discussed in claim `) [The standby mode reads on “a low power mode”.]
Regarding independent claim 11:
The claim recites similar limitations as corresponding claim 1 and is rejected using the same teachings and rationale.
Regarding independent claim 16:
The claim recites similar limitations as corresponding claim 1 and is rejected using the same teachings and rationale.
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL W CHOI whose telephone number is (571)270-5069. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at (571) 272-9774. 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.
/MICHAEL W CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Prosecution Insights