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 Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 7 appears to be missing a “:” after comprising, for clarity please insert “:” after comprising. 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.
Claim 6 is 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 6 recites the limitation "all the data packets" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
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, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hakata et al (USPN 20110175732) in view of Lee et al (USPN 20140177604).
Regarding claim 1, Hakata discloses
method for querying and responding to grouped electronic shelf labels, comprising: (for communication between electronic shelf labels/ESL, FIG. 1 #1-1 to 3-p and server/control center, FIG. 1 #10, via base station, FIG. 1 #1-3 [0009-0014, 0018]
grouping, by a control center, electronic shelf labels managed by each base station (server communicates with ESLs in groups 1-3 via respective base stations 1-3 based on proximity of ESLs with a respective base station [0009-0011], FIG. 1
issuing, by the control center, data to designated electronic shelf labels respectively through the base station (data to be displayed on ESLs are stored on server and the server transmits updates and ESL data to particular ESL using ESL tag/ESL label number via base station [0010, 0020], FIG. 2
Hakata does not expressly disclose sending, by a base station, a group query instruction to the designated electronic shelf labels on a group basis; reporting, by each of the electronic shelf labels, a response results to the base station based on the group query instruction
Lee discloses sending, by a base station, a group query instruction to the designated electronic shelf labels on a group basis (gateway/base station, FIGs. 1, 5 #200, broadcasts a wakeup message to a group of tags/ESL, FIGs. 1, 5 #300, it manages [0044, 0060, 0081-0083]
reporting, by each of the electronic shelf labels, a response results to the base station based on the group query instruction (each tag/ESL reports back with an update data request [0069, 0092], FIG. 6
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “sending, by a base station, a group query instruction to the designated electronic shelf labels on a group basis; reporting, by each of the electronic shelf labels, a response results to the base station based on the group query instruction” as taught by Lee into Hakata’s system with the motivation to enable each base station/gateway to quickly communicate with a plurality of tags/ESLs by using broadcasting to conserve energy.
Regarding claim 7, Hakata discloses
a system for querying and responding to grouped electronic shelf labels, comprising a control center, a base station, and electronic shelf labels; (system, FIG. 1, comprising server/control center, FIG. 1 #10, base station, FIG. 1 #1-3, and electronic shelf labels/ESL, FIG. 1 #1-1 to 3-p for communication the devices [0009-0014, 0018]
the control center is configured to group electronic shelf labels managed by each base station (server communicates with ESLs in groups 1-3 via respective base stations 1-3 based on proximity of ESLs with a respective base station [0009-0011], FIG. 1
and issue data to designated electronic shelf labels respectively through the base station (data to be displayed on ESLs are stored on server and the server transmits updates and ESL data to particular ESL using ESL tag/ESL label number via base station [0010, 0020], FIG. 2
Hakata does not expressly disclose the base station is configured to send a group query instruction to the designated electronic shelf labels on a group basis; each of the electronic shelf labels is configured to report response results to the base station based on the group query instruction
Lee discloses the base station is configured to send a group query instruction to the designated electronic shelf labels on a group basis (gateway/base station, FIGs. 1, 5 #200, broadcasts a wakeup message to a group of tags/ESL, FIGs. 1, 5 #300, it manages [0044, 0060, 0081-0083]
each of the electronic shelf labels is configured to report response results to the base station based on the group query instruction (each tag/ESL reports back with an update data request [0069, 0092], FIG. 6
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “the base station is configured to send a group query instruction to the designated electronic shelf labels on a group basis; each of the electronic shelf labels is configured to report response results to the base station based on the group query instruction” as taught by Lee into Hakata’s system with the motivation to enable each base station/gateway to quickly communicate with a plurality of tags/ESLs by using broadcasting to conserve energy.
Claims 2, 4, 8, 10, 13 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hakata in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 7, and in further view of Park et al (USPN 20150348450)
Regarding claims 2, 8, 13, Lee discloses “an electronic shelf label identification” wakeup message includes both ESL tag identifier and gateway identifying information [0016, 0083, 0084]
“the base station comprising a sending module which is configured to” gateway/base station comprising communication modules, FIG. 3 #211, 212, for sending wakup signal [0056-0060], FIGs. 5, 6
Combined system of Hakata and Lee does not expressly disclose “wherein the group query instruction comprises a group number and an electronic shelf label identification; the base station configured to send a group query instruction to the designated electronic shelf labels in each group according to group number and an electronic shelf label identification, on a group basis”
Park discloses group of ESLs identified via group identification and each ESL identified by MAC address used for communicating to group and individual ESL [0068, 0069, 0161-0163], FIG. 12
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “wherein the group query instruction comprises a group number and an electronic shelf label identification; the base station configured to send a group query instruction to the designated electronic shelf labels in each group according to group number and an electronic shelf label identification, on a group basis” as taught by Park into combined system of Hakata and Lee with the motivation to replace base station identification, as taught by Lee, with ESL group id as taught by Park in order to quickly communicate with a plurality of tags/ESLs by using broadcasting to conserve energy.
Regarding claims 3, 9, 14, Lee discloses “wherein the group query instruction comprises response sending time; each of the electronic shelf labels comprising a reporting module which is configured to report a response result to the base station according to the response sending time” wake up message carries timeslot and slice time information that the ESL uses to determine when it should transmit its own response [0016, 0072, 0084], FIGs. 2 #310, 7
Regarding claims 4, 10, 15, Lee discloses “wherein the group query instruction comprises response sending time; each of the electronic shelf labels comprising a calculating module which is configured to calculate a starting time point for data packet sending according to the response sending time, and report a response result to the base station at the starting time point for data packet sending” ESL, FIG. 4 #320, calculates remaining sleep time which directly determines ESL’s starting time point for waking up and transmitting its update data request [0023, 0094, 0095, 0106]
Claims 6, 12, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hakata in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 7, and in further view of Byun (USPN 20150332356)
Regarding claims 6, 12, 17, Hakata discloses “wherein the base station further configured to report all data packets to the control center” base station receiving, e.g. FIG. 1 #BS1, for receiving communication from its associated group of ESLs and reporting to server [0011-0013]
Lee discloses the base station comprising a transmission module which is configured to” gateway/base station comprising communication modules, FIG. 3 #211, 212, for transmission [0056-0060], FIGs. 5, 6
Combined system of Hakata and Lee does not expressly disclose “which is configured to report all data packets to the control center after all the data packets are received”
Byun discloses ESL gateway, FIG. 8 #200, aggregating identification information, display resolution information, and member registration request for transmission to server [0140-0142], FIG. 8
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “which is configured to report all data packets to the control center after all the data packets are received” as taught by Byun into combined system of Hakata and Lee with the motivation to reduce communication between base station/gateway and server for energy saving, reduced spectrum usage, and reduced processing at both base station/gateway and server.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 11, 13 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhuang et al (USPN 20220327299) FIG. 1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F campus 10:30-5pm, telework 6pm-8pm| Telework count days.
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, Ian N Moore can be reached at (571)272-3085. 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.
/THAI NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights