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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 17th, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
This Office Action is in response to the communications for the present US application number 18/833,116 last filed on February 17th, 2026.
Claims 1-12 and 16 were previously cancelled.
Claims 13, 19-21, 24, and 25 were amended.
Claim 26 was newly added.
Claims 13-15 and 17-26 remain pending and have been examined, directed to COMMUNICATION CONTROL DEVICE, VEHICLE, COMMUNICATION CONTROL METHOD, AND COMMUNICATION CONTROL PROGRAM.
Upon further review of the latest claim amendments along with the applicant’s representative’s response, the examiner reviewed the applied reference and respectfully disagrees.
With respect to the 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejection, using Doshi, and using amended independent claim 1 for discussion purposes here, the applicant’s representative argued the amended claim with respect to how new settings or controls are routed via a switching control unit, which is necessary for controlling communications between devices/endpoints.
In response, the Examiner reviewed Doshi and respectfully disagrees. First, the overall premise to the concept remains unchanged and with that means the same components involved also remain unchanged. The claimed language was directed to the scenario of after receiving a change notification, and at some specific trigger (which we have to look ahead at dependent claim or broadly interpret within the independent claim, that for example an update as finished downloading), the updated new settings would be reflected, at the endpoints, and wherein all of the data, including the change notifications were routed via at least one switching control unit. The Examiner had already previously pointed out how Doshi’s RSI system/environment includes components like routers or switches or hubs (e.g., Doshi: ¶¶ 99 and 109). The Examiner also reviewed the present application’s Specifications on a definition for the “switching control unit” which was found to be interpreted as an Ethernet switch (e.g., Filed Specifications ¶ [0039]). Furthermore, the specific trigger remains undefined in the independent claim. The Examiner reviewed and ensured that it remains consistent with the dependent claims, like in claims 17 and 18. Therefore, overall, the Examiner would contend that the amended claim language did not change in scope of the invention from the previous version, as we’ve already established there is a new update, which gets applied to the relevant endpoints, and all communications are routed via the one or more switches within the network/environment. For at least these reasons, the Examiner remains unpersuaded.
The other independent claims 24 and 25 were similarly amended and argued following claim 13 and thus were similarly rejected under the same rationale.
Newly added dependent claim 26 was reviewed and addressed.
The remaining dependent claims were not specifically argued at this time.
Applicant's arguments were considered but they were not found persuasive. See the following claim rejections for further clarifications with added emphasis on the points previously disclosed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 13-15 and 17-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. US 2022/0012042 A1 to Doshi et al. (referred to hereafter as “Doshi”).
As to claim 13, Doshi further discloses a communication control device that controls communication of a network, the communication control device comprising:
a memory (e.g., Doshi: ¶¶ 146-150); and
a processor coupled to the memory (e.g., Doshi: ¶¶ 146-150), wherein the processor is configured to:
receive a change notification related to a change in a communication setting of the network (Doshi discloses of an overall distributed system of components that can be adapted to work within different embodiments. Doshi describes and introduces a Resilient Security Island (RSI), a self-reliant subsystem that gets implemented at each endpoint node. At the user’s end, each endpoint computing node can be interpreted as a distinct entity that can receive an alert of an update, which would require some change to the way the entity communicates and/or connects to the system over the network, e.g., Doshi: Figs. 1-6A-B, 11 and 13 and additional ¶¶ 55-56, 77-79, 82, 99, 123-132, and 134-141); and
after receiving the change notification, reflecting new settings information of the network needed to accompany the change notification in a switching control unit connected to the communication control device by reflecting, at a specific trigger, the new settings information for controlling communication between control devices via the switching control unit to operate the network (Doshi discloses of examples with respect to when an endpoint system gets notification of an change or an update that is available and there were multiple ways that the system can respond in order to retrieve and apply that available update (e.g., Doshi: ¶¶ 99 and 123-132). The RSI system can also include asset components including routers/switches/hubs, etc. that connect with the various endpoints, all within this operating environment (e.g., Doshi: ¶ 109 and Figs. 9 and 11). (Examiner’s Note: This “switching control unit” was interpreted to be more closely to a switch, like in Doshi’s system, based upon the present application’s Specifications definition in ¶ [0039]). And the specific “trigger” is not defined here in the claims, and so it can be broadly interpreted to any aspect regarding the update (and where some of examples are illustrated and provided in dependent claims 17 and 18 later, e.g., Doshi: ¶¶ 127-129, and 133). Furthermore, once the update is active and applied, the new settings information would be applied to the networked components and endpoints).
wherein the change notification is a notification accompanying a new control device being connected to the network (The implementation of the RSI subsystem would allow for all of the updates to be sent to all the endpoints that need to be notified. In one example embodiment, Doshi discloses of an RSI partition that can operate in a special mode, to run various tests including repairing, reconfiguring, recertifying, or to securely onboard new devices. The change in the configurations with the new device(s) would mean an update the system and would be propagated through the RSI subsystem. In a later section, Doshi describes how the RSI would verify any updates and configuration changes (e.g., Doshi: ¶¶ 103-105, 110, 115-116, and 123-132).
As to claim 14, Doshi further discloses the communication control device of claim 13, wherein the processor is further configured to reflect the new settings information in the communication control device (Following claim 13, the communication device/system would have a processor to handle or reflect the steps and changes needed for the new update settings, especially upon completion of the update, e.g., Doshi: Fig. 11 and ¶¶ 123-132 and 146-150).
As to claim 15, Doshi further discloses the communication control device of claim 13, wherein the change notification is a notification related to updating software in a control device connected to the network (Following claim 13, many of the examples were related to getting updates to some software configuration, e.g., Doshi: Figs. 1-4, 7, and 11, and ¶¶ 36, 42, 55-56, 96, 99, and 123-132).
As to claim 17, Doshi further discloses the communication control device of claim 13, wherein the processor is further configured to reflect the new settings information in the switching control unit using completion of download of software as the specific trigger (e.g., Doshi: Fig. 11 and ¶¶ 99 and 129).
As to claim 18, Doshi further discloses the communication control device of claim 13, wherein the processor is further configured to reflect the new settings information in the switching control unit using rebooting of a system including the network as the specific trigger (restarting or rebooting can be part of the sequence, e.g., Doshi: ¶¶ 127 and 133).
As to claim 19, Doshi further discloses the communication control device of claim 13, wherein after receiving the change notification and prior to the specific trigger, the processor is further configured to prompt a user as to whether or not to reflect the new settings information in the switching control unit (checking with a user for input, e.g., Doshi: Fig. 11, step 1112, and ¶ 127).
As to claim 20, Doshi further discloses the communication control device of claim 13, wherein, the processor is further configured to:
determine whether or not the new settings information of the network needed accompanying the change notification is stored in at least one of the communication control device or a switching control unit connected to the communication control device (Following claim 13, an update can be received from some separate/external source or peer system, the data can be stored within a memory, storage means section of the endpoint system (or “communication control device”), or it can be retrieved again in a separate process, e.g., Doshi: Fig. 11 and ¶¶ 123-132 and 146-150); and
request the new settings information from an external device external to the network in cases in which the processor has determined that the new settings information is not stored in either the communication control device or the switching control unit (The update can be stored at some external source server over the network, and the endpoint needs to get it from that source, e.g., Doshi: Figs. 7 and 11 (step 1114 with remote secure store) and ¶¶ 100 and 128).
As to claim 21, Doshi further discloses the communication control device of claim 20, wherein when the processor has requested the new settings information, the processor is further configured to receive the new settings information from the external device and reflect the received new settings information in the switching control unit (Following claims 13 and 20, Fig. 11’s embodiment illustrates how the update can be requested/obtained/retrieved from a separate remote storage. In other scenarios, the endpoints can issue requests and get responses back, e.g., Fig. 3 and 11 and ¶¶ 42-43 and 128).
As to claim 22, Doshi further discloses the communication control device of claim 8, wherein the processor is further configured to determine whether or not the communication control device and the switching control unit are operable in cases in which the processor has determined that the new settings information is not stored in either the communication control device or the switching control unit, and generate and transmit to the network, a notification that the communication control device and the switching control unit are inoperable and a diagnostic code indicating a cause of the inoperability, in cases in which the communication control device and the switching control unit have been determined to be inoperable (Following claims 13, 20, and 21/8, Doshi covers different failure scenarios, e.g., Doshi: ¶¶ 128 and 130).
As to claim 23, Doshi further discloses a vehicle comprising:
the communication control device of claim 13 (see the corresponding rejection of claim 13);
at least one switching control unit (e.g., Doshi: ¶ 99); and
a control device connected to the switching control unit (For this “system” that’s a “vehicle” with these distributed components, Doshi further discloses of various components that can perform similar to a controller or managing component that’s connected to the rest of the system of components (e.g., network interface controller (NIC), pod controller, input/output controller, memory or peripheral controller, etc.), e.g., Doshi: ¶¶ 99, 109, and 150).
As to claim 24, see the similar corresponding rejection of claim 13.
As to claim 25, see the similar corresponding rejection of claim 13.
As to claim 26, Doshi further discloses the communication control device of claim 13, wherein the processor is further configured to, after receiving the change notification and before the specific trigger occurs, maintain communication between control devices using communication settings reflected prior to the change notification (Following claim 13’s interpretations, and supposing the new update has not finished downloading yet (similar to claim 17’s interpretations on the trigger), without changing anything yet, Doshi’s system would still be running and using pre-existing rules before any updates and changes are applied, from the change notifications, e.g., Doshi: ¶¶ 99, 109, and 127-129).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xiang Yu whose telephone number is (571)270-5695. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-3:00 (PST/PDT).
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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at (571)272-3865. 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.
/Xiang Yu/Examiner, Art Unit 2455