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 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)(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.
(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 1-3 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102a(2) and as being anticipated by Golsch (US 2023/0234538).
Regarding Claims 1 and 11, Golsch teaches a system for positioning a digital smart key for a vehicle (Fig.1:10 and Par.7), the system comprising a main node (Fig.1:29 and Fig.2:20, main node comprises 29, 32, 33, etc.) and a plurality of sub-nodes (Fig.1:31A-31F and Fig.2:31A-31F), with both the main node and the plurality of sub-nodes being located on the vehicle (Fig.1), and the plurality of sub-nodes being distributed at different positions on the vehicle (Fig.1 distributed elements 31A-31F), wherein the main node is configured to establish a first Bluetooth connection with the first digital smart key when the first digital smart key approaches the vehicle (Par.96 Bluetooth connection established between gateway/main node 29 and portable device/smart key 10), and the first digital smart key is configured to periodically send data packets to the main node through the first Bluetooth connection (Fig.9:1050B, Par.98, “data in each of the transmissions 1050A and 1050B”, 1050B is sent periodically); the main node is further configured to send a first interactive message (Fig.9:1041) to each of the plurality of sub-nodes (Fig.9:1041, Par.97 gateway 29 communicates timing information messages 1041 to the timing control module 25. The sensors 31 receive the timing information messages) according to a first data packet (Fig.9:1031) sent by the first digital smart key at a first moment (Fig.9:1031 sent by smart key 10), the first interactive message containing time information and frequency information on the first data packet (Par.97 and Par.126, process 1012 and 1013 must use 1031 to provide connection parameter (i.e. time (slave latency,interval,clock accuracy) and frequency information (channel map, hop number))); each of the plurality of sub-nodes is configured to monitor a second data packet sent by the first digital smart key at a second moment according to the first interactive message (Fig.9:1050B, Par.98: sensors 31 are configured to measure the received energy strength of each of the transmissions 1050A and 1050B. Other parameters the sensors 31 can be configured to measure include: (1) the data in each of the transmissions 1050A and 1050B. note: 1050B is second data send after 1031), and send a signal strength of the second data packet to the main node, the second moment being later than the first moment (Par.98, signal strength measured and “information collected during observation 1015A is passed through a security filtering module 33 to the sensor processing and localization module 32.” and Fig.2:20 (main node) comprises 29, 32, 33); and the main node is further configured to determine a relative position of the first digital smart key to the vehicle according to a plurality of signal strengths sent by the plurality of sub-nodes (Par.7, Par.8).
Regarding Claims 2 and 12, Golsch teaches each of the plurality of sub-nodes is configured to determine time information and frequency information on the second data packet (Par.97, Par.98, communications 1050B in 1015A is monitored) according to the time information and frequency information on the first data packet (Par.97 and Par.126, process 1012 and 1013 must use 1031 to provide connection parameter (i.e. time (slave latency,interval,clock accuracy) and frequency information (channel map, hop number))), and monitor the second data packet sent by the first digital smart key at the second moment according to the determined time information and frequency information on the second data packet (Fig.9 and Par.97-98, After the connection interval time 1061A has elapsed, the sensors 31 start observations 1015B on the next channel in the reproduced channel map. The process repeats in perpetuity until either the connection is lost or a command from the timing control module 25 commands the sensors 31 to stop following the communication link.).
Regarding Claims 3 and 13, Golsch teaches the main node is further configured to send a data packet to the first digital smart key according to a data packet sent by the first digital smart key (Par.98 and Fig.9, (1) the data in each of the transmissions 1050A and 1050B).
Regarding Claim 10, Golsch teaches the plurality of sub-nodes are connected to the main node through respective data buses (Fig.2:45 connects subnodes 31 with main node 20).
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 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Golsch (US 2023/0234538).
Regarding Claims 4 and 14, Golsch teaches that it is well known for a second digital smart key to connect to the vehicle (Par.63 and 104). Therefore, it is obvious that the limitations of Claim 4 and 14 are implicit or very obvious in view of the rejection of Claim 1 presented above. Hence, the limitations “wherein the main node is configured to establish a second Bluetooth connection with a second digital smart key when the second digital smart key approaches the vehicle, and the second digital smart key is configured to periodically send data packets to the main node through the second Bluetooth connection; the main node is configured to send a second interactive message to each of the plurality of sub-nodes according to a third data packet sent by the second digital smart key at a third moment, the second interactive message containing time information and frequency information on the third data packet; each of the plurality of sub-nodes is configured to monitor a fourth data packet sent by the second digital smart key at a fourth moment according to the second interactive message, and send a signal strength of the fourth data packet to the main node, the fourth moment being later than the third moment; and the main node is configured to determine a relative position of the second digital smart key to the vehicle according to a plurality of signal strengths sent by the plurality of sub-nodes” are obvious since Golsch teaches it is a multiple devices (i.e. a second smart key) can connect to a vehicle (Par.63 and Par.104) to provide an enhanced system which can allow multiple people with their own respective devices to access the vehicle. This would allow family members, with their own respective devices, to share and access a single vehicle.
Regarding Claims 5 and 15, Golsch teaches the main node is configured to receive a data packet sent by the second digital smart key and send a data packet to the second digital smart key. (Fig.9 and Par.63, Par.104 and Par.98, data in each of the transmissions 1050A and 1050B).
Claims 6, 8, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Golsch (US 2023/0234538) in view of Plondke (US 2010/0077399).
Regarding Claims 6 and 16, Golsch teaches that multiple smart keys may access the vehicle (Par.63 and Par.104) and the main node is configured to, perform a first task of sending a data packet to the first digital smart key and perform a second task of sending a data packet to the second digital smart key (Par.98 and Fig.9, (1) the data in each of the transmissions 1050A and 1050B, Par.63 and Par.104, data transmitted to respective smart keys), however Golsch does not expressly teach the main node comprises a scheduler configured to determine priorities for tasks to be executed by the main node; and the main node is configured to, when a first task of sending a data packet to the first digital smart key and a second task of sending a data packet to the second digital smart key conflict on a thread to be executed by the main node, execute one with a higher priority among the first task and the second task.
Plondke teaches that it is well known in the art for a processor to have a thread receive multiple tasks at the same time and determine priority amongst the tasks to be completed first (Par.25). Therefore, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to modify Golsch’s main node to implement the teachings of Plondke such that the combination would have the main node obviously comprise a scheduler (e.g. program/coding) configured to determine priorities for tasks to be executed by the main node when there is a conflict on a thread such that the main node sends a data packet to the first digital smart key of a first task and sends a data packet to the second digital smart key of the second task. Therefore, an enhanced system is provided where a person with higher priority (e.g. driver) is given access to a vehicle before a person with less priority (e.g. passenger) when they happen to attempt access at the same time. This way, requests are processed in accordance with priority and data processing capabilities.
Regarding Claims 8 and 18, Golsch teaches each sub-node (Fig.9: sensor 31) of the plurality of sub-nodes (Fig.9 and Par.98, sensors 31) is configured to, a third task of feeding back to the main node the signal strength of a data packet sent by the first digital smart key (Par.63, Par.104 and Par.98, data in each of the transmissions 1050A and 1050B, signal strength measured and the information collected during observation 1015A is passed through a security filtering module 33 to the sensor processing and localization module 32) and the fourth task of feeding back to the main node the signal strength of a data packet sent by the second digital smart key (Par.63, Par.104 and Par.98, the same is performed for the different smart keys). however Golsch does not expressly teach the main node comprises a scheduler configured to determine priorities for tasks to be executed by said each sub-node, and said each sub-node is configured to, when a third task of feeding back to the main node the signal strength of a data packet sent by the first digital smart key and the fourth task of feeding back to the main node the signal strength of a data packet sent by the second digital smart key conflict on a thread to be executed by said each sub-node, execute one with a higher priority among the third task and the fourth task.
Plondke teaches that it is well known in the art for a processor to have a thread receive multiple tasks at the same time and determine priority amongst the tasks to be completed first (Par.25). Therefore, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to modify Golsch’s main node to implement the teachings of Plondke such that the combination would have the main node obviously comprise a scheduler (e.g. program/coding) configured to determine priorities for tasks (i.e. signal strength feedback) to be executed by the main node when there is any conflict on a thread. Based on the combination each sub-node (i.e. processor) would obviously process a third task of feeding back to the main node the signal strength of a data packet sent by the first digital smart key and process the fourth task of feeding back to the main node the signal strength of a data packet sent by the second digital smart key with a higher priority among the third task and the fourth task. Therefore, an enhanced system is provided where tasks associated with a person with higher priority (e.g. driver) is given access to a vehicle before a person with less priority (e.g. passenger). This way, requests are processed in accordance with priority and data processing capabilities.
Claims 7, 9, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Golsch (US 2023/0234538) and Plondke (US 2010/0077399) in further view of Zbiljic (US 20170318119).
Regarding Claims 7 and 17, Golsch and Plondke a scheduler executing the first and second task executed by the main node (Golsch: Par.98 and Fig.9, (1) the data in each of the transmissions 1050A and 1050B, Par.63 and Par.104, data transmitted to respective smart keys) teaches does not expressly teach the scheduler is configured to, when the first task fails to be executed by the main node due to the conflict between the first task and the second task, raise the priority of the first task among subsequent tasks of the main node; and the scheduler is configured to, when the second task fails to be executed by the main node due to the conflict between the first task and the second task, raise the priority of the second task among subsequent tasks of the main node.
Zbiljic teaches the well-known concept of increasing the priority of a task that fails to be executed by a processor and has been waiting for some time (Zbiljic 20170318119 Par.93). Therefore, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to modify Golsch and Plondke with the teachings of Zbiljic such that if any of the respective tasks (e.g. first or second) fails, it would have been obvious to have the scheduler raise the priority of the first task or the second task, respectively, among subsequent tasks of the main node. The combination would provide an enhanced system where delays due to any type of failure can be minimized by ensuring the task that failed and has been waiting is processed in a timely fashion to provide fairness and meet quality of service guarantees.
Regarding Claims 9 and 19, Golsch and Plondke teaches a scheduler executing the third and fourth task executed by each of the sub-nodes (Golsch: Par.63, Par.104 and Par.98, sensors/subnodes 31 send signal strength measured and the information collected during observation to security filtering module 33 to the sensor processing and localization module 32. Reads on executing third and fourth task as explained in claim 8/18) however Golsch and Plondke do not expressly teach the scheduler is configured to, when the third task fails to be executed by said each sub-node due to the conflict between the third task and the fourth task, raise the priority of the third task among subsequent tasks; and the scheduler is configured to, when the fourth task fails to be executed by said each sub-node due to the conflict between the third task and the fourth task, raise the priority of the fourth task among subsequent tasks of said each sub-node.
Zbiljic teaches the well-known concept of increasing the priority of a task that fails to be executed by a processor and has been waiting for some time (Zbiljic 20170318119 Par.93). Therefore, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to modify Golsch and Plondke with the teachings of Zbiljic such that if any of the respective tasks (e.g. third or fourth) fails, it would have been obvious to have the scheduler raise the priority of the third task or the fourth task, respectively, among subsequent tasks of said sub-node. The combination would provide an enhanced system where delays due to any type of failure can be minimized by ensuring the task that failed and has been waiting is processed in a timely fashion to provide fairness and meet quality of service guarantees.
Claims 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Golsch (US 2023/0234538) in view of OFFICIAL NOTICE.
Regarding Claim 20, Golsch teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a program stored therein, wherein the program, when executed by a processor, causes the multi-core processor to implement the method according to claim 1 (Fig.2 and Par.9, implicit), however Golsch does not explicitly teach a multi-core processor, causes the multi-core processor to implement the method according to claim 1.
The examiner notes that it is a very well known concept to use multi-core processors. Therefore, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to modify Golsch with the subject matter of the Official Notice such that an enhanced device is provided which can handle more computing tasks more quickly while minimizing power usage.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Asai (US 2023/0286464): Asai teaches it is very well known for a controller to (Par.102: smart ECU) to receive a response/tasks from two smart keys at the same time (Par.105), the controller processes the response/task for each based on a predetermined priority.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WESLEY LEO KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-7867. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30 M-F.
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.
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.
/WESLEY L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights