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 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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 7, 12, 15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deng (US 20110183726).
Regarding Claims 1 and 12, Deng discloses a method and an integrated circuit (IC) comprising: a first circuit (mobile device has transceiver circuit, Paragraph 14); a first lookup table circuit (Paragraphs 15, 17, 18, 22); and a power manager (controller used to perform functions, where functions are based on sleeping thus power management, Paragraphs 17 and 37) configured to: detect an inactive state in the first circuit in an IC (detect network connection unavailable thus inactive as broadly interpreted, Paragraph 17); generate an indication of a first duration of the inactive state of the first circuit (duration unavailable determined as long or short, Paragraph 17); access a first lookup table to obtain a first low-power mode (LPM) identifier based on the first duration of the inactive state of the first circuit (based on unavailable duration choose long or short sleep duration, using table, Paragraphs 17, 18, and 22); and cause the first circuit to enter a first LPM identified by the first LPM identifier (enter sleep mode, Paragraph 19 and 23).
Regarding Claims 4 and 15, Deng discloses a second circuit in the IC, the power manager further configured to: detect an inactive state in the second circuit (performing the power management on a receiver or transceiver thus two circuits, paragraph 32); generate an indication of a second duration of the inactive state of the second circuit; access a second lookup table to obtain a second LPM identifier for the second circuit based on the second duration of the inactive state of the second circuit; and cause the second circuit to enter a second LPM identified by the second LPM identifier (same as above for claim 1, performing change to low power mode for multiple type of circuits, receiver or transceiver either would be the second circuit and entering long sleep mode interpreted to be the same as applicants second LPM based on unavailability duration or inactive period, Paragraphs 17, 18, 19, 22-23).
Regarding Claims 7 and 18, Deng discloses power manager configured to: store a plurality of LPM identifiers comprising the first LPM identifier in the first lookup table (short or long sleep duration thus identifiers, Paragraph 17); and index the plurality of LPM identifiers according to corresponding ranges of durations (short or long based on duration of unavailability thus inactive durations, Paragraph 17), wherein: the first LPM identifier is obtained in response to the first duration of the inactive state of the first circuit being within the range of durations corresponding to the first LPM identifier (short sleep if unavailability is short duration, Paragraph 17).
Regarding Claim 19, Deng discloses wherein: the range of durations corresponding to the first LPM identifier is indicated by one of a maximum duration and a minimum duration; and obtaining the first LPM identifier further comprises comparing the first duration to the one of the maximum duration and the minimum duration (short and long unavailability of the network is categorized into being short or long thus a max and minimum duration must be defined in order to compare the time to the unavailability being short or long, Paragraph 17).
Regarding Claim 20, Deng discloses further comprising: determining a minimum duration of the range of durations corresponding to the first LPM identifier based on a duration threshold between a first LPM identified by the first LPM identifier and a second LPM identified by a second LPM identifier (Long duration example given as 5 minutes and short duration given at 2.56 seconds thus 2.56 to 5 minutes interpreted as short unavailability thus short sleep and first low power mode and above or at 5 minutes is long unavailability thus long sleep and second low power mode, Paragraph 17).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (US 20110183726) in view of Shanmugasundaram et al. (US 20140113690).
Regarding Claims 2, 10, and 13, Deng discloses the power manager however Deng fails to explicitly disclose the power manager circuit further configured to: access the first lookup table to obtain the first LPM identifier based on an indication of a frequency of a clock signal in the first circuit and also index the plurality of LPM identifiers based on a frequency of a clock signal of the first circuit
In an analogous art, Shanmugasundaram et al. discloses a power manager circuit further configured to: access the first lookup table to obtain the first LPM identifier based on an indication of a frequency of a clock signal in the first circuit and index the plurality of LPM identifiers based on a frequency of a clock signal of the first circuit (determine clock frequency needed by CPU and selects sleep mode index based on current activity of CPU, Paragraph 84).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a clock frequency to determine a power mode in order to conserve battery power when services are not needed (Shanmugasundaram et al. , Paragraphs 6 and 7).
Claim(s) 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (US 20110183726) in view of Shanmugasundaram et al. (US 20140113690) and further in view of Alavoine et al. (US 20170228196).
Regarding Claims 3 and 14, Deng discloses the power manager comprising a power manager circuit however Deng fails to explicitly disclose the circuit configured to: access the first lookup table to obtain the first LPM identifier based on an indication of a frequency of a memory interface of a memory coupled to the first circuit.
In an analogous art, Alavoine et al. discloses accessing the first lookup table to obtain the first LPM identifier based on an indication of a frequency of a memory interface of a memory coupled to the first circuit (low power mode selected based on frequency of memory, Paragraph 61).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the LPM based on the memory frequency to utilize performance metrics in conserving battery levels (Alavoine et al., Paragraph 2).
Claim(s) 5, 6, 16, 17are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (US 20110183726) in view of Ramaraju et al. (US 20110296211).
Regarding Claims 5 and 16, Deng discloses the power manager however Deng fails to explicitly disclose the circuit further configured to: access the first lookup table to obtain the first LPM identifier based on a first circuit identifier to identify the first circuit.
In an analogous art, Ramaraju et al. discloses accessing the first lookup table to obtain the first LPM identifier based on a first circuit identifier to identify the first circuit (Figure 4 shows lookup table which is referenced using the specific circuit and the corresponding low power modes in a table, Paragraph 11).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the lookup table reference both the circuit type and corresponding low power modes for faster processing of the preprogrammed data through using a lookup table in determining which power mode to enter.
Regarding Claim 6 and 17, Deng discloses a second circuit in the IC, the power manager further configured to: detect an inactive state in the second circuit (performing the power management on a receiver or transceiver thus two circuits, paragraph 32); generate an indication of a second duration of the inactive state of the second circuit; access a second lookup table to obtain a second LPM identifier for the second circuit based on the second duration of the inactive state of the second circuit; and cause the second circuit to enter a second LPM identified by the second LPM identifier (same as above for claim 1, performing change to low power mode for multiple type of circuits, receiver or transceiver either would be the second circuit and entering long sleep mode interpreted to be the same as applicants second LPM based on unavailability duration or inactive period, Paragraphs 17, 18, 19, 22-23).
Claim(s) 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (US 20110183726) in view of Nam et al. (US 20210099956).
Regarding Claim 8, Deng discloses a LPM identifier (short and long sleep duration, Paragraph 17), however Deng fails to disclose the first LPM identifier is one of a plurality of LPM identifiers for a plurality of first LPMs for the first circuit; and each first LPM of the plurality of first LPMs has a rate of power consumption unique among rates of power consumption of the plurality of first LPMs.
In an analogous art, Nam et al. discloses a first LPM identifier is one of a plurality of LPM identifiers for a plurality of first LPMs for the first circuit; and each first LPM of the plurality of first LPMs has a rate of power consumption unique among rates of power consumption of the plurality of first LPMs (different power modes have different power consumption, Paragraph 86).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have different LPMs with different consumptions of power to accommodate for different receiving requirements (number of receive chains thus receiving capability changed based on power modes, Paragraph 86).
Claim(s) 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (US 20110183726) in view of Nam et al. (US 20210099956) and further in view of Krantz et al. (US 20040153676).
Regarding Claim 9, Deng discloses wherein: the first LPM identified saves power (Paragraph 17) however Deng fails to disclose the first LPM identifier provides a greatest net power savings among the plurality of first LPMs for the first duration of the inactive state.
In an analogous art, Krantz et al. discloses a first LPM identifier provides a greatest net power savings among the plurality of first LPMs for the first duration of the inactive state (low power mode corresponds to max power savings, Paragraph 33).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have one of the power modes provide maximum power savings to allow for different processor utilization levels to extend battery life (Krantz et al., Paragraph 4, and account for different unavailability of network levels as taught by Deng).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (US 20110183726) in view of Examiner’s Official Notice.
Regarding Claim 11, Deng discloses the IC of claim 1 integrated into a entertainment unit; a navigation device; a communications device; mobile computing device, a mobile location data unit; a global positioning system (GPS) device; a mobile phone; a cellular phone; a smartphone , a computer; a portable computer; a mobile computing device; a personal digital assistant (PDA); a monitor; a computer monitor; a television; a tuner ( Paragraph 14), however Deng fails to explicitly disclose the device selected from the group consisting of: a set-top box; a fixed location data unit; a session initiation protocol (SIP) phone; a tablet; a phablet; a server; a wearable computing device; a desktop computer;; a radio; a satellite radio; a music player; a digital music player; a portable music player; a digital video player; a video player; a digital video disc (DVD) player; a portable digital video player; an automobile; and a vehicle component.
Examiner takes official notice that a set-top box; a fixed location data unit; a session initiation protocol (SIP) phone; a tablet; a phablet; a server; a wearable computing device; a desktop computer;; a radio; a satellite radio; a music player; a digital music player; a portable music player; a digital video player; a video player; a digital video disc (DVD) player; a portable digital video player; an automobile; and a vehicle component are all electronic devices that are well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the IC integrated into any combination of the devices disclosed by Deng and Examiner’s official notice as power management is used for all electronic devices regardless of battery power or other power mechanisms as power available is finite.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Steven Lim whose telephone number is (571)270-1210. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays 9am-5pm, Tuesday-Friday 8:30am-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, Steven Lim can be reached at 571-270-1210. 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.
/STEVEN LIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Prosecution Insights