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 .
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.
For reissue applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the current provisions.
Priority
The instant application has been filed as a broadening reissue of U.S. Patent No. 11,493,967 to Vishnubhatla et al. (hereinafter the ‘967 patent), granted on 8 November 2022, having claims 1-21. In a preliminary amendment, Applicant has amended claims 1 and 12 and added claims 22-23. Claims 1-33 have been examined.
Reissue Applications
Applicant is notified that any subsequent amendment to the specification and/or claims must comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b). In addition, for reissue applications filed before September 16, 2012, when any substantive amendment is filed in the reissue application, which amendment otherwise places the reissue application in condition for allowance, a supplemental oath/declaration will be required. See MPEP § 1414.01.
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceeding in which the ‘967 patent is or was involved. These proceedings would include any trial before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, interferences, reissues, reexaminations, supplemental examinations, and litigation.
Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is material to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue application.
These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP §§ 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8 November 2024 was filed before the mailing date of the first action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitations are:
“communications module” in claims 1 and 12.
“power supply block,” “power supply block,” and “processor block” in claim 28.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Claim Objections
Claims 27 and 33 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 27 and 33 recite “the disabling of tone or more heat producing components” in line 2. It is being presumed that this should be “the disabling of one or more heat producing components.” Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4, 8, 9, 11-15, 18, 19, 21-26, and 28-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0034020 to Vilhauer et al. (hereinafter Vilhauer) in view of WIPO Patent Application Publication No. 2004/081774 to Baumann et al. (hereinafter Baumann).
NOTE: All citations to Baumann are with respect to the attached translation.
Regarding claim 1, Vilhauer discloses a method, comprising:
Although Vilhauer discloses the monitoring of a voltage emanating from a power supply (see paragraph 17) and that the voltage from a power supply may be decreased due to temperature increases (see paragraphs 3-4), Vilhauer does not explicitly disclose monitoring a temperature of the power supply.
Baumann discloses an analogous data consumption analyzing circuit (see abstract) in which “the power supply device 1 contains a temperature measuring device 22 for measuring the operating temperature of the power supply device. A corresponding signal is sent via the signal line 8 sent to the evaluation device 4... Resistance dropping voltage can then be used as a measure of the temperature change.” See pp.4-5 and figure 2). One skilled in the art would recognize that this confirms that a voltage change is being caused, at least in part, by the power supply temperature.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the invention of Vilhauer by adding a temperature measuring device for the power supply, to show that the detected declines in voltage, as pointed out by Vilhauer, are in fact due to power supply temperature.
Vilhauer discloses that the power supply being monitored powers a communications module (radio frequency device, see paragraph 23, also see paragraph 29 and figure 1) and communicating information of the monitored temperature to the communications module in an electronic device (see paragraphs 60-62 and 66);
disabling, using a main processor or circuit elements coupled to the communications module, one or more heat producing components that are coupled to the main processor or circuit element of the electronic device, when the monitored temperature of the power supply is higher than a first temperature (main processor 250, see figure 1; actions may include reducing and/or ceasing provision of electric power to one or more components, see paragraphs 51-53; one skilled in the art would recognize that any components that draw and consume power implicitly produce heat); and
Although Vilhauer discloses the restarting of components by the main processor when the power supply voltage achieves a threshold (command to undo an action, see paragraph 32), Vilhauer does not disclose restarting, using the main processor or circuit elements, the one or more disabled heat producing components to restore electronic device functionality in an ordered manner when the monitored temperature of the power supply reaches a second temperature that is less than the first temperature.
Baumann further discloses that the one or more disabled heat producing components to restore electronic device functionality in an ordered manner when the monitored temperature of the power supply reaches a second temperature that is less than the first temperature (power reduction when the upper limit value is exceeded and a signal for canceling the power reduction when the vale falls below lower limit value, see p. 3; functionality is restored according to lists for deactivation (at upper limit) and activation (at lower limit), see p. 6. Baumann further notes that this addresses a problem where power consumption can fluctuate during operation (see .p. 2).
Therefore it would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to further modify Vilhauer’s invention, as per Baumann, because power consumption can fluctuate during operation.
Regarding claim 2, Vilhauer further discloses that the power supply is a Lithium Ion Battery and the temperature being monitored is the temperature of the Lithium Ion Battery (see paragraph 34).
Regarding claim 3, Vilhauer further discloses disabling one or more heat producing components includes placing the electronic device in a low energy state (reduced power, see paragraph 48).
Regarding claim 4, Vilhauer further discloses disabling certain heat producing components when the monitored temperature of the power supply rises to a third temperature higher than the second temperature and less than the first temperature (second threshold that is lower, by measuring voltage, than the first threshold, see paragraphs 126 and 130, so there are two temperatures for disabling that are higher than the temperature for reactivation).
Regarding claim 8, Vilhauer further discloses generating a notification each time the monitored temperature rises above the first and third temperature and falls below the second temperature (notice concerning the current state of the power source is an available action for any transition, see paragraphs 67, 70, 74, 126, and 130).
Regarding claim 9, Vilhauer further discloses resources supporting calls are maintained when the electronic device is placed in the low energy state (priority given to phone call components, see paragraph 66).
Regarding claim 11, Vilhauer further discloses disabling one or more heat producing components of the electronic device includes throttling back a speed of a microprocessor of the electronic device (throttling of processor 150, see paragraphs 66 and 67).
Regarding claim 12, Vilhauer discloses a device, comprising:
a communications module (radio frequency device, see paragraph 23, also see paragraph 29 and figure 1);
a power supply providing power to the communications module (see paragraphs 24 and 34 and figure 1);
Although Vilhauer discloses the monitoring of a voltage emanating from a power supply (see paragraph 17) and that the voltage from a power supply may be decreased due to temperature increases (see paragraphs 3-4), Vilhauer does not explicitly disclose a temperature sensor for monitoring a temperature of the power supply and communicating an indication of the monitored temperature to the communication module.
Baumann discloses an analogous data consumption analyzing circuit (see abstract) in which “the power supply device 1 contains a temperature measuring device (i.e. a sensor) 22 for measuring the operating temperature of the power supply device. A corresponding signal is sent via the signal line 8 sent to the evaluation device 4... Resistance dropping voltage can then be used as a measure of the temperature change.” See pp.4-5 and figure 2). One skilled in the art would recognize that this confirms that a voltage change is being caused, at least in part, by the power supply temperature.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the invention of Vilhauer by adding a temperature measuring device for the power supply, to show that the detected declines in voltage, as pointed out by Vilhauer, are in fact due to power supply temperature.
a main processor or circuit elements coupled to the communications module (processor 250 coupled to interface controller 195b, see paragraph 24 and figure 1); and
components coupled to the main processor or circuit elements (see figure 1)
Although Vilhauer discloses the restarting of components by the main processor when the power supply voltage achieves a threshold (command to undo an action, see paragraph 32), Vilhauer does not disclose the components producing heat (NOTE: one skilled in the art would recognize that any components that draw and consume power implicitly produce heat) are disabled by the main processor or circuit elements when the monitored temperature of the power supply is higher than a first temperature and the disabled heat producing components are restarted by the main processor or circuit elements to restore electronic device functionality in an ordered manner when the monitored temperature of the power supply reaches a second temperature that is less than the first temperature.
Baumann further discloses that the one or more disabled heat producing components to restore electronic device functionality in an ordered manner when the monitored temperature of the power supply reaches a second temperature that is less than the first temperature (power reduction when the upper limit value is exceeded and a signal for canceling the power reduction when the vale falls below lower limit value, see p. 3; functionality is restored according to lists for deactivation (at upper limit) and activation (at lower limit), see p. 6. Baumann further notes that this addresses a problem where power consumption can fluctuate during operation (see .p. 2).
Therefore it would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to further modify Vilhauer’s invention, as per Baumann, because power consumption can fluctuate during operation.
Regarding claim 13, Vilhauer further discloses the power supply is a Lithium Ion Battery (see paragraph 34).
Regarding claim 14, Vilhauer further discloses disabling the heat producing components place the electronic device in a low energy state (reduced power, see paragraph 48).
Regarding claim 15, Vilhauer further discloses the device includes a plurality of heat producing components and only certain heat producing components are disabled when the monitored temperature of the power supply rises to a third temperature higher than the second temperature and less than the first temperature (second threshold that is lower, by measuring voltage, than the first threshold, see paragraphs 126 and 130, so there are two temperatures for disabling that are higher than the temperature for reactivation).
Regarding claim 18, Vilhauer further discloses the communications module generates a notification each time the monitored temperature rises above the first and third temperature and falls below the second temperature (notice concerning the current state of the power source is an available action for any transition, see paragraphs 67, 70, 74, 126, and 130).
Regarding claim 19, Vilhauer further discloses that the components supporting communication are maintained when the electronic device is placed in the low energy state (priority given to phone call components, see paragraph 66).
Regarding claim 21, Vilhauer further discloses disabling heat producing components includes throttling back a speed of the main processor (processor 150, see paragraphs 66 and 67).
Regarding claim 22, Vilhauer further discloses disabling one or more heat producing components includes throttling back of one or more of the heat producing components (processor 150, see paragraphs 66 and 67).
Regarding claim 23, Vilhauer further discloses disabling one or more heat producing components includes throttling back of one or more of the heat producing components (processor 150, see paragraphs 66 and 67).
Regarding claim 24, Vilhauer further discloses that responsive to the communicating an indication of the monitored temperature to the communication module when there is disabling of one or more heat producing components, there is a display of a status or change in status of operation of the device due to the disabling (see paragraphs 74, 126, and 130).
Regarding claim 25, Vilhauer further discloses that responsive to the communicating an indication of the monitored temperature to the communication module when there is disabling of one or more heat producing components, there is a display of a status or change in status of operation of the device due to the disabling (see paragraphs 74, 126, and 130).
Regarding claim 26, Vilhauer further discloses the device is an OLED device (see paragraph 39).
Regarding claim 28, Vilhauer discloses a device, comprising: a communications block (radio frequency device, see paragraph 23, also see paragraph 29 and figure 1);
a power supply block that powers the communications block (see paragraphs 24 and 34 and figure 1);
Although Vilhauer discloses the monitoring of a voltage emanating from a power supply (see paragraph 17) and that the voltage from a power supply may be decreased due to temperature increases (see paragraphs 3-4), Vilhauer does not explicitly disclose a temperature sensor block for monitoring a temperature of the power supply block and for communicating an indication of the monitored temperature to the communication module a processor block coupled to the communications block.
Baumann discloses an analogous data consumption analyzing circuit (see abstract) in which “the power supply device 1 contains a temperature measuring device (i.e. a sensor) 22 for measuring the operating temperature of the power supply device. A corresponding signal is sent via the signal line 8 sent to the evaluation device 4... Resistance dropping voltage can then be used as a measure of the temperature change.” See pp.4-5 and figure 2). One skilled in the art would recognize that this confirms that a voltage change is being caused, at least in part, by the power supply temperature.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the invention of Vilhauer by adding a temperature measuring device for the power supply, to show that the detected declines in voltage, as pointed out by Vilhauer, are in fact due to power supply temperature.
Vilhauer further discloses one or more components coupled to the processor block (see figure 1), the components produce heat (one skilled in the art would recognize that any components that draw and consume power implicitly produce heat),
Although Vilhauer discloses the restarting of components by the main processor when the power supply voltage achieves a threshold (command to undo an action, see paragraph 32), Vilhauer does not disclose the device is configured such that one or more of the components are disabled when the monitored temperature of the power supply block reaches a first temperature, and the device is configured such that the at least one disabled heat producing component is restarted to normal functionality when the monitored temperature of the power supply block reaches a second temperature that is less than the first temperature.
Baumann further discloses that the one or more disabled heat producing components to restore electronic device functionality in an ordered manner when the monitored temperature of the power supply reaches a second temperature that is less than the first temperature (power reduction when the upper limit value is exceeded and a signal for canceling the power reduction when the vale falls below lower limit value, see p. 3; functionality is restored according to lists for deactivation (at upper limit) and activation (at lower limit), see p. 6. Baumann further notes that this addresses a problem where power consumption can fluctuate during operation (see .p. 2).
Regarding claim 29, Baumann further discloses that when a plurality of the disabled heat producing components are disabled, the disabled heat producing components are restored to electronic device functionality in an ordered manner (activation according to lists, above).
Regarding claim 30, Vilhauer further discloses disabling one or more heat producing components includes throttling back of one or more of the heat producing components (processor 150, see paragraphs 66 and 67).
Regarding claim 31, Vilhauer further discloses that responsive to the communicating an indication of the monitored temperature to the communication block when there is disabling of one or more heat producing components, there is a display of a status or change in status of operation of the device due to the disabling (see paragraphs 74, 126, and 130).
Regarding claim 32, Vilhauer further discloses the device is an OLED device (see paragraph 39).
Claims 7, 17, 27, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vilhauer in view of Baumann as applied to claims 4, 12, 15, and 28 above, and further in view of WIPO Patent Application Publication No. WO2016/117985 to Ingale et al. (hereinafter Ingale).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Vilhauer and Baumann do not disclose the maintaining of a log of each instance the monitored temperature rises above the first and third temperature and falls below the second temperature.
Ingale discloses an analogous system for maintaining user equipment that includes the storing of an historical record of the battery pack temperature, which would implicitly include transitions between different temperature levels (see paragraph 72). One skilled in the art would recognize that this is done to allow for failure analysis.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to further modify the invention of Vilhauer and Baumann by storing an historical record of the battery pack temperature, as per Ingale, to allow for failure analysis.
Regarding claims 27 and 33, although Vilhauer discloses that notices may be sent to the user about status, including disabled components “through any of a variety of connections and/or interfaces” (see paragraph 95), Vilhauer does not explicitly state that the device is paired to an external device and an indication of the disabling of one or more heat producing components is sent to the paired external device.
Ingale further discloses that the device may be connected to external I/O devices to support the implementation (see paragraphs 72 and 76). One skilled in the art would recognize that the use of external devices for certain functions would reduce the load on the processor of the device.
Therefore it would have further have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the invention of Vilhauer and Baumann by using paired external devices, as per Ingale, to would reduce the load on the processor of the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5, 6, 10, 16, 20 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 5 and 16, no art was found that disclosed or rendered obvious “restoring the electronic device functionality in an ordered manner includes performing a soft reboot of the electronic device.”
Claim 10 is allowable based upon its dependence on claim 5.
Claim 20 is allowable based upon its dependence on claim 16.
Regarding claim 6, although Vilhauer discloses disclose a preference for disabling components using a high amount of power (see paragraph 115), no art was found that discloses or renders obvious disabling one or more heat producing components includes disabling components producing a greatest amount of heat.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW E HENEGHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3834. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Michael Fuelling can be reached at (571)270-1367. 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.
/MATTHEW E HENEGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferee:
/Ovidio Escalante/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
/M.F/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992
