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 § 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 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.
Claims 26 - 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plagemann et al. (US Pat. No. 9317721), hereinafter referred to as Plagemann in view of KIM et al. (US Pub. No. 20100180283), hereinafter referred to Kim.
As to claim 26, Plagemann discloses configuring a USB interface (message pipe and stream pipe communication interface, Fig. 6) in a USB controller (host establishing message and stream pipes, col. 11, lines 6–16 and 24–32; Fig. 6) so as to open one or more pipes (message pipe and stream pipe, Fig. 6) between the USB controller and one or more corresponding USB endpoints of a USB device (camera communication endpoints associated with message and stream pipes, Fig. 6) according to a required USB endpoint configuration (selected communication path based on operational state, Fig. 6) of the USB device that is required for performing an operation in relation to the USB device (privacy control and image transfer operation, col. 11, lines 6–32; Fig. 6), performing the operation in relation to the USB device (transferring image and control data through established pipes, Fig. 6), and unconfiguring the configured USB interface (disabling stream pipe, col. 12, lines 1–18; Fig. 6) in the USB controller so as to close the one or more pipes between the USB controller (host disabling stream pipe, col. 12, lines 1–18; Fig. 6) and the one or more corresponding USB endpoints (camera communication endpoints associated with disabled stream pipe, Fig. 6) of the USB device (host establishes and disables message and stream pipes, col. 11, lines 6–32; col. 12, lines 1–18; Fig. 6).
Kim discloses, what Plagemann lacks, selecting appropriate parameters (device interface setup and endpoint type selection parameters, steps 204 and 206, Fig. 2; paras. 0049-0054) of the OS so as to modify or over-ride the default USB endpoint (selected control, bulk, interrupt, or isochronous endpoint behavior, paras. 0029-0036) configuration functionality and/or the default USB endpoint unconfiguration functionality of the OS (device registration, interface setup, and device connection disconnect operations performed through Linux OS resources, paras. 0022).
Plagemann and Kim are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely host-side USB communication and control systems for managing USB devices using operating-system-level software and drivers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Plagemann and Kim before him or her, to modify the host-side USB control software and endpoint configuration mechanism of Plagemann to include the Linux operating system–based USB driver and kernel resource management environment of Kim.
The suggestion and motivation for doing so would have been to implement the software-controlled opening, closing, and management of USB pipes and endpoints taught by Plagemann using a well-known, widely deployed Linux USB software stack.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Kim with Plagemann to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
As to claim 27, Plagemann discloses configuring a USB interface (message pipe and stream pipe communication interface, Fig. 6) in a USB controller (host establishing message and stream pipes, col. 11, lines 6–16 and 24–32; Fig. 6) so as to open one or more pipes (message pipe and stream pipe, Fig. 6) between the USB controller and one or more corresponding USB endpoints of a USB device (camera communication endpoints associated with message and stream pipes, Fig. 6) according to a required USB endpoint configuration (selected communication path based on operational state, Fig. 6) of the USB device that is required for performing an operation in relation to the USB device (privacy control and image transfer operation, col. 11, lines 6–32; Fig. 6), performing the operation in relation to the USB device (transferring image and control data through established pipes, Fig. 6), and unconfiguring the configured USB interface (disabling stream pipe, col. 12, lines 1–18; Fig. 6) in the USB controller so as to close the one or more pipes between the USB controller (host disabling stream pipe, col. 12, lines 1–18; Fig. 6) and the one or more corresponding USB endpoints (camera communication endpoints associated with disabled stream pipe, Fig. 6) of the USB device (host establishes and disables message and stream pipes, col. 11, lines 6–32; col. 12, lines 1–18; Fig. 6).
Kim discloses, what Plagemann lacks, reading, from the USB device, a USB device descriptor (device descriptor information management unit 140 extracting device descriptor information from the USB device, Fig. 1; paras. 0023-0026) and using the USB device descriptor to select the information relating to the USB device and/or the information relating to the operation to be performed in relation to the USB device (device descriptor information used to provide configuration information about devices and select a configuration appropriate to a function to be provided by the device, para. [0026]) from accumulated information relating to a plurality of known USB devices stored in the memory of the computing resource or from a database such as a database located remotely from the computing resource (device descriptor information collected, organized, managed, searched, and stored in user space for subsequent device interface and endpoint processing, paras. 0023-0026).
As to claim 28, Plagemann discloses configuring a USB interface (message pipe and stream pipe communication interface, Fig. 6) in a USB controller (host establishing message and stream pipes, col. 11, lines 6–16 and 24–32; Fig. 6) so as to open one or more pipes (message pipe and stream pipe, Fig. 6) between the USB controller and one or more corresponding USB endpoints of a USB device (camera communication endpoints associated with message and stream pipes, Fig. 6) according to a required USB endpoint configuration (selected communication path based on operational state, Fig. 6) of the USB device that is required for performing an operation in relation to the USB device (privacy control and image transfer operation, col. 11, lines 6–32; Fig. 6), performing the operation in relation to the USB device (transferring image and control data through established pipes, Fig. 6), and unconfiguring the configured USB interface (disabling stream pipe, col. 12, lines 1–18; Fig. 6) in the USB controller so as to close the one or more pipes between the USB controller (host disabling stream pipe, col. 12, lines 1–18; Fig. 6) and the one or more corresponding USB endpoints (camera communication endpoints associated with disabled stream pipe, Fig. 6) of the USB device (host establishes and disables message and stream pipes, col. 11, lines 6–32; col. 12, lines 1–18; Fig. 6).
Kim discloses, what Plagemann lacks wherein, when executed by the processing resource, the computer program causes the processing resource to request from a user (selection of a function needed by the user, interface unit 110, Fig. 1; para. 0019), information relating to the USB device and/or information relating to the operation (operating system diagnosis function selected by the user for a diagnosis object USB device, interface unit 110 and device initialization process unit 130, Fig. 1; paras. 0019, 0022), to be performed in relation to the USB device via a user interface (interface unit serving as an interface with a user, interface unit 110, Fig. 1; para. 0019) of the computing resource (interface unit 110 serving as an interface with a user, providing a menu of operating system diagnosis functions, performing selection of a function needed by the user, and call processing according to the selected function, Fig. 1; para. 0019).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 – 22, 25 and 29 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
the prior art, does not teach or fairly suggest:
In claim 1: the computer program causes the processing resource to modify or over-ride the default USB endpoint configuration functionality of the OS and configure the USB interface in the USB controller so as to open the one or more pipes between the USB controller and one or more corresponding USB endpoints of the USB device according to the required USB endpoint configuration of the USB device that is required for performing the operation in relation to the USB device, also in claim 25.
In claim 29: unconfiguring the configured USB interface in the USB controller so as to close the one or more pipes between the USB controller and the one or more corresponding USB endpoints of the USB device; wherein the operation comprises an erasure operation.
Further the combination of the above limitations with all of the other limitations in the respective independent claim is not obvious.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUANITO C BORROMEO whose telephone number is (571)270-1720. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9 - 5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Henry Tsai can be reached on 5712724176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JUANITO C BORROMEO/ Assistant Examiner, Art Unit 2184
/HENRY TSAI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2184
Prosecution Insights