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 .
DETAILED ACTION
a. Claims 1-20 in the present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, are being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
b. This is a first action on the merits based on Applicant’s claims submitted on 11/20/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/20/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12177754. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims cited above in the instant application broaden the scope of Claims 1-20 of already allowed U.S. Patent No. 12177754 by omitting the feature of a method and/or apparatus, logic using for LTE gateways for home and commercial sensor data. It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA), also note Exparte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App. 1969); the omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would be obvious to one skilled in the art.
The table below compares the claims in instant application with corresponding conflicting claims in copending U.S. application No. 12177754 wherein the underlined parts highlighting the patentably indistinct features between the conflicting claims.
In instant application
In U.S. Patent No. 12177754
Claim 1. A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processing system including a processor, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising:
comparing a device identifier on a data packet generated by a first device within a residence to a list of machine-type communication (MTC) source device identifiers;
based on the comparing indicating that the device identifier is included in the list, adding a tag to the data packet, resulting in tagged data; and
transmitting the tagged data to a second device of an access network such that the second device transmits the tagged data to a third device on a core network, wherein the third device aggregates the tagged data with MTC data, resulting in a
bundle of data, and wherein the third device transmits the bundle of data to a data center.
Claim 3. The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the data center stores a second bundle of data to facilitate access to the second bundle of data, the second bundle of data including human traffic communication (HTC) data
generated by a plurality of HTC devices located at the residence.
Claim 4. The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the list is a registry of MTC devices that are approved for use at a premise that comprises the residence.
Claim 5. The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 4, wherein the list is maintained on a storage device that is located in the residence.
Claim 6. A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processing system including a processor, facilitate performance of operations, comprising: receiving, by the processing system, data from a machine-type communication (MTC) device located at premises that comprise a residence, wherein the processing system, a plurality of MTC devices, and a plurality of human traffic communication (HTC) devices are located at the premises; storing the data at the processing system; and transmitting the data with second data as a bundle to a network element of an access network for provisioning to a cloud data facility comprising cloud storage, wherein the network element compares a device identifier on the data to a list of MTC source device identifiers, and wherein the network element applies a tag to the bundle to distinguish the bundle as a bundle of MTC data from another bundle that is a bundle of HTC data based on the device identifier on the data being found in the list, wherein the cloud data facility arranges the data with third data of a second bundle based on the data and the third data corresponding to respective instances of a first type of sensor, wherein the cloud data facility arranges the second data with fourth data of the second bundle based on the second data and the fourth data corresponding to respective instances of a second type of sensor that is different from the first type of sensor, wherein the list is a registry of MTC devices that are approved for use at the premises, and wherein the list is maintained on a storage device that is located in the residence.
Claim 6. The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the data packet is received from an MTC device according to a predetermined schedule.
Claim 14. The method of claim 9, wherein the data packet is received from an MTC device according to a predetermined schedule.
Claim 2. The gateway of claim 1, wherein the data is received from the MTC device according to a predetermined schedule.
Claim 7. The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 6, wherein the MTC device comprises an environmental sensor.
Claim 15. The method of claim 14, wherein the MTC device comprises an environmental sensor.
Claim 3. The gateway of claim 1, wherein the MTC device comprises an environmental sensor.
Claim 8. The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 6, wherein the MTC device transmits data within the residence at a power level less than 100 mW.
Claim 16. The method of claim 14, wherein the MTC device transmits data at a power level less than 100 mW.
Claim 9. The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 6, wherein the MTC device transmits data within the premises at a power level less than 100 mW.
Claim 9. A method comprising:
comparing, by a processing system including a processor, a device identifier on a data packet generated by a first device to a list of machine-type communication (MTC) source device identifiers;
based on the comparing indicating that the device identifier is included in the list, adding, by the processing system, a tag to the data packet, resulting in tagged data; and
transmitting, by the processing system, the tagged data to a second device of an access network such that the second device transmits the tagged data to a third device on a core network, wherein the third device aggregates the tagged data with MTC data, resulting in a bundle of data, and wherein the third device transmits the bundle of data.
Claim 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the third device transmits the bundle of data to a data center, and wherein the data center analyzes and indexes the bundle of data to facilitate access to the bundle of data.
Claim 11. The method of claim 10, wherein the data center stores a second bundle of data to facilitate access to the second bundle of data, the second bundle of data including human traffic communication (HTC) data generated by a plurality of HTC devices.
Claim 12. The method of claim 9, wherein the list is a registry of MTC devices that are approved for use at a premise.
Claim 13. The method of claim 12, wherein the list is maintained on a storage device that is located at the premise.
Claim 10. A method comprising: receiving, by a processing system comprising a processor, data from a machine-type communication (MTC) device; storing, by the processing system, the data; and transmitting, by the processing system, the data with second data as a bundle to a first network element for provisioning to a cloud data facility comprising cloud storage, wherein the first network element compares a device identifier on the data to a list of MTC source device identifiers, and wherein the first network element applies a tag to the bundle to distinguish the bundle as a bundle of MTC data relative to another bundle of data that is a bundle of human-type communications (HTC) data based on the device identifier on the data being found in the list, wherein the cloud data facility arranges the data with third data of a second bundle based on the data and the third data corresponding to respective instances of a first type of sensor, wherein the cloud data facility arranges the second data with fourth data based on the second data and the fourth data corresponding to respective instances of a second type of sensor that is different from the first type of sensor, wherein the list is a registry of MTC devices that are approved for use at a premises that comprise a residence, and wherein the list is maintained on a storage device that is located in the residence.
Claim 17. A device comprising: a processing system including a processor; a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising: comparing a device identifier on a data packet generated by a first device within a residence to a list of machine-type communication (MTC) source device identifiers; based on the comparing indicating that the device identifier is included in the list, adding a tag to the data packet, resulting in tagged data; and transmitting the tagged data to a second device such that the second device transmits the tagged data to a third device, wherein the third device aggregates the tagged data with MTC data, resulting in a bundle of data, and wherein the third device transmits the bundle of data to a data center.
Claim 18. The device of claim 17, wherein the data packet is obtained from at least one sensor.
Claim 1. A gateway comprising: a processing system including a processor; a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations, comprising: receiving, by the gateway, data from a machine-type communication (MTC) device; storing the data at the gateway with second data previously stored at the gateway, resulting in a bundle of data; and transmitting the bundle of data from the gateway to a first network element for provisioning to a cloud data facility comprising cloud storage, wherein the first network element compares a device identifier on the data to a list of MTC source device identifiers, and wherein the first network element applies a tag to the bundle of data to distinguish the bundle of data as a bundle of MTC data from another bundle of data that is a bundle of human-type communications (HTC) data based on the device identifier on the data being found in the list, wherein the cloud data facility arranges the data with third data of a second bundle of data based on the data and the third data corresponding to respective instances of a first type of sensor, wherein the cloud data facility arranges the second data with fourth data of the second bundle of data based on the second data and the fourth data corresponding to respective instances of a second type of sensor that is different from the first type of sensor, wherein the list is a registry of MTC devices that are approved for use at a premises that comprise a residence, and wherein the list is maintained on a storage device that is located in the residence.
Claim 20. The device of claim 17, wherein the data packet is obtained from an MTC device that transmits the data packet using a short-range communication technology.
Claim 5. The gateway of claim 1, wherein the MTC device transmits data within the residence at a power level less than 100 mW.
As shown above, claims 1-20 of claimed U.S. Patent No. 12177754, using different but patentably indistinct terminologies, disclose all features of corresponding claims 1, 3-9, and 11-20 of instant application. Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1-20 of U. S. Patent No. 12177754 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the "right to exclude" already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as shown in the table above.
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 of this title, 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.
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.
Claims 1 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrzic et al. US Pub 2016/0353493 (hereinafter “Vrzic”), in view of Gage et al. US Pub 2016/0142308 (hereinafter “Gage”), and further in view of Wang et al. US Pub 2012/0039253 (hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim 1
Vrzic discloses a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium (i.e. “MTC-AS”), comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processing system including a processor ([0047]), facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising:
comparing a device identifier (i.e. “MTC-ID”) on a data packet (“The MTC AS performs authentication and authorization of each MTC device by verifying the MTC-ID with the MTC-HSS.” [0075]) generated by a first device (e.g. “MTC devices 202, 204” in Fig. 2) to a list of machine-type communication (MTC) source device identifiers (“The MTC-HSS provides authentication with the MTC server 618 to the MTC devices 602, 604 and includes a database of all the MTC device IDs that belong to the MTC application provider.” [0054]);
Vrzic does not specifically teach based on the comparing indicating that the device identifier is included in the list, adding a tag to the data packet, resulting in tagged data.
In an analogous art, Gage discloses a method for differentiating HTC data from MTC data (“MTC may be differentiated from Human-Type Communications (HTC) such as voice and data communications using smartphones, laptops or tablets, in that MTC traffic may be generally characterized as being sporadic and low bandwidth, while HTC traffic may be characterized as involving a substantially incessant demand for high bandwidth. Thus, as noted in 3GPP TS 23.888, “System improvements for Machine-Type Communications (MTC)”, <http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/23888.htm> and IETF RFC 7252, “The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)”, June 2014, <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7252>, MTC traffic may typically involve the exchange of a few small packets in very short-lived (relative to HTC communications) packet flows.” [0005] and furthermore “Moreover, MTC communications systems may be differentiated from HTC systems in that it is anticipated, and taken into account in network design, that there will be a very large number of MTC devices (relative to HTC devices) within a network coverage area” [0008]) and based on the comparing indicating that the device identifier is included in the list (i.e. “an indication that the device is an MTC device”), adding a tag (i.e. “an indication that the device is an MTC device, an indication that the device is an HTC device”) to the data packet (“deriving the context information from information selected from a group consisting of an IP header field, a transport protocol header field, an application header field” [0060]), resulting in tagged data (“The action of populating can comprise deriving the context information from information selected from a group consisting of an IP header field, a transport protocol header field, an application header field, a characteristic of a radio access link connection over which packets flow in the first direction, a characteristic of a radio access link connection over which packets flow in the second direction, a network node identity, a communications protocol, an indication that the device is a mobile device, an indication that the device is a non-mobile device, an indication that the device is an MTC device, an indication that the device is an HTC device…” [0060]);
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices, to include Gage’s method for differentiating MTC devices from HTC devices, in order to minimize MTC overhead transmission (Gage [0005]).
Vrzic and Gage do not specifically teach a first device within a residence; transmitting the tagged data to a second device of an access network such that the second device transmits the tagged data to a third device on a core network, wherein the third device aggregates the tagged data with MTC data, resulting in a bundle of data, and wherein the third device transmits the bundle of data to a data center.
In an analogous art, Wang discloses a device (i.e. “device 110/120/130” in Fig. 1) transmitting the tagged data (“an intermediate device, coupled to the plurality of device, for receiving the plurality of machine type communication data flows, performing a data multiplexing operation on the plurality of machine type communication data flows to generate a multiplexed data flow” [0010]) to a second device (i.e. “intermediate device 200”) of an access network (“the intermediate device 200 performs a data multiplexing operation on received MTC data flows to generate a multiplexed data flow and then in step S206, transmits the multiplexed data flow to a base station or a core network of the service network 300 through a second connection over the second interface” [0026]; Fig. 2) such that the second device transmits the tagged data to a third device (e.g. “Base station 330”, “Core network 310” etc.; Fig. 1) on a core network (“the intermediate device 200 … then in step S206, transmits the multiplexed data flow to a base station or a core network of the service network 300 through a second connection over the second interface” [0026]; Fig. 2), wherein the third device aggregates the tagged data with MTC data (i.e. “the multiplexed data flow”), resulting in a bundle of data (“Thereafter, the Home Node-B 240 can receive the multiplexed data flow generated by the gateway 210 through a third interface (Uu interface) and transmit the multiplexed data flow to the core network 310 of the service network 300 through the second connection over the second interface.” [0034]), and wherein the third device transmits the bundle of data to a data center (i.e. “service network 300” in Fig. 1).
Wang further discloses a first device within a residence (“a special cellular station, called a Home Node-B (HNB), or Home e-Node-B (HeNB) is used, which is typically designed to improve wireless reception quality of service networks for indoor coverage, such as in a home or in a small business space.” [0005]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices, as modified by Gage, to include Wang’s data processing method for performing machine type communication data transmissions using a gateway, in order to efficiently route MTC data between valid MTC devices. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Wang’s data processing method for performing machine type communication data transmissions using a gateway into Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 3
Vrzic, as modified by Gage and Wang, previously discloses the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 1,
Gage further discloses wherein the data center stores a second bundle of data (i.e. HTC related data v.s. first bundle of data or MTC related data) to facilitate access to the second bundle of data, the second bundle of data including human traffic communication (HTC) data (i.e. “HTC traffic”) generated by a plurality of HTC devices located at the residence (“MTC may be differentiated from Human-Type Communications (HTC) such as voice and data communications using smartphones, laptops or tablets, in that MTC traffic may be generally characterized as being sporadic and low bandwidth, while HTC traffic may be characterized as involving a substantially incessant demand for high bandwidth. Thus, as noted in 3GPP TS 23.888, “System improvements for Machine-Type Communications (MTC)”, <http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/23888.htm> and IETF RFC 7252, “The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)”, June 2014, <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7252>, MTC traffic may typically involve the exchange of a few small packets in very short-lived (relative to HTC communications) packet flows.” [0005] and furthermore “Moreover, MTC communications systems may be differentiated from HTC systems in that it is anticipated, and taken into account in network design, that there will be a very large number of MTC devices (relative to HTC devices) within a network coverage area” [0008]).
Regarding claim 4
Vrzic, as modified by Gage and Wang, previously discloses the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 1,
Vrzic further discloses wherein the list is a registry of MTC devices that are approved for use (“The MTC-HSS provides authentication with the MTC server 618 to the MTC devices 602, 604 and includes a database of all the MTC device IDs that belong to the MTC application provider.” [0054]) at a premise that comprises the residence (the list is a registry of MTV devices that are approved for use is stored in a Home Subscriber Server (HSS)).
Regarding claim 9
A method comprising:
comparing, by a processing system including a processor, a device identifier on a data packet generated by a first device to a list of machine-type communication (MTC) source device identifiers;
based on the comparing indicating that the device identifier is included in the list, adding, by the processing system, a tag to the data packet, resulting in tagged data; and
transmitting, by the processing system, the tagged data to a second device of an access network such that the second device transmits the tagged data to a third device on a core network, wherein the third device aggregates the tagged data with
MTC data, resulting in a bundle of data, and wherein the third device transmits the bundle of data.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 9 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding non-transitory computer readable medium claimed in claim 1. Therefore method claim 9 corresponds to computer program product claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 12
The method of claim 9, wherein the list is a registry of MTC devices that are approved for use at a premise.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 12 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding non-transitory computer readable medium claimed in claim 4. Therefore method claim 12 corresponds to computer program product claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 4 rejection above.
Regarding claim 17
Vrzic discloses a device (“MTC server” [0005]) comprising:
a processing system (“processing system 1600” in Fig. 16; [0086]) including a processor (“processing unit 1601” in Fig. 16; [0086]);
a memory (“memory 1620” in Fig. 16; [0086]) that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising:
comparing a device identifier on a data packet generated by a first device within a residence to a list of machine-type communication (MTC) source device identifiers;
based on the comparing indicating that the device identifier is included in the list, adding a tag to the data packet, resulting in tagged data; and
transmitting the tagged data to a second device such that the second device transmits the tagged data to a third device, wherein the third device aggregates the tagged data with MTC data, resulting in a bundle of data, and wherein the third device transmits the bundle of data to a data center.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 1 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding non-transitory computer readable medium claimed in claim 1. Therefore apparatus claim 17 corresponds to computer program product claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 18
Vrzic, as modified by Gage and Wang, previously discloses the device of claim 17,
Gage further discloses wherein the data packet is obtained from at least one sensor (“an MTC device such as a sensor or meter may be configured to capture an event, such as a temperature” [0010]).
Claims 2, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrzic, in view of Gage and Wang, and further in view of Bonneau et al. US Pub 2009/0072024 (hereinafter “Bonneau”).
Regarding claim 2
Vrzic, as modified by Gage and Wang, previously discloses the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 1,
Vrzic, Gage, and Wang do not specifically teach wherein the data center analyzes and indexes the bundle of data to facilitate access to the bundle of data.
In an analogous art, Bonneau discloses wherein the data center analyzes and indexes the bundle of data to facilitate access to the bundle of data (“The analysis subsystem 108 includes local (stations and other facilities) and central processing systems supporting multiple applications which analyze the detector data, integrate associated data and information, assess threat risk and alternative responses and present the results (with recommendations) to the commanders responsible for managing the response, if any, through a government interface 120. Processors of the analysis subsystem 108 are linked in a distributed processing environment, facilitating shared information repositories, processing capacity and applications to implement the processing algorithms offer the results.” [0028].
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices, as modified by Gage and Wang, to include Bonneau’s data processing method for catorizing different types of data, in order to efficiently analyze the contents of collected data (Bonneau [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Bonneau’s data processing method for catorizing different types of data into Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 10
The method of claim 9, wherein the third device transmits the bundle of data to a data center, and wherein the data center analyzes and indexes the bundle of data to facilitate access to the bundle of data.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 10 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding non-transitory computer readable medium claimed in claim 2. Therefore method claim 10 corresponds to computer program product claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 2 rejection above.
Regarding claim 11
The method of claim 10, wherein the data center stores a second bundle of data to facilitate access to the second bundle of data, the second bundle of data including human traffic communication (HTC) data generated by a plurality of HTC devices.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 10 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding non-transitory computer readable medium claimed in claim 3. Therefore method claim 10 corresponds to computer program product claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 3 rejection above.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrzic, in view of Gage and Wang, and further in view of McCann US Pub 2018/024928 (hereinafter “McCann”).
Regarding claim 5
Vrzic, as modified by Gage and Wang, previously discloses the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 4,
Vrzic discloses wherein the list is a registry of MTV devices that are approved for use is stored in a Home Subscriber Server (HSS) but does not specifically teach wherein the list is maintained on a storage device that is located in the residence.
In an analogous art, McCann discloses that the HSS is located on the premises (“In FIG. 1, platform 100 is implemented as a cloud service separate from on-premises equipment, which in the illustrated example includes a Diameter routing agent (DRA) 108, an offline charging system (OFCS) 110, a home subscriber server (HSS) 112, a packet data network (PDN) gateway (PGW) 114, and a mobility management entity (MME) 116.” [0023] and see annotated Fig.1 below)
PNG
media_image1.png
659
572
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices, as modified by Gage and Wang, to include McCann’s on-premises equipment, in order to effectively authenticate access of legally registered devices (McCann [0025]; [0030]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate McCann’s on-premises equipment into Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 13
The method of claim 12, wherein the list is maintained on a storage device that is located at the premise.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 13 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding non-transitory computer readable medium claimed in claim 5. Therefore method claim 13 corresponds to computer program product claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 5 rejection above.
Claims 6, 7, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrzic, in view of Gage and Wang, and further in view of Kim et al. US Pub 2012/0282956 (hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding claim 6
Vrzic, as modified by Gage and Wang, previously discloses the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 1,
Vrzic, Gage, and Wang do not specifically teach wherein the data packet is received from an MTC device according to a predetermined schedule.
In an analogous art, Kim discloses wherein the data packet is received from an MTC device according to a predetermined schedule (“However, the MTC user data, as used herein, may be actual user data (for example, reporting information collected by a device), or control data (for example, a reporting period) for MTC between an MTC device and an MTC server.” [0061] and furthermore “The present invention involves downlink transmission of MTC data from an MTC server or MME to a UE. Examples of which include: making a change to the admission of a specific MTC feature (e.g., on/off, allowed time, etc.); making a change to the reporting period during which the UE has to report to the MTC server (e.g., changing the interval at which the UE reports to the MTC server from 7 days to 15 days); status information of the MTC server; transmitting a specific error message; and downlink transmission of a specific notification or the like from the MTC server (or MME) to the UE.” [0134]; [0138]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Wang’s data processing method for performing machine type communication data transmissions using a gateway, as modified by Lee, Vrzic, McCann, Gage, and Condoluci, to include Kim’s method for transmitting MTC data in a mobile in communication system in order to efficiently route MTC data between valid MTC devices and MTC server “In the present invention, MTC data is encapsulated in an existing control procedure or control message or the like, on a control signal, without performing packet data bearer setup, and the control signal having the encapsulated MTC data is sent between a network and a terminal, thereby optimizing network resource efficiency and reducing the wireless channel load." Kim [Abstract].
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices, as modified by Gage and Wang, to include Kim’s method for transmitting MTC data in a mobile in communication system, in order to efficiently route MTC data between valid MTC devices and MTC server (Kim [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Kim’s method for transmitting MTC data in a mobile in communication system into Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 7
Vrzic, as modified by Gage, Wang, and Kim, previously discloses the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 6,
Gage further discloses wherein the MTC device comprises an environmental sensor (“an MTC device such as a sensor or meter may be configured to capture an event, such as a temperature” [0010]).
Regarding claim 14
The method of claim 9, wherein the data packet is received from an MTC device according to a predetermined schedule.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 14 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding non-transitory computer readable medium claimed in claim 6. Therefore method claim 14 corresponds to computer program product claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 6 rejection above.
Regarding claim 15
The method of claim 14, wherein the MTC device comprises an environmental sensor.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 15 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding non-transitory computer readable medium claimed in claim 7. Therefore method claim 15 corresponds to computer program product claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 7 rejection above.
Claims 8, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrzic, in view of Gage, Wang, and Kim, and further in view of Condoluci et al. NPL “Towards 5G DenseNets: Architectural Advances For Effective Machine-Type Communications over Femtocells” IEEE Jan 2015 (hereinafter “Condoluci”).
Regarding claim 8
Vrzic, as modified by Gage, Wang, and Kim, previously discloses the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 6,
Vrzic, as modified by Gage, Wang, and Kim do not specifically teach wherein the MTC device transmits data within the residence at a power level less than 100 mW.
In an analogous art, Condoluci discloses wherein the MTC device transmits data within the residence at a power level less than 100 mW (“In our architecture, LTE-capable MTC devices communicate directly with Home-evolved NodeBs (HeNBs), which are low-cost femtocells (with economic efforts close to those of non-3GPP access points in terms of device cost, installation and maintenance) for local-area access with low-power transmission (less than 100mW) capability.” [section 2.0]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices, as modified by Gage, Wang, and Kim, to include Condoluci’s method for effective MTC over femtocells in order to efficiently route MTC data between valid MTC devices and MTC femtocell. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Condoluci’s method for effective MTC over femtocells into Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 16
The method of claim 14, wherein the MTC device transmits data at a power level less than 100 mW.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 16 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding non-transitory computer readable medium claimed in claim 8. Therefore method claim 16 corresponds to computer program product claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 8 rejection above.
Regarding claim 20
The device of claim 17,
wherein the data packet is obtained from an MTC device that transmits the data packet using a short-range communication technology.
In an analogous art, Condoluci discloses wherein the data packet is obtained from an MTC device that transmits the data packet using a short-range communication technology (“In our architecture, LTE-capable MTC devices communicate directly with Home-evolved NodeBs (HeNBs), which are low-cost femtocells (with economic efforts close to those of non-3GPP access points in terms of device cost, installation and maintenance) for local-area access with low-power transmission (less than 100mW) capability.” [section 2.0]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices, as modified by Gage, Wang, and Kim, to include Condoluci’s method for effective MTC over femtocells in order to efficiently route MTC data between valid MTC devices and MTC femtocell. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Condoluci’s method for effective MTC over femtocells into Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrzic, in view of Gage and Wang, and further in view of Xiong et al. US Pub 2017/0230951 (hereinafter “Xiong”).
Regarding claim 19
Vrzic, as modified by Gage and Wang, previously discloses the device of claim 18,
Vrzic, Gage, and Wang do not specifically teach wherein the at least one sensor includes a motion sensor, an orientation sensor, a location sensor, or any combination thereof.
In an analogous art, Xiong discloses wherein the at least one sensor includes a motion sensor, an orientation sensor, a location sensor, or any combination thereof (“In various embodiments, sensor 628 may include one or more sensing devices to determine environmental conditions and/or location information related to the system 600. In some embodiments, the sensors may include, but are not limited to, a gyro sensor, an accelerometer, a proximity sensor, an ambient light sensor, and a positioning unit. The positioning unit may also be part of, or interact with, the baseband circuitry 608 and/or RF circuitry 604 to communicate with components of a positioning network, e.g., a global positioning system (GPS) satellite.” [0079]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices, as modified by Gage and Wang, to include Xiong’s method for transmitting control messages for MTC devices, in order to efficiently route MTC data between valid MTC devices (Xiong [0004]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Xiong’s method for transmitting control messages for MTC devices into Vrzic’s method for authenticating MTC devices since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/CHUONG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
