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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 12, 13, 15, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lekkas (US20190281052) in view of Thompson (US10824765).
As to claim 1, Lekkas discloses a module, including: a first processor (element 140), a second processor (element 356), a bus (element 170), and a first isolation circuit (element 310), wherein the first processor is communicatively connected to the second processor through the bus, and the first isolation circuit is disposed on a communication link between the first processor and the bus (Fig. 3 with a plurality of ECU nodes coupled by a bus such as 170 via first isolation circuit 310, para. 0025);
the second processor is configured to transmit a first message to the first processor (Fig. 3, where element 356 communicates with ECU node 1 via security module 310, para. 0050); and the first isolation circuit is configured to control transmission of the first message based on a correspondence between the first message and a first preset protocol (Fig. 3, where the chosen protocol is CAN protocol, and access port 130, where requests is whitelisted protocols are allowed transmission, para. 0025).
Lekkas does not disclose an integrated circuit.
Thompson teaches in Fig. 1 of an ECU on an integrated circuit (Fig.1, with security module 15, COL.2, lines 45 – 55). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to offer a small footprint capability of an ECU for a vehicular embodiment (COL.1, lines 27 – 37).
As to claim 12, Lekkas discloses a communication method, including: monitoring a first message transmitted from a second processor to a first processor of the integrated circuit (Fig. 3, where element 356 communicates with ECU node 1 via security module 310, para. 0050); and controlling transmission of the first message based on a correspondence between the first message and a first preset protocol when the first message is monitored ( isolation circuit is configured to control transmission of the first message based on a correspondence between the first message and a first preset protocol (Fig. 3, where the chosen protocol is CAN protocol, para. 0024). Thompson teaches in Fig. 1 of an ECU on an integrated circuit (Fig.1, with security module 15, COL.2, lines 45 – 55). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to offer a small footprint capability for a vehicular embodiment (COL. 1, lines 27 – 37).
As to claims 13, and 19, Lekkas discloses the method, wherein the controlling transmission of the first message based on a correspondence between the first message and a first preset protocol when the first message is monitored (Fig. 3, where element 356 communicates with ECU node 1 via security module 310, para. 0050) includes: blocking the first message in a case that the first message is not in correspondence to the first preset protocol (Fig. 3, where the chosen protocol is CAN protocol, and access port 130, where requests not have appropriate protocols as captured in whitelisted protocols are denied, paras. 0024, and 088); or transmitting the first message in a case that the first message is in correspondence to the first preset protocol (Fig. 3, where the chosen protocol is CAN protocol, and access port 130, where requests recognize whitelisted protocol and enabled access via access port 130, para. 0025).
As to claim 15, Thompson discloses an electronic device, including: the integrated circuit ( Fig. 1 of an ECU on an integrated circuit , Fig.1, with security module 15, COL.2, lines 45 – 55). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to offer a small footprint capability of an ECU for a vehicular embodiment (COL. 1, lines 27 – 37).
As to claim 18, Thompson discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, in which a computer program is stored, wherein the computer program, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to implementing the communication method for an integrated circuit ( Fig. 1 with memory 14b, and COL. 3, lines 40 – 45). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to offer a small footprint capability for a vehicular embodiment (COL. 1, lines 27 – 37).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lekkas/Thompson in view of Law et al (US20210092097) hereinafter Law.
As to claim 11, the module, wherein a security level of the first processor is higher than a security level of the second processor.
Law teaches in Fig. B of processors wherein a security level of the first processor is higher than a security level of the second processor (para. 0070, where the security level of the processor can be established as high or low). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to use the security level assignment capabilities of Law in the system of Lekkas/Thompson to apply the appropriate level of security dependent on need, (para. 0009).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 – 10, 14, 16, 17, and 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20220038304, US11876879, and US20190281052 among others teach the use of isolation devices in a system managing data flow for security concerns.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER ANTHONY DALEY whose telephone number is (571)272-3625. The examiner can normally be reached 7 - 3:30 pm.
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, Dr. Henry Tsai can be reached at 571 2724176. 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.
/C.A.D/Examiner, Art Unit 2184
/HENRY TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2184