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 .
Manner of Making Amendments under 37 C.F.R. § 1.121
Any subsequent submission by Applicant's amending the claims must comply with the requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 1.121(c) and MPEP § 714(II)(C) regarding the manner of presenting amended claims. That is, amended text must be properly indicated. Failure to provide a compliant amendment may result in the amendment being treated as non-compliant and not entered.
Pursuant to MPEP § 714(II)(C), all changes to currently amended claims must be shown relative to the immediate prior version of the claims. Deleted matter ordinarily must be shown by strike-through; however, when deleting five (5) or fewer consecutive characters, deletion by double brackets may be used and, in certain circumstances, is required. In particular, where strike-through cannot be readily perceived—such as when deleting a single numeral, punctuation mark, or other short character string—double brackets must be used to clearly identify the deleted matter. For example, deletion of punctuation marks standing alone (e.g., commas, periods, semicolons, parentheses, or quotation marks) should be indicated by double brackets rather than strike-through.
Similarly, the text of any added subject matter must be presented in a manner such that the underlining is readily perceptible. Where underlining of added matter cannot be easily perceived, including, for example, the addition or substitution of one or more characters, punctuation marks, numerals, or word fragments, the amendment shall instead be presented by deleting the entire affected text and adding the complete replacement text with underlining. Examples include, without limitation, amendments correcting misspellings, changing a singular term to a plural term or vice versa, adding prefixes or suffixes, or modifying punctuation or numerals.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 4, 12, and 20 contain the trademark/trade name Bluetooth®. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b). See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify and/or describe a wireless transceiver and, accordingly, the identification and/or description renders the claims indefinite (e.g., pertaining to the required version of the communication protocol). MPEP § 2173.05(u).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4, 11, 12, 14, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0036686 (hereinafter, “BOMMER”) in view of US 2020/0086993 (hereinafter, “PHAN”), US 2021/0357251 (hereinafter, “LIN”), and US 2004/0008762 (hereinafter, “GARLETT”)
Regarding claim 1, BOMMER discloses:
A method of performing equipment self-tests in an aircraft, comprising: (¶ 0029: [W]ireless performance testing system 100 may be installable on a complex system such as an aircraft)
. . . a seatback in-flight entertainment (IFE) system associated with a current seat from a maintenance server on the aircraft (aircraft 400/900), . . . ; (¶ 0053: An in-flight entertainment system may include wireless hardware components at various locations throughout the cabin such as above the ceiling, in the headrests of passenger seats, underneath passenger seats; ¶ 0036: The control module may be even further configured to receive, measure or calculate one or more parameters of the messages or other signals and/or responses; ¶ 0033: [T]he wireless monitor may include a control module 202 coupled to a radio 204. The control module may be generally configured to control the radio to emulate any of one or more wireless systems of interest, and cause transmission of and receive data during operation of the wireless monitor. The control module may also be configured to collect or otherwise receive, measure or calculate other data based on the wireless system of interest and/or the data transmitted or received during operation of the wireless monitor; ¶ 0057: [A] query from the hub monitor with sample data from which the quality of the communication link)
determining, based on a configuration in the message, a first set of seats from which the current seat is configured to perform a reception and a second set of seats to which the current seat is configured to perform a transmission; (¶ 0051: [W]ireless monitors 404b, 404c may be installed at locations where seated passengers may access the respective access point; ¶ 0059: [W]ireless monitors 102 may be configured to operate in a mesh arrangement in which hub and node monitors may be indistinguishable. Any monitor may be configured to function as a hub monitor or node monitor; or in other terms, any one or more monitors may be configured to selectively function as a hub monitor or node monitor. The mesh arrangement may enable collection of a larger amount of sampling data as the wireless monitors may communicate with one another as opposed to a singular hub monitor, which may enable multiple coverage estimates; ¶ 0060: [A]ny of wireless monitors 404a, 404b, 404c may be configured to function as a hub monitor or node monitor, or may be configured to selectively function as a hub monitor and node monitor)
performing, for the first set of seats, a first test for a receiver of the wireless transceiver, . . . ; (¶ 0036: [M]essages and responses may be between the wireless monitor and one or more other wireless monitors such as for performing a query/response, connectivity check, interrogation; ¶ 0057: [I]nterrogated node monitors 102 may respond to a query from the hub monitor with sample data from which the quality of the communication link between the hub monitor and respective node monitors may also be determined. In this case, the hub monitor may be configured to request the sample data as in the connectivity check, and may evaluate the received sample data (or lack thereof) from each node to verify success; ¶ 0033: The control module may be generally configured to . . . cause transmission of and receive data during operation of the wireless monitor)
performing, for the second set of seats, a second test for a transmitter of the wireless transceiver, . . . ; and (¶ 0036: [M]essages and responses may be between the wireless monitor and one or more other wireless monitors such as for performing a query/response, connectivity check, interrogation; ¶ 0057: [I]nterrogated node monitors 102 may respond to a query from the hub monitor with sample data from which the quality of the communication link between the hub monitor and respective node monitors may also be determined. In this case, the hub monitor may be configured to request the sample data as in the connectivity check, and may evaluate the received sample data (or lack thereof) from each node to verify success; ¶ 0033: The control module may be generally configured to . . . cause transmission of and receive data during operation of the wireless monitor)
. . . (a) a first indication of whether the receiver is operational, (b) a second indication of whether the second test was completed, and (c) a list of successful transmitters and failed transmitters associated with the first set of seats. (¶ 0056: [W]ireless monitors 102 in a hub-and-spoke arrangement may be configured to perform a connectivity check. The hub monitor may be configured to check connectivity of the node monitors to the hub monitor such as at regular intervals. The hub monitor may then be configured to record success or failure of the connectivity for each node monitor with an appropriate time stamp. In this regard, success or failure of a connectivity check may be determined based on the type of wireless system of interest and its radio access technology; ¶ 0060: [T]he hub monitor may also be configured to transmit sample data to the hub monitors, and timestamp and log a successful transmission)
BOMMER does not explicitly disclose:
receiving . . . a message comprising an indication to perform a self-test for a wireless transceiver associated with the seatback IFE system and the current seat
wherein a duration of the first test is a first function of a historical average duration taken for performing the first test and a first randomized value associated with the current seat;
wherein a duration of the second test is a second function of a historical average duration taken for performing the second test and a second randomized value associated with the current seat; and
transmitting, to the maintenance server based on a completion of the first test and the second test, a report
In the same field of endeavor, however, PHAN teaches:
receiving . . . a message comprising an indication to perform a self-test for a wireless transceiver associated with the seatback IFE system and the current seat (¶ 0038: [S]eat control module 206 can also (or alternatively) be configured to transmit diagnostic and usage information to the IFE unit 110 based upon a schedule, in response to triggering event (e.g., startup, restart, detected error/fault), and/or in response to a query/request for information from the IFE unit 110 or a query/request received via the IFE unit 110 (e.g., a query/request from the aircraft server 310 and/or the ground server 318))
transmitting, to the maintenance server based on a completion of the first test and the second test, a report (¶ 0004: The aircraft server can be configured to receive the diagnostic and usage information from the seat control modules and/or the inflight entertainment units; ¶ 0018: [A] system and method for monitoring passenger chair components and reporting diagnostic and usage information (e.g., faults, test data, use data, or the like) to a remote server; ¶ 0026: [D]iagnostic and usage information that can be collected and reported include . . . errors/faults (e.g., no signal detected, actuator/positioning errors, power instability, non-functioning lights and/or peripheral device, etc.), test data, settings, user preferences, and/or usage information (e.g., settings, preferences, inputs, and/or actions) collected over time; ¶ 0041: The IFE units 110 can then independently transmit the collected diagnostic and usage information to the aircraft server 310)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to provide a ground server and an aircraft server, as taught by PHAN, such that the aircraft server is configured to generate alerts and/or instructions based upon the diagnostic and usage information (e.g., for errors/faults that can be corrected inflight or errors/faults that require the passenger to be relocated to prevent harm). See PHAN, at ¶ 0042.
Also, in the same field of endeavor, however, LIN teaches:
wherein a duration of the first test is a first function of a historical average duration taken for performing the first test . . . ; (¶ 0013: Block S102: Information of a plurality of products to be tested is obtained. The information of the plurality of products includes the number of the products, test items of each product, test devices required for testing the test items, and test duration of each test item. The test duration of the test item is the standard duration or the average duration, which an operator can modify according to actual situations)
wherein a duration of the second test is a second function of a historical average duration taken for performing the second test . . . ; and (¶ 0013: Block S102: Information of a plurality of products to be tested is obtained. The information of the plurality of products includes the number of the products, test items of each product, test devices required for testing the test items, and test duration of each test item. The test duration of the test item is the standard duration or the average duration, which an operator can modify according to actual situations)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to provide an average duration for performing testing, as taught by LIN, to coordinate a testing sequence in which multiple subjects are tested. See LIN, at ¶ 0012.
Also, in the same field of endeavor, GARLETT teaches:
wherein a duration of the first test is a first function of a . . . first randomized value associated with the current seat; (¶ 0007: [A] high speed data communication system having the capability to inject time changes in data windows of the signals for testing purposes; ¶ 0009: [S]tations include a self-test system to adjust on a random time interval basis the time duration of data windows present in a data signal. A time adjust system introduces time changes in a data window during which the signal may be present to be sensed. An activator system operating on a random or unpredictably occurring basis enables the time adjust system to introduce time delays in the data window; ¶ 0024: [S]elf-test system 48 adjusts on a random basis the time period or eye in which data windows are present in data signals in the fiber optic network)
wherein a duration of the second test is a second function of a . . . second randomized value associated with the current seat; and (¶ 0007: [A] high speed data communication system having the capability to inject time changes in data windows of the signals for testing purposes; ¶ 0009: [S]tations include a self-test system to adjust on a random time interval basis the time duration of data windows present in a data signal. A time adjust system introduces time changes in a data window during which the signal may be present to be sensed. An activator system operating on a random or unpredictably occurring basis enables the time adjust system to introduce time delays in the data window; ¶ 0024: [S]elf-test system 48 adjusts on a random basis the time period or eye in which data windows are present in data signals in the fiber optic network)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to enable the capability to periodically assure proper performance and receipt of data during variations in the time length of the data window or "eye" of signals in the communication system. See GARLETT, at ¶ 0002.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of BOMMER, PHAN, LIN, and GARLETT, as applied above, renders obvious the method of claim 1. BOMMER further discloses:
wherein the wireless transceiver is a Bluetooth® transceiver. (¶ 0025: [S]uitable radio access technologies include . . . Bluetooth, low power versions of Bluetooth)
Regarding claim 11, BOMMER discloses:
A system for performing equipment self-tests in an aircraft, comprising: (¶ 0029: [W]ireless performance testing system 100 may be installable on a complex system such as an aircraft)
a plurality of seats in the aircraft (aircraft 400/900), wherein each seat is associated with a corresponding seatback in-flight entertainment (IFE) system; (¶ 0053: An in-flight entertainment system may include wireless hardware components at various locations throughout the cabin such as above the ceiling, in the headrests of passenger seats, underneath passenger seats; ¶ 0036: The control module may be even further configured to receive, measure or calculate one or more parameters of the messages or other signals and/or responses; ¶ 0033: [T]he wireless monitor may include a control module 202 coupled to a radio 204. The control module may be generally configured to control the radio to emulate any of one or more wireless systems of interest, and cause transmission of and receive data during operation of the wireless monitor. The control module may also be configured to collect or otherwise receive, measure or calculate other data based on the wireless system of interest and/or the data transmitted or received during operation of the wireless monitor; ¶ 0057: [A] query from the hub monitor with sample data from which the quality of the communication link)
. . .
an on-board [hub monitor] configured to receive the message comprising the indication and a configuration for determining a first set of seats from which a current seat is configured to perform a reception and a second set of seats to which the current seat is configured to perform a transmission, (¶ 0051: [W]ireless monitors 404b, 404c may be installed at locations where seated passengers may access the respective access point; ¶ 0059: [W]ireless monitors 102 may be configured to operate in a mesh arrangement in which hub and node monitors may be indistinguishable. Any monitor may be configured to function as a hub monitor or node monitor; or in other terms, any one or more monitors may be configured to selectively function as a hub monitor or node monitor. The mesh arrangement may enable collection of a larger amount of sampling data as the wireless monitors may communicate with one another as opposed to a singular hub monitor, which may enable multiple coverage estimates; ¶ 0060: [A]ny of wireless monitors 404a, 404b, 404c may be configured to function as a hub monitor or node monitor, or may be configured to selectively function as a hub monitor and node monitor))
wherein the corresponding seatback IFE system for the current seat is configured to:
perform, for the first set of seats, a first test for a receiver of the wireless transceiver . . . ; (¶ 0036: [M]essages and responses may be between the wireless monitor and one or more other wireless monitors such as for performing a query/response, connectivity check, interrogation; ¶ 0057: [I]nterrogated node monitors 102 may respond to a query from the hub monitor with sample data from which the quality of the communication link between the hub monitor and respective node monitors may also be determined. In this case, the hub monitor may be configured to request the sample data as in the connectivity check, and may evaluate the received sample data (or lack thereof) from each node to verify success; ¶ 0033: The control module may be generally configured to . . . cause transmission of and receive data during operation of the wireless monitor)
perform, for the second set of seats, a second test for a transmitter of the wireless transceiver . . . ; and (¶ 0036: [M]essages and responses may be between the wireless monitor and one or more other wireless monitors such as for performing a query/response, connectivity check, interrogation; ¶ 0057: [I]nterrogated node monitors 102 may respond to a query from the hub monitor with sample data from which the quality of the communication link between the hub monitor and respective node monitors may also be determined. In this case, the hub monitor may be configured to request the sample data as in the connectivity check, and may evaluate the received sample data (or lack thereof) from each node to verify success; ¶ 0033: The control module may be generally configured to . . . cause transmission of and receive data during operation of the wireless monitor)
. . . (a) a first indication of whether the receiver is operational, (b) a second indication of whether the second test was completed, and (c) a list of successful transmitters and failed transmitters associated with the first set of seats. (¶ 0056: [W]ireless monitors 102 in a hub-and-spoke arrangement may be configured to perform a connectivity check. The hub monitor may be configured to check connectivity of the node monitors to the hub monitor such as at regular intervals. The hub monitor may then be configured to record success or failure of the connectivity for each node monitor with an appropriate time stamp. In this regard, success or failure of a connectivity check may be determined based on the type of wireless system of interest and its radio access technology; ¶ 0060: [T]he hub monitor may also be configured to transmit sample data to the hub monitors, and timestamp and log a successful transmission)
BOMMER does not explicitly disclose:
a ground server configured to transmit a message comprising an indication to perform a self-test for a wireless transceiver associated with the corresponding seatback IFE system; and [a] maintenance server
wherein a duration of the first test is a first function of a historical average duration taken for performing the first test and a first randomized value associated with the current seat;
wherein a duration of the second test is a second function of a historical average duration taken for performing the second test and a second randomized value associated with the current seat; and
transmit, to the on-board maintenance server based on a completion of the first test and the second test, a report comprising
In the same field of endeavor, however, PHAN teaches:
a ground server configured to transmit a message comprising an indication to perform a self-test for a wireless transceiver associated with the corresponding seatback IFE system; and [a] maintenance server . . . (¶ 0039: IFE units 110 can be configured to transmit the diagnostic and usage information (e.g., faults, errors, test data, usage data (e.g., usage statistics), user settings/preferences, current settings, any combination thereof, etc.) to the aircraft server 310 periodically, based upon a schedule, in response to triggering event (e.g., startup, restart, detected error/fault), and/or in response to a query/request received from the aircraft server 310 or received via the aircraft server 310 (e.g., from the ground server 318))
transmit, to the on-board maintenance server based on a completion of the first test and the second test, a report comprising (¶ 0004: The aircraft server can be configured to receive the diagnostic and usage information from the seat control modules and/or the inflight entertainment units; ¶ 0018: [A] system and method for monitoring passenger chair components and reporting diagnostic and usage information (e.g., faults, test data, use data, or the like) to a remote server; ¶ 0026: [D]iagnostic and usage information that can be collected and reported include . . . errors/faults (e.g., no signal detected, actuator/positioning errors, power instability, non-functioning lights and/or peripheral device, etc.), test data, settings, user preferences, and/or usage information (e.g., settings, preferences, inputs, and/or actions) collected over time; ¶ 0041: The IFE units 110 can then independently transmit the collected diagnostic and usage information to the aircraft server 310)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to provide a ground server and an aircraft server, as taught by PHAN, such that the aircraft server is configured to generate alerts and/or instructions based upon the diagnostic and usage information (e.g., for errors/faults that can be corrected inflight or errors/faults that require the passenger to be relocated to prevent harm). See PHAN, at ¶ 0042.
Also, in the same field of endeavor, however, LIN teaches:
wherein a duration of the first test is a first function of a historical average duration taken for performing the first test . . . ; (¶ 0013: Block S102: Information of a plurality of products to be tested is obtained. The information of the plurality of products includes the number of the products, test items of each product, test devices required for testing the test items, and test duration of each test item. The test duration of the test item is the standard duration or the average duration, which an operator can modify according to actual situations)
wherein a duration of the second test is a second function of a historical average duration taken for performing the second test . . . ; and (¶ 0013: Block S102: Information of a plurality of products to be tested is obtained. The information of the plurality of products includes the number of the products, test items of each product, test devices required for testing the test items, and test duration of each test item. The test duration of the test item is the standard duration or the average duration, which an operator can modify according to actual situations)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to provide an average duration for performing testing, as taught by LIN, to coordinate a testing sequence in which multiple subjects are tested. See LIN, at ¶ 0012.
Also, in the same field of endeavor, GARLETT teaches:
wherein a duration of the first test is a first function of a . . . first randomized value associated with the current seat; (¶ 0007: [A] high speed data communication system having the capability to inject time changes in data windows of the signals for testing purposes; ¶ 0009: [S]tations include a self-test system to adjust on a random time interval basis the time duration of data windows present in a data signal. A time adjust system introduces time changes in a data window during which the signal may be present to be sensed. An activator system operating on a random or unpredictably occurring basis enables the time adjust system to introduce time delays in the data window; ¶ 0024: [S]elf-test system 48 adjusts on a random basis the time period or eye in which data windows are present in data signals in the fiber optic network)
wherein a duration of the second test is a second function of a . . . second randomized value associated with the current seat; and (¶ 0007: [A] high speed data communication system having the capability to inject time changes in data windows of the signals for testing purposes; ¶ 0009: [S]tations include a self-test system to adjust on a random time interval basis the time duration of data windows present in a data signal. A time adjust system introduces time changes in a data window during which the signal may be present to be sensed. An activator system operating on a random or unpredictably occurring basis enables the time adjust system to introduce time delays in the data window; ¶ 0024: [S]elf-test system 48 adjusts on a random basis the time period or eye in which data windows are present in data signals in the fiber optic network)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to enable the capability to periodically assure proper performance and receipt of data during variations in the time length of the data window or "eye" of signals in the communication system. See GARLETT, at ¶ 0002.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of BOMMER, PHAN, LIN, and GARLETT, as applied above, renders obvious the system of claim 11. BOMMER further discloses:
wherein the wireless transceiver is a Bluetooth® transceiver. (¶ 0025: [S]uitable radio access technologies include . . . Bluetooth, low power versions of Bluetooth)
Regarding claim 14, BOMMER discloses:
An apparatus for performing equipment self-tests in an aircraft, comprising: (¶ 0029: [W]ireless performance testing system 100 may be installable on a complex system such as an aircraft)
one or more processors of a [hub monitor] on the aircraft (aircraft 400/900) that are configured to:
receive . . . a first message comprising an indication for a seatback in-flight entertainment (IFE) system associated with each of a plurality of seats in the aircraft to perform a self-test for a wireless transceiver associated with the seatback IFE system and a corresponding seat; and (¶ 0051: [W]ireless monitors 404b, 404c may be installed at locations where seated passengers may access the respective access point; ¶ 0059: [W]ireless monitors 102 may be configured to operate in a mesh arrangement in which hub and node monitors may be indistinguishable. Any monitor may be configured to function as a hub monitor or node monitor; or in other terms, any one or more monitors may be configured to selectively function as a hub monitor or node monitor. The mesh arrangement may enable collection of a larger amount of sampling data as the wireless monitors may communicate with one another as opposed to a singular hub monitor, which may enable multiple coverage estimates; ¶ 0060: [A]ny of wireless monitors 404a, 404b, 404c may be configured to function as a hub monitor or node monitor, or may be configured to selectively function as a hub monitor and node monitor))
transmit, to each wireless transceiver, a second message comprising the indication and a configuration that enables the corresponding seat to determine a first set of seats from which the corresponding seat is configured to perform a reception and a second set of seats to which the corresponding seat is configured to perform a transmission, wherein the seatback IFE system is configured to (a) perform, for the first set of seats, a first test for a receiver of the each wireless transceiver, (¶ 0036: [M]essages and responses may be between the wireless monitor and one or more other wireless monitors such as for performing a query/response, connectivity check, interrogation; ¶ 0057: [I]nterrogated node monitors 102 may respond to a query from the hub monitor with sample data from which the quality of the communication link between the hub monitor and respective node monitors may also be determined. In this case, the hub monitor may be configured to request the sample data as in the connectivity check, and may evaluate the received sample data (or lack thereof) from each node to verify success; ¶ 0033: The control module may be generally configured to . . . cause transmission of and receive data during operation of the wireless monitor)
. . .
(b) perform, for the second set of seats, a second test for a transmitter of the each wireless transceiver, (¶ 0036: [M]essages and responses may be between the wireless monitor and one or more other wireless monitors such as for performing a query/response, connectivity check, interrogation; ¶ 0057: [I]nterrogated node monitors 102 may respond to a query from the hub monitor with sample data from which the quality of the communication link between the hub monitor and respective node monitors may also be determined. In this case, the hub monitor may be configured to request the sample data as in the connectivity check, and may evaluate the received sample data (or lack thereof) from each node to verify success; ¶ 0033: The control module may be generally configured to . . . cause transmission of and receive data during operation of the wireless monitor)
. . .
wherein the one or more processors is further configured to:
. . . (a) a first indication of whether the receiver is operational, (b) a second indication of whether the second test was completed, and (c) a list of successful transmitters and failed transmitters associated with the first set of seats. (¶ 0056: [W]ireless monitors 102 in a hub-and-spoke arrangement may be configured to perform a connectivity check. The hub monitor may be configured to check connectivity of the node monitors to the hub monitor such as at regular intervals. The hub monitor may then be configured to record success or failure of the connectivity for each node monitor with an appropriate time stamp. In this regard, success or failure of a connectivity check may be determined based on the type of wireless system of interest and its radio access technology; ¶ 0060: [T]he hub monitor may also be configured to transmit sample data to the hub monitors, and timestamp and log a successful transmission)
BOMMER does not explicitly disclose:
from a ground server external to the aircraft
wherein a duration of the first test is a first function of a historical average duration taken for performing the first test and a first randomized value associated with the corresponding seat, and
wherein a duration of the second test is a second function of a historical average duration taken for performing the second test and a second randomized value associated with the corresponding seat, and
receive, from the each wireless transceiver and based on a completion of the first test and the second test, a report comprising
In the same field of endeavor, however, PHAN teaches:
from a ground server external to the aircraft (¶ 0039: IFE units 110 can be configured to transmit the diagnostic and usage information (e.g., faults, errors, test data, usage data (e.g., usage statistics), user settings/preferences, current settings, any combination thereof, etc.) to the aircraft server . . . in response to a query/request received . . . via the aircraft server 310 (e.g., from the ground server 318))
receive, from the each wireless transceiver and based on a completion of the first test and the second test, a report comprising (¶ 0004: The aircraft server can be configured to receive the diagnostic and usage information from the seat control modules and/or the inflight entertainment units; ¶ 0018: [A] system and method for monitoring passenger chair components and reporting diagnostic and usage information (e.g., faults, test data, use data, or the like) to a remote server; ¶ 0026: [D]iagnostic and usage information that can be collected and reported include . . . errors/faults (e.g., no signal detected, actuator/positioning errors, power instability, non-functioning lights and/or peripheral device, etc.), test data, settings, user preferences, and/or usage information (e.g., settings, preferences, inputs, and/or actions) collected over time; ¶ 0041: The IFE units 110 can then independently transmit the collected diagnostic and usage information to the aircraft server 310)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to provide a ground server and an aircraft server, as taught by PHAN, such that the aircraft server is configured to generate alerts and/or instructions based upon the diagnostic and usage information (e.g., for errors/faults that can be corrected inflight or errors/faults that require the passenger to be relocated to prevent harm). See PHAN, at ¶ 0042.
Also, in the same field of endeavor, however, LIN teaches:
wherein a duration of the first test is a first function of a historical average duration taken for performing the first test . . . ; (¶ 0013: Block S102: Information of a plurality of products to be tested is obtained. The information of the plurality of products includes the number of the products, test items of each product, test devices required for testing the test items, and test duration of each test item. The test duration of the test item is the standard duration or the average duration, which an operator can modify according to actual situations)
wherein a duration of the second test is a second function of a historical average duration taken for performing the second test . . . ; and (¶ 0013: Block S102: Information of a plurality of products to be tested is obtained. The information of the plurality of products includes the number of the products, test items of each product, test devices required for testing the test items, and test duration of each test item. The test duration of the test item is the standard duration or the average duration, which an operator can modify according to actual situations)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to provide an average duration for performing testing, as taught by LIN, to coordinate a testing sequence in which multiple subjects are tested. See LIN, at ¶ 0012.
Also, in the same field of endeavor, GARLETT teaches:
wherein a duration of the first test is a first function of a . . . first randomized value associated with the current seat; (¶ 0007: [A] high speed data communication system having the capability to inject time changes in data windows of the signals for testing purposes; ¶ 0009: [S]tations include a self-test system to adjust on a random time interval basis the time duration of data windows present in a data signal. A time adjust system introduces time changes in a data window during which the signal may be present to be sensed. An activator system operating on a random or unpredictably occurring basis enables the time adjust system to introduce time delays in the data window; ¶ 0024: [S]elf-test system 48 adjusts on a random basis the time period or eye in which data windows are present in data signals in the fiber optic network)
wherein a duration of the second test is a second function of a . . . second randomized value associated with the current seat; and (¶ 0007: [A] high speed data communication system having the capability to inject time changes in data windows of the signals for testing purposes; ¶ 0009: [S]tations include a self-test system to adjust on a random time interval basis the time duration of data windows present in a data signal. A time adjust system introduces time changes in a data window during which the signal may be present to be sensed. An activator system operating on a random or unpredictably occurring basis enables the time adjust system to introduce time delays in the data window; ¶ 0024: [S]elf-test system 48 adjusts on a random basis the time period or eye in which data windows are present in data signals in the fiber optic network)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to enable the capability to periodically assure proper performance and receipt of data during variations in the time length of the data window or "eye" of signals in the communication system. See GARLETT, at ¶ 0002.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of BOMMER, PHAN, LIN, and GARLETT, as applied above, renders obvious the apparatus of claim 14. BOMMER does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the maintenance server is triggered to transmit the second message by a crew member of the aircraft or by the ground server.
In the same field of endeavor, however, PHAN further teaches:
wherein the maintenance server is triggered to transmit the second message by a crew member of the aircraft or by the ground server. (¶ 0039: The aircraft server 310 is configured to receive diagnostic and usage information collected by one or more IFE units 110 from respective seat control modules 206 or respective groups of seat control modules 206. For example, the one or more IFE units 110 can be configured to transmit the diagnostic and usage information (e.g., faults, errors, test data, usage data (e.g., usage statistics), user settings/preferences, current settings, any combination thereof, etc.) to the aircraft server 310 periodically, based upon a schedule, in response to triggering event (e.g., startup, restart, detected error/fault), and/or in response to a query/request received from the aircraft server 310 or received via the aircraft server 310 (e.g., from the ground server 318))
Regarding claim 20, the combination of BOMMER, PHAN, LIN, and GARLETT, as applied above, renders obvious the apparatus of claim 14. BOMMER further discloses:
wherein the wireless transceiver is a Bluetooth® transceiver. (¶ 0025: [S]uitable radio access technologies include . . . Bluetooth, low power versions of Bluetooth)
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over BOMMER in view of PHAN, LIN, and GARLETT, as applied above, and further in view of US 2014/0053185 (hereinafter, “BLEACHER”)
Regarding claim 5, the combination of BOMMER, PHAN, LIN, and GARLETT, as applied above, renders obvious the method of claim 1. BOMMER does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the seatback IFE system of the current seat comprises a graphical user interface (GUI) associated with a first wireless transceiver and an integrated handheld device associated with a second wireless transceiver.
In the same field of endeavor, however, BLEACHER teaches:
wherein the seatback IFE system of the current seat comprises a graphical user interface (GUI) associated with a first wireless transceiver and an integrated handheld device associated with a second wireless transceiver. (¶ 0004: User interfaces to existing IFE systems may include a touch screen on a dedicated seat display monitor or video display unit disposed at the passenger seat, such as in the seat back in front of the passenger seat. A user interface can be provided by a remote controller that is wireless or tethered at a passenger seat while being within reach of the passenger)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to provide handheld controllers, as taught by BLEACHER, to facilitate a user's control of the content displayed on the video display units via remote controls for personal use by passengers at their seats in the aircraft. See BLEACHER, at ¶ 0003.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over BOMMER in view of PHAN, LIN, and GARLETT, as applied above, and further in view of US 2019/0031366 (hereinafter, “LAUER”)
Regarding claim 8, the combination of BOMMER, PHAN, LIN, and GARLETT, as applied above, the method of claim 1. BOMMER does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the seatback IFE system of the current seat excludes an integrated handheld device.
In the same field of endeavor, however, LAUER teaches:
wherein the seatback IFE system of the current seat excludes an integrated handheld device. (¶ 0019: Seat-back passenger units 106 may be in-flight entertainment devices that enable passengers to watch movies and/or television programming (e.g., via IPTV))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to provide seat-back passenger units without an integrated handheld device, as taught by LAUER, to enable physical coupling to the seat-back mounting unit, which is in turn affixed to the seat-back, such that the seat-back mounting units are partially embedded within the seats. See LAUER, at ¶ 0019.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over BOMMER in view of PHAN, LIN, GARLETT, and LAUER, as applied above, and further in view of US 2012/0310585 (hereinafter, “OLIVEIRA”)
Regarding claim 9, the combination of BOMMER, PHAN, LIN, GARLETT, and LAUER, as applied above, renders obvious the method of claim 8. BOMMER further discloses:
wherein the seatback IFE system of the current seat performing the first test comprises:
receiving, by the receiver of the wireless transceiver associated with the current seat, one or more messages from a first wireless transceiver associated with a first . . . seat . . . . (¶ 0033: The control module may be generally configured to . . . cause transmission of and receive data during operation of the wireless monitor)
BOMMER does not explicitly disclose:
[an] adjacent seat located rightward from the current seat.
In the same field of endeavor, however, OLIVEIRA teaches:
[an] adjacent seat located rightward from the current seat. (¶ 0045: The tester can also select groups of seats, e.g., 5A-15J)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify BOMMER’s wireless performance testing system to provide seat-back passenger units without an integrated handheld device, as taught by OLIVEIRA, to perform a common set of operations, such that a test graphical user interface is provided to enable interaction with the simulated seat. See OLIVEIRA, at ¶ 0045.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of BOMMER, PHAN, LIN, GARLETT, and OLIVEIRA, as applied above, renders obvious the method of claim 9. BOMMER further discloses:
wherein the seatback IFE system of the current seat performing the second test comprises:
transmitting, by the transmitter of the wireless transceiver associated with the current seat, the one or more messages to a second wireless transceiver associated with a second . . . seat . . . . (¶ 0033: The control module may be generally configured to . . . cause transmission of and receive data during operation of the wireless monitor)
BOMMER does not explicitly disclose:
[an] adjacent seat located leftward from the current seat.
In the same field of endeavor, however, OLIVEIRA further teaches:
[an] adjacent seat located leftward from the current seat. (¶ 0045: The tester can also select groups of seats, e.g., 5A-15J)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 13, and 15-18 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Garth D Richmond whose telephone number is (703)756-4559. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET.
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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 571-270-5371. 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.
/GARTH D RICHMOND/Examiner, Art Unit 2644
/KATHY W WANG-HURST/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights