Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
DETAILED ACTION
2. This communication is in response to Application No. 18/989,497 filed on 20 December 2024.
Claims 1-27 are presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application in TAIWAN 113142381 11/05/2024.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an input unit”, “a simulation unit” and “a deployment unit” in claim 1 and “an input unit”, “a simulation unit” and “a deployment unit” in claim 20.
When looking to the specification, a few times that an automatic deployment system is provided, which includes an input unit, a simulation unit, and a deployment unit (page 2 lines 24-26]) and the invention is an automatic deployment system for a signal path redistributor 6, which includes an input unit 1, a simulation unit 2 and a deployment unit 3 (page 4 lines 14-16]). At best the drawing Fig 1 show that an input unit, a simulation unit and a deployment unit is a box within the automatic deployment system.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, because the claim purports to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, but fails to recite a combination of elements as required by that statutory provision and thus cannot rely on the specification to provide the structure, material or acts to support the claimed function. Such elements are the input unit for receiving a first actual transmission information and a second actual transmission information, the simulation unit for receiving a plurality of simulation parameters to generate a first simulation information and a second simulation information and the deployment unit for training to generate a prediction deployment model. As such, the claim recites a function that has no limits and covers every conceivable means for achieving the stated function, while the specification discloses at most only those means known to the inventor. Accordingly, the disclosure is not commensurate with the scope of the claim.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
8. Claims 1-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
9. Claim 1 recites “an input unit”, “a simulation unit” and “a deployment unit” and claim 20 recites “an input unit”, “a simulation unit” and “a deployment unit”. However, the claims fail to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. For instance, the specification in page 2 lines 24-26 states
an automatic deployment system is provided, which includes an input unit, a simulation unit, and a deployment unit and the specification in page 4 lines 24-26 states the invention is an automatic deployment system for a signal path redistributor 6, which includes an input unit 1, a simulation unit 2 and a deployment unit 3 . However, the claims fail to disclose the processor as components of the system structure. At best the drawing Fig 1 show that an input unit, a simulation unit and a deployment unit is a box within the automatic deployment system. Boxes are not adequate structure. Therefore, the claims are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
10. Claims 2-19 and 21-27 fail to cure the deficiencies of their parent claim(s) and, therefore, inherit the rejections.
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 3-19 and 22-27 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. Claims 1-2 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OREKONDY et al. (US 2023/0155704 A1); in view of SUN et al. (US 2024/0314613 A1).
Regarding claim 1, OREKONDY discloses an automatic deployment system, comprising: an input unit, receiving a first actual transmission information and a second actual transmission information in a communication environment without signal path redistributor ([paragraph 0038-0039, 0046, 0071-0073, 0091-0092] describes automatic deployment system includes channel model (e.g. input unit) receiving input data includes actual various transmission information relating to certain frequencies (e.g. a first actual transmission information and a second actual transmission information) in a communication scenarios which is not using signal path periodically regenerated distribution (e.g. redistributor));
a simulation unit, connected to the input unit, the simulation unit receiving a plurality of simulation parameters and simulating to generate a first simulation information and a second simulation information according to the plurality of simulation parameters ([paragraph 0029, 0037-0039, 0055, 0081-0084] describes simulation system (e.g. simulation system) connected to channel model (e.g. input unit) and simulation system (e.g. simulation system) receiving various simulation parameters to generate different simulation information (e.g. a first simulation information and a second simulation information) according to various simulation parameters);
OREKONDY fails to teach and a deployment unit, connected to the simulation unit and the input unit, the deployment unit training to generate a prediction deployment model according to the first actual transmission information, the first simulation information, and the second simulation information and using the prediction deployment model to generate a prediction deployment information according to the second actual transmission information.
However, SUN teaches and a deployment unit, connected to the simulation unit and the input unit, the deployment unit training to generate a prediction deployment model according to the first actual transmission information, the first simulation information, and the second simulation information and using the prediction deployment model to generate a prediction deployment information according to the second actual transmission information ([paragraph 0011, 0054-0055, 0094, 0111-0113, 0140-0144] describes deployment AI model (e.g. deployment unit) connected to input model (e.g. input unit) and simulation platform (e.g. simulation unit), deployment AI model (e.g. deployment unit) perform one or more different stages of a prediction process and generate prediction model (e.g. prediction deployment model) based on actual transmission information, simulation information and another simulation information (e.g. second simulation information) and prediction model (e.g. prediction deployment model) to generate a prediction deployment information according to the another (e.g. second) actual transmission information).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of OREKONDY to include a deployment unit, connected to the simulation unit and the input unit, the deployment unit training to generate a prediction deployment model according to the first actual transmission information, the first simulation information, and the second simulation information and using the prediction deployment model to generate a prediction deployment information according to the second actual transmission information as taught by SUN. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of OREKONDY in the SUN system in order to effectively implement artificial intelligence in a network ([paragraph 0003] in SUN).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of OREKONDY and SUN teaches the automatic deployment system, wherein the deployment unit is provided with a simulation performance threshold; after the deployment unit generates the prediction deployment information, the deployment unit compares a performance of the prediction deployment information with the simulation performance threshold (SUN:[paragraph 0031-0032, 0047-0051, 0111-0112] describes deployment AI model (e.g. deployment unit) included with a simulation performance threshold and deployment AI model (e.g. deployment unit) comparing a performance of prediction deployment information with the simulation performance threshold after deployment AI model (e.g. deployment unit) generates prediction deployment information);
when the performance of the prediction deployment information meets the simulation performance threshold, the deployment unit publishes the prediction deployment information to a signal path redistributor in the communication environment; when the performance of the prediction deployment information does not meet the simulation performance threshold, the plurality of simulation parameters are adjusted to regenerate a new prediction deployment information (SUN: [paragraph 0011, 0047-0051, 0054-0055, 0109-0113, 0140-0144] describes when the performance of the prediction deployment information meets the simulation performance threshold, the deployment AI model (e.g. deployment unit) communicating (e.g. publishes) the prediction deployment information to quantity of signal path (e.g. signal path redistributor) in the communication environment and when the performance of the prediction deployment information does not meet the simulation performance threshold, simulation parameters are adjusted to regenerate a new prediction deployment information).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of OREKONDY to include wherein the deployment unit is provided with a simulation performance threshold; after the deployment unit generates the prediction deployment information, the deployment unit compares a performance of the prediction deployment information with the simulation performance threshold; when the performance of the prediction deployment information meets the simulation performance threshold, the deployment unit publishes the prediction deployment information to a signal path redistributor in the communication environment; when the performance of the prediction deployment information does not meet the simulation performance threshold, the plurality of simulation parameters are adjusted to regenerate a new prediction deployment information as taught by SUN. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of OREKONDY in the SUN system in order to effectively implement artificial intelligence in a network ([paragraph 0003] in SUN).
Regarding claim 20, OREKONDY discloses an automatic deployment method, applied to an automatic deployment system, the automatic deployment system comprising an input unit, a simulation unit and a deployment unit, the automatic deployment method comprising receiving, by the input unit, a first actual transmission information in a communication environment without signal path redistributor([paragraph 0038-0039, 0046, 0071-0073, 0091-0092] describes automatic deployment system includes channel model (e.g. input unit) receiving input data includes actual various transmission information relating to certain frequencies (e.g. a first actual transmission information and a second actual transmission information) in a communication scenarios which is not using signal path periodically regenerated distribution (e.g. redistributor));
receiving, by the simulation unit, a plurality of simulation parameters; simulating, by the simulation unit, to generate a first simulation information and a second simulation information according to the plurality of simulation parameters([paragraph 0029, 0037-0039, 0055, 0081-0084] describes simulation system (e.g. simulation system) connected to channel model (e.g. input unit) and simulation system (e.g. simulation system) receiving various simulation parameters to generate different simulation information (e.g. a first simulation information and a second simulation information) according to various simulation parameters);
OREKONDY fails to teach training, by the deployment unit, to generate a prediction deployment model according to the first actual transmission information, the first simulation information, and the second simulation information and using the prediction deployment model to generate a prediction deployment information according to a second actual transmission information received by the input unit ; publishing, by the deployment unit, the prediction deployment information to a signal path redistributor in the communication environment.
However, SUN teaches training, by the deployment unit, to generate a prediction deployment model according to the first actual transmission information, the first simulation information, and the second simulation information and using the prediction deployment model to generate a prediction deployment information according to a second actual transmission information received by the input unit ; publishing, by the deployment unit, the prediction deployment information to a signal path redistributor in the communication environment ([paragraph 0011, 0054-0055, 0094, 0111-0113, 0140-0144] describes deployment AI model (e.g. deployment unit) connected to input model (e.g. input unit) and simulation platform (e.g. simulation unit), deployment AI model (e.g. deployment unit) perform one or more different stages of a prediction process and generate prediction model (e.g. prediction deployment model) based on actual transmission information, simulation information and another simulation information (e.g. second simulation information) and prediction model (e.g. prediction deployment model) to generate a prediction deployment information according to the another (e.g. second) actual transmission information);
publishing, by the deployment unit, the prediction deployment information to a signal path redistributor in the communication environment ([paragraph 0047-0051, 0054-0055, 0109-0113] describes the deployment AI model (e.g. deployment unit) communicating (e.g. publishes) the prediction deployment information to quantity of signal path (e.g. signal path redistributor) in the communication environment).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of OREKONDY to include training, by the deployment unit, to generate a prediction deployment model according to the first actual transmission information, the first simulation information, and the second simulation information and using the prediction deployment model to generate a prediction deployment information according to a second actual transmission information received by the0 input unit; publishing, by the deployment unit, the prediction deployment information to a signal path redistributor in the communication environment as taught by SUN. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of OREKONDY in the SUN system in order to effectively implement artificial intelligence in a network ([paragraph 0003] in SUN).
Regarding claim 21, this claim contains limitations found within that of claim 2 and the same rationale to rejection is used.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
- Goodman et al., US 2024/0354598 A1, Embodiments of the disclosure provide for data-driven predictions within a process simulation system.
- XU et al., US 2022/0277118 A1, A method includes providing a plurality of simulation components.
- LEE et al., US 2022/0131764 A1, A method, performed by an electronic device, of controlling a state control parameter for adjusting a state of a network of a base station, using any one of a plurality of models.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEHULKUMAR J SHAH whose telephone number is (571)272-1072. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 6:05 am-3:55 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, TONIA DOLLINGER can be reached at 571-272-4170. 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.
/M.J.S/Examiner, Art Unit 2459 /TONIA L DOLLINGER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2459
Prosecution Insights