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 .
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.
This office action is in response to the communication filed on 7/24/2026.
Claims 1-13 are pending.
Response to Amendments
The 35 USC 112 rejection has been withdrawn due to the amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior art rejection have been considered but found moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 8, 13 is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang et al. (US 2021/0092018, herein “Fang”) in view of Harata et al. (US 2015/0254909, “Harata”).
As to claim 1, Fang discloses a relay device for use in an in-vehicle network that includes a plurality of functional units constituted of circuitries, the in-vehicle network including a first network and a second network (fig. 5, 6, 7, in-vehicle networks behind a first gateway and second gateways, or relay devices),
the relay device (fig. 5-7, first or second gateway) comprising:
a relay unit constituted of a circuitry and configured to perform relay processing to relay frames transmitted and received between the functional units in the first network and the functional units in the second network, and frames transmitted and received between a plurality of the functional units in the second network ([0250], translation circuit 2808 that selectively relays first communications data 2904 to the second network interface circuit 2816 for transmission on the second network 2817, and/or second communications data 2906 to the first network interface circuit 2802 for transmission on the first network 2805, fig. 5, network interfaces connecting devices in network 512 and 514); and
a proxy processing unit constituted of a circuitry and configured to act as a proxy for the plurality of functional units in the second network by operating as a communication partner of the functional units in the first network ([0129], fig. 25, translation circuit for configuring messages for passage from one of the network(s) 406 to another one of the network(s) 406—for example where the networks 406 are of different types, utilize different protocols) in communicating information regarding setting processing for performing communication in the in-vehicle network (abstract, fig. 60, 71, 72, policies for regulation of communications between end points of networks).
wherein the proxy processing unit is further configured to:
receive first setting information from the first network; convert the first setting information into second setting information for the second network; perform the setting processing for applying the second setting information to one or more functional units of the plurality of functional units in the second network (fig. 7, [0138], [0180], translation circuits 702 and 704 (claimed proxy) receive and translate a command/setting from a network to target endpoint devices in another network, the target endpoint devices apply the command/setting).
Fang does not disclose: transmit a completion response to the first network after completion of the setting processing.
Harata discloses transmit a completion response to the first network after completion of the setting processing (fig. 1, 2, 3, [0109], [0120], a command complete response from a target ECU in a target network 30 to a gateway 10 back to the network of origin 50 (network of the 2nd tool)).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Harata’s complete response to Fang’s teachings in order to simply notify the source of settings a completion at the destination.
As to claim 7, Fang discloses a communication control method to be performed in a relay device for use in an in-vehicle network that includes a plurality of functional units, the in-vehicle network including a first network and a second network (fig. 5, 6, 7, in-vehicle networks behind a first gateway and second gateways, or relay devices), the communication control method comprising:
a step of performing relay processing to relay frames transmitted and received between the functional units in the first network and the functional units in the second network, and frames transmitted and received between a plurality of the functional units in the second network ([0250], translation circuit 2808 that selectively relays first communications data 2904 to the second network interface circuit 2816 for transmission on the second network 2817, and/or second communications data 2906 to the first network interface circuit 2802 for transmission on the first network 2805, fig. 5, network interfaces connecting devices in network 512 and 514); and
a step of acting as a proxy for the plurality of functional units in the second network by operating as a communication partner of the functional units in the first network in communicating information regarding setting processing for performing communication in the in-vehicle network ([0129], fig. 25, translation circuit for configuring messages for passage from one of the network(s) 406 to another one of the network(s) 406—for example where the networks 406 are of different types, utilize different protocols) in communicating information regarding setting processing for performing communication in the in-vehicle network (abstract, fig. 60, 71, 72, policies for regulation of communications between end points of networks).
wherein the step of acting as a proxy comprises:
receiving first setting information from the first network; converting the first setting information into second setting information for the second network; performing the setting processing for applying the second setting information to one or more functional units of the plurality of functional units in the second network (fig. 7, [0138], [0180], translation circuits 702 and 704 (claimed proxy) receive and translate a command/setting from a network to target endpoint devices in another network, the target endpoint devices apply the command/setting).
Fang does not disclose: transmitting a completion response to the first network after completion of the setting processing.
Harata discloses transmitting a completion response to the first network after completion of the setting processing (fig. 1, 2, 3, [0109], [0120], a command complete response from a target ECU in a target network 30 to a gateway 10 back to the network of origin 50 (network of the 2nd tool)).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Harata’s complete response to Fang’s teachings in order to simply notify the source of settings a completion at the destination.
As to claim 8, Fang discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium ([0398]) storing a communication control program for a relay device for use in an in-vehicle network that includes a plurality of functional units, the in-vehicle network including a first network and a second network (fig. 5, 6, 7, in-vehicle networks behind a first gateway and second gateways, or relay devices), the communication control program, when executed by a computer, causing the computer to function as:
a relay unit configured to perform relay processing to relay frames transmitted and received between the functional units in the first network and the functional units in the second network, and frames transmitted and received between a plurality of the functional units in the second network ([0250], translation circuit 2808 that selectively relays first communications data 2904 to the second network interface circuit 2816 for transmission on the second network 2817, and/or second communications data 2906 to the first network interface circuit 2802 for transmission on the first network 2805, fig. 5, network interfaces connecting devices in network 512 and 514); and
a proxy processing unit configured to act as a proxy for the plurality of functional units in the second network by operating as a communication partner of the functional units in the first network in communicating information regarding setting processing for performing communication in the in-vehicle network ([0129], fig. 25, translation circuit for configuring messages for passage from one of the network(s) 406 to another one of the network(s) 406—for example where the networks 406 are of different types, utilize different protocols) in communicating information regarding setting processing for performing communication in the in-vehicle network (abstract, fig. 60, 71, 72, policies for regulation of communications between end points of networks).
wherein the proxy processing unit is further configured to:
receive first setting information from the first network; convert the first setting information into second setting information for the second network; perform the setting processing for applying the second setting information to one or more functional units of the plurality of functional units in the second network (fig. 7, [0138], [0180], translation circuits 702 and 704 (claimed proxy) receive and translate a command/setting from a network to target endpoint devices in another network, the target endpoint devices apply the command/setting).
Fang does not disclose: transmit a completion response to the first network after completion of the setting processing.
Harata discloses transmit a completion response to the first network after completion of the setting processing (fig. 1, 2, 3, [0109], [0120], a command complete response from a target ECU in a target network 30 to a gateway 10 back to the network of origin 50 (network of the 2nd tool)).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Harata’s complete response to Fang’s teachings in order to simply notify the source of settings a completion at the destination.
As to claim 13, Fang-Harata discloses the second setting information includes at least one of filtering, communication bandwidth, a frame priority, and a VLAN setting (Fang, [0195], allowing or disallowing certain communication types, certain communication priority thresholds, etc., during certain operating conditions; and/or capturing certain data values during certain operating conditions as a data capturing event), quantitative (e.g., controlling a rate of communications, a network zone utilization, external device communication rates, etc.) of a different relay device (Fang, fig. 7, [0138], message translation between 2 gateways or relays of 2 networks).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang-Harata in view of Rajan et al. (US 2017/0072876, “Rajan”).
As to claim 2, Fang-Harata discloses the proxy processing unit acquires functional unit information regarding each of the functional units in the second network, and transmits the functional unit information regarding the relay device to the first network (Fang, [0129], [0250]).
Fang-Harata does not disclose generating aggregate information based on the acquired functional unit information and transmitting the generated aggregate information.
Rajan discloses generating aggregate information based on the acquired functional unit information and transmitting the generated aggregate information ([0018], [0032], in-vehicle control circuitry for aggregating payloads into a single outgoing message to other networks).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Rajan’s message aggregation to Fang-Harata’s teachings in order to reduce message overhead (Rajan, [0032])
Claim(s) 5, 6 is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang-Harata in view of Ishigooka et al. (US 2012/0307836, “Ishigooka”).
As to claim 5, Fang-Harata does not disclose the proxy processing unit generates the second setting information for each of the functional units to be subjected to the setting processing in the second network, based on the first setting information received from the functional units in the first network, and transmits the generated second setting information to a corresponding functional unit in the second network.
Ishigooka discloses disclose the proxy processing unit generates the second setting information for each of the functional units to be subjected to the setting processing in the second network, based on the first setting information received from the functional units in the first network, and transmits the generated second setting information to a corresponding functional unit in the second network (fig. 33, 9, [0111]-[0121], each gateway ECU receives relayed topology information regarding other ECU networks and updates its routing table by using the received topology information).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Ishigooka’s topology or routing information relay to Fang-Harata’s teachings in order to facilitate communication between ECUs belonging to different networks (Ishigooka, [0021])
As to claim 6, for the same rationale in claim 5, Fang-Harata-Ishigooka discloses the proxy processing unit generates the second setting information for the relay device that is one of the functional units to be subjected to the setting processing, based on the first setting information received from the functional units in the first network, and the relay device further comprises: a setting unit constituted of a circuitry and configured to perform the setting processing for the relay device, based on the second setting information for the relay device that is generated by the proxy processing unit (Ishigooka, fig. 33, 9, [0111]-[0121], each gateway ECU receives relayed topology information regarding other ECU networks and updates its routing table by using the received topology information).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang-Harata-Rajan in view of Ishigooka.
As to claim 9, Fang-Harata-Rajan does not disclose the proxy processing unit generates setting information for each of the functional units to be subjected to the setting processing in the second network, based on the setting information received from the functional units in the first network, and transmits the generated setting information to the corresponding functional unit.
Ishigooka discloses disclose the proxy processing unit generates setting information for each of the functional units to be subjected to the setting processing in the second network, based on the setting information received from the functional units in the first network, and transmits the generated setting information to the corresponding functional unit (fig. 33, 9, [0111]-[0121], each gateway ECU receives relayed topology information regarding other ECU networks and updates its routing table by using the received topology information).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Ishigooka’s topology or routing information relay to Fang-Harata-Rajan’s teachings in order to facilitate communication between ECUs belonging to different networks (Ishigooka, [0021])
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang-Harata in view of Suyama et al. (WO 2021/020025 A1, published on 02/04/2021, English translation on pages 68-97, herein “Suyama”).
As to claim 12, Fang does not disclose the second setting information includes at least one of a VLAN setting and a frame data size of one or more functional units of the plurality of functional units in the second network.
Harata discloses the second setting information includes at least one of a VLAN setting and a frame data size of one or more functional units of the plurality of functional units in the second network (page 77, Further, the relay device 200 relays, for example, an IP packet between vehicle-mounted ECUs 111 belonging to different VLANs. Specifically, the relay device 200 acquires an IP packet from the received Ethernet frame, and transmits the IP packet to the in-vehicle ECU 111 of the transmission destination based on the transmission destination IP address of the acquired IP packet; p. 85, With reference to FIG. 9, for example, in the new network shown in FIG. 5, the generation unit 250 sets “VLAN 20” as the ID of the VLAN to which the image sensor 111G including the application 100G, which is the new function unit, belongs, and sets the application 100F. Generates configuration information indicating the content of additionally setting "VLAN 20" as the ID of the VLAN corresponding to the communication port 120C of the relay device 200 including the relay device 200.)
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Suyama’s VLAN settings messaging to Fang-Harata’s teachings in order to facilitate communication about VLAN settings between different networks.
Allowable Subject Matter and Reasons for Allowance
Claims 3, 4, 10, 11 would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and to overcome any rejection/objections of any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance:
By interpreting the claims in light of the Specification, the Examiner finds the claimed invention to be patentably distinct from the prior art of records. Specifically, the prior art of records, individually or in combination, fail to explicitly teach, suggest or render obvious the claimed invention as recited, including the proxy processing unit selects the functional unit information regarding each of the functional units in the second network that communicate with each of the functional units in the first network from the acquired functional unit information, and generates the aggregate information including the selected functional unit information.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled "Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance."
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is included in form PTO 892.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HIEU T HOANG whose telephone number is (571) 270-1253. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9 AM -5 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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached on 571-272-7304. 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.
/HIEU T HOANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights