CTNF 19/033,281 CTNF 73112 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This application has been examined. Claims 1-20 are pending. The Group and/or Art Unit location of your application in the PTO has changed. To aid in correlating any papers for this application, all further correspondence regarding this application should be directed to Group Art Unit 2175. Specification 06-11 AIA The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112: 07-30-02 AIA 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. 4. Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as indefinite. Claim 4 recites directing air to enter "from the front panel of the housing." The use of the definite article "the" before "front panel" presupposes that this element was previously introduced somewhere in the claim or a claim from which claim 4 depends. However, a review of claim 1 (the base independent claim) and claim 3 (the intervening dependent claim upon which claim 4 depends) reveals that neither claim introduces or recites a "front panel" as a structural element of the housing. Claim 1 recites only "a housing," and claim 3 introduces "a side panel of the housing" and "a back panel of the housing", but no "front panel" appears anywhere in the dependency chain preceding claim 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 5 compounds this problem. Claim 5 depends from claim 4 and recites "a second air flow to enter from a front panel of the housing." Here, the indefinite article "a" is used which under normal drafting conventions would mean Applicant is introducing "front panel" for the first time. Yet claim 4 (from which claim 5 depends) already referred to "the front panel" as though it existed. The result is an internal inconsistency: claim 4 uses the definite article (implying prior introduction), and claim 5 uses the indefinite article (implying first introduction). Under MPEP § 2173.05(e), once an element has been established in a claim, subsequent dependent claims must use the definite article to refer to the same element. Using the indefinite article in claim 5 may be interpreted as introducing a distinct, second "front panel," which is almost certainly not what was intended but is a plausible reading of the claim language as drafted. 5. Claims 7, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as indefinite. Claim 1, the independent device claim, introduces and claims a structurally distinct component denominated the "second power unit." Importantly, claim 1 draws an explicit architectural distinction between the "first power unit" which is defined as comprising both a "first power supply" and a "power distribution unit" and the "second power unit," which is described as a separate and distinct component configured solely to power the audio amplifier. The term "power unit" in claim 1 is thus not synonymous with "power supply"; a power unit may itself contain a power supply (as the first power unit does) and may include additional components. Claim 7 depends directly from claim 1, not from claim 3. Therefore, the scope of claim 7 does not include the "first divider" introduced in claim 3. The "first divider" exists only within claims 3, 4, 5, and 6, which form a separate dependency chain from claim 7. Despite this, claim 7 introduces its new element as a "second divider." The use of an ordinal "second" carries legal significance in patent claim drafting. Under well-established USPTO examining practice (MPEP § 2173.05(e)) and Federal Circuit precedent, ordinals such as "first" and "second" are used to distinguish between multiple instances of the same type of element within a single claim scope. When a claim recites a "second divider," the clear implication is that a "first divider" also exists within that same claim scope. However, because claim 7 depends from claim 1 (which recites no "first divider"), the "second" ordinal in claim 7 has no corresponding "first divider" within the dependency chain of claim 7. This creates an ambiguity: does the label "second divider" mean (a) that Applicant intends claim 7 to also incorporate the "first divider" of claim 3, despite not claiming it through the dependency structure; (b) that the "second" is purely nominal/ordinal with no structural significance; or (c) that there is a drafting error? A skilled artisan cannot determine with reasonable certainty which of these readings applies, rendering claim 7 indefinite. Claims 19 and 20, the method and non-transitory computer-readable medium claims respectively are nominally directed to the same underlying invention as claim 1. However, both claims recite an audio amplifier "powered by a second power supply different from the first power supply." Neither claim 19 nor claim 20 recites a "second power unit" at all. This substitution of terminology creates a material ambiguity of claim scope. Because claim 1 distinguishes between the "power unit" (the larger assembly, which can include a power supply plus other components) and the "power supply" (the component within the unit that actually supplies power), the phrase "second power supply" in claims 19 and 20 is narrower or at least different in scope than "second power unit" in claim 1. A skilled artisan reading the three independent claims together cannot determine with reasonable certainty whether the method and CRM claims are coextensive in scope with the device claim, or whether they claim a structurally narrower configuration in which only a standalone power supply (as opposed to a fuller power unit assembly) is required. The inconsistency is particularly problematic because claims 19 and 20 also introduce the term "first power supply" as if it were an independently defined element, whereas claim 1 establishes that the "first power supply" is a component of the "first power unit." In claims 19 and 20, there is no "first power unit" only a "first power supply" leaving open the question of whether the power distribution unit (an essential component of the first power unit in claim 1) is present or required in the method/CRM claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA 6. Claim s 1-2, 8, 10-13, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Thomas (“Thomas”) (US No. 8,396,232) . In regard to claim 1, Thomas discloses a device for providing power to a plurality of electronic devices in a surgical environment and for processing multimedia data associated with the surgical environment, comprising: a housing; a plurality of ports exposed on the housing, each port connectable to an electronic device of the plurality of electronic devices in the surgical environment (as shown in Fig. 1-3, which is reproduced below for ease of reference and convenience, Thomas discloses a surgical console (console 10) operating in a surgical environment (operating room), providing power to surgical devices and processing multimedia content. Abstract: "A method and system are disclosed for playing, storing, accessing, and retrieving multimedia content and providing the content to a surgical environment”. The console 10 as a physical enclosure/housing containing all components. FIG. 1 (perspective view showing housing); FIG. 3 (detailed housing view); col. 6:49 thru col. 7:30: "Microsurgical Console 10 may operably couple to a number of user interfaces 12...". The housing is explicitly shown as a single enclosure containing the processing module, power supply, amplifier, storage, and I/O components. The plurality of ports on the housing for connecting surgical peripheral devices 14 (cameras, surgical instruments, foot pedals, etc.). FIG. 1: front panel 16 showing plurality of ports; FIG. 2: Interface PCB 34 with power outputs 59A-59E (five individual power ports). Col. 5:9-58): "Microsurgical Console 10 may operably couple to a number of user interfaces 12, such as a foot pedal assembly... and to microsurgical peripheral devices 14". Col. 5:9-58: power outputs 59A-59E distributing power to connected peripherals); PNG media_image1.png 552 652 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 646 553 media_image2.png Greyscale a first power unit enclosed in the housing, the first power unit comprising a first power supply and a power distribution unit, wherein the power distribution unit is configured to receive power from the first power supply and distribute the power across the plurality of ports (in Thomas, discloses an internal power supply (power supply 53) providing power to Interface PCB 34 (the power distribution unit), which then distributes power across five power outputs 59A-59E to connected surgical peripherals. FIG. 2: power signal 52 provided to Interface PCB 34; power supply 53 coupled to Interface PCB 34; power outputs 59A-59E distributing power to display interface 50, expansion panel 42, speakers 46, and other components. Col. 59-58: "Interface PCB 34 may include... a power output 59 (functionally distributed as power outputs 59A–59E). Interface PCB 34 couples to an external or internal power supply 53. Then interface PCB 34 may distribute power to various other elements..."); an audio output port exposed on the housing (in Thomas, discloses audio output 58 exposed on the housing (front panel 16). FIG. 2: audio output 58 shown on Interface PCB 34, connected to the front panel. Col. 5:9-58: "Interface PCB 34 may include an audio output 58... audio input(s) 54". FIG. 1: front panel 16 includes speaker 22 and associated audio ports); a transceiver enclosed in the housing, wherein the transceiver is configured to receive and decode an audio signal associated with the surgical environment (in Thomas, discloses processing module 32 (transceiver) enclosed in the housing, configured to receive audio signals from mass storage devices 36, 38, 40 and external audio input(s) 54, and decode/process them for playback. FIG. 2: processing module 32 receiving input from mass storage 36, 38, 40 and audio inputs 54. Col. 59-58: "Host multimedia module 30... may functionally include a processing module 32... mass storage devices 36, 38, and 40, speaker(s) 46, display interface 50..." Col. 5:9-58: processing module receives and decodes audio content for playback through the surgical console. The audio signal is explicitly associated with the surgical environment (e.g., background music for operating room, surgical procedure audio); an audio amplifier enclosed in the housing, wherein the audio amplifier is configured to amplify the decoded audio signal and output the decoded and amplified audio signal via the audio output port (in Thomas discloses speaker(s) 46 driven by the processing module, with audio output 58 for outputting amplified audio. The processing module 32 includes amplification functionality to drive the speakers. FIG. 2: speaker(s) 46 connected to processing module 32; audio output 58 on Interface PCB 34 for external output. Col. 5:9-58:"speaker(s) 46" listed as a component of host multimedia module 30. Col. 4:63-67: "surgical console 10 may include a microphone and/or speaker 22" for audio output. The audio output 58 outputs the decoded and amplified audio signal from the console housing); and a second power unit enclosed in the housing, wherein the second power unit is different from the first power unit and is configured to power the audio amplifier (in Thomas, discloses that Interface PCB 34 separately powers the audio components (audio output 58) distinctly from the power outputs 59A– 59E that power the surgical peripheral devices. Power supply 53 provides power to Interface PCB 34, which allocates separate power outputs for audio (58) and for peripheral device ports (59A-59E). FIG. 2: audio output 58 and power outputs 59A-59E as distinct power paths from interface PCB 34. Col. 5:9-58). In regard to claim 2, Thomas discloses wherein the plurality of electronic devices in the surgical environment comprise: one or more cameras, one or more medical devices, one or more surgical tools, one or more displays, one or more speakers, one or more input devices, one or more video or audio encoders, one or more video or audio decoders, one or more transceivers, or any combination thereof (in Thomas, explicitly discloses the same enumerated device types connected to the surgical console: cameras (PTZ camera referenced col. 4:26-35 of related art context), displays (display interface 50, FIG. 2), speakers (speaker 46, FIG. 2), input devices (user interfaces 12, foot pedal assemblies, touch screens, col. 6:49-53), encoders/decoders (processing module 32 operable as encoder and decoder, col. 5:59 thru col. 6:14), and other surgical peripheral devices 14 (medical devices, surgical tools, col. 4:26-52). The full enumerated list of claim 2 is taught by Thomas either expressly or by reasonable implication as the class of devices a surgical console would power and connect). In regard to claim 8, Thomas discloses wherein the transceiver is configurable to: encode and transmit a first plurality of data associated with the surgical environment; and receive and decode a second plurality of data associated with the surgical environment (in Thomas directly and expressly discloses a processing module 32 that is configurable to both encode/transmit and receive/decode data. FIG. 2 (processing module 32 with both input and output paths); col. 5:19-34: processing module 32 can receive audio from external sources (audio inputs 54), decode it, and output it via audio output 58 and can receive data from mass storage 36, 38, 40 and transmit/output it. More directly: col. 5:34-58 (of related embodiment): "the surgical console of the present invention can include means for receiving... multimedia content" and also transmitting/displaying data back that bidirectional operation. The present application's own specification at paragraph [0067] confirms bidirectional SDVoE transceivers are standard known devices: "the transceiver 210 is configurable to operate as an encoder, as a decoder, or as an encoder and a decoder simultaneously" that confirming this is a known feature of standard transceiver components, not a patentable advance. In regard to claim 10, Thomas discloses further a first communication link between the transceiver and the first power unit (in Thomas discloses a direct connection between processing module 32 and Interface PCB 34 (the power distribution unit) within the console housing. FIG. 2: processing module 32 and Interface PCB 34 are shown as connected functional blocks with data and control paths between them. Col. 5:9-58: interface PCB 34 is described as distributing signals from processing module 32 to various components. A communication link between the processing module and the power PCB is inherent and explicitly depicted in FIG. 2). In regard to claim 11, Thomas discloses wherein the transceiver is configured to receive a first control signal for the first power unit and provide the first control signal for the first power unit to the first power unit via the first communication link (in Thomas discloses processing module 32 controlling the operation of Interface PCB 34 and associated power outputs. The processing module sends control signals to Interface PCB 34 to manage power distribution. FIG. 2: control flow between processing module 32 and Interface PCB 34. Col. 5:9-58: processing module 32 orchestrates the distribution of signals and power through Interface PCB 34. Col. 3:62 thru col. 4:15: "surgical console 10 [allows] operator to begin a surgical procedure by setting the initial operating parameters" these control signals flow through the console's internal architecture from the processing module to the power/interface PCB). In regard to claim 12, Thomas discloses further a second communication link between the transceiver and the audio amplifier (in Thomas discloses a direct connection between processing module 32 and speaker(s) 46 (audio amplifier) within interface PCB 34. FIG. 2: processing module 32 shown connected to speaker(s) 46 via the host multimedia module 30 functional block. Col. 5:9-58: "Host multimedia module 30... may functionally include a processing module 32... speaker(s) 46", these components are directly linked. The audio output 58 on interface PCB 34 provides the physical output pathway from the processing/amplifier circuit to the external audio port, implying a communication link between the transceiver and the amplifier circuit). In regard to claim 13, Thomas discloses wherein the transceiver is configured to receive a second control signal for the audio amplifier and provide the second control signal for the audio amplifier to the audio amplifier via the second communication link (in Thomas discloses processing module 32 controlling audio playback parameters through the console, including volume, playback mode, and audio source selection. FIG. 2: control flow from processing module 32 to speaker(s) 46. Col. 4:53 thru col. 5:8: "The retrieval and playback of the multi-media may be done through the display screen 17 and associated buttons 18 or through dedicated buttons 18 and knobs 20 that relate to specific functions associated with the playback of information", these user-adjustable controls generate control signals that the processing module routes to the audio amplifier/speaker subsystem. Multiple knobs 20 for audio control (FIG. 1) confirm control signal path from processing module to amplifier). Independent claims 19 (method) and 20 (non-transitory computer-readable medium) recite the same operative limitations as a device/system of claim 1 in method and medium form respectively. The method/system/medium distinction does not impart patentability where the underlying operative steps are the same. See MPEP § 2114. Therefore, claims 19 and 20 are rejected on the same basis and mapping as claim 1 above. The examiner relies on the entire teachings of Thomas reference; the applicant should carefully consider the entire teachings of the above-mentioned references to better understand the examiner’s position . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 7. 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 t which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 8. Claims 3-7 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Thomas in view of Malone et al. (“Malone”) (US No. 6,927,976). In order to expedite and avoid piecemeal prosecution, the following rejection is made to the extent that the claims are understood, by considering those elements which are understood and interpreting their function in a manner which is consistent with the recited goals of the claims, and then applying the best available art. The examiner relies on the entire teachings of Thomas and Malone references; the applicant should carefully consider the entire teachings of the above-mentioned references to better understand the examiner’s position. In regard to claim 3, Thomas discloses console 10 housing multiple components (power supply 53, Interface PCB 34, processing module 32, speakers 46) that generate heat and require thermal management. The housing structure of FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 implies internal structural partitioning to organize and isolate components. But Thomas does not expressly disclose a first divider enclosed in the housing, wherein the first divider extends from a side panel of the housing to a back panel of the housing to form a compartment, and wherein the first power unit is disposed outside the compartment and the second power unit is disposed inside the compartment. In the same field of endeavor, Dove discloses a first divider enclosed in the housing, wherein the first divider extends from a side panel of the housing to a back panel of the housing to form a compartment, and wherein the first power unit is disposed outside the compartment and the second power unit is disposed inside the compartment (as shown in Fig. 3, which is reproduced below for ease of reference and convenience, Malone discloses flexible air baffle mounted within chassis of electronic device that "obstructs air flow between an air inlet vent and an air exhaust vent" and creates separate airflow regions within the enclosure for different components. Abstract; col. 1:65 thru col. 2:10; FIG. 1: teaches structural divider creating internal compartments for thermal isolation that directly applicable to separating first and second power units). PNG media_image3.png 545 667 media_image3.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply Malone’s flexible air baffle (i.e. physical divider) mounted within chassis of electronic device into Thomas’s console, in order to isolate the inside components thermally and protect the components’ integrity. In regard to claim 4, Malone discloses wherein the first divider is configured to direct a first air flow to enter from the front panel of the housing, to circulate through the second power unit disposed inside the compartment, and to exit through the back panel of the housing (in Malone, explicitly discloses air baffle directing "cold air from the cold aisle" through specific components and exhausting heated air through specific exit that teaching front-to-back directed airflow through internal compartments. Abstract; col.4:45-64). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply Malone’s flexible air baffle (i.e. physical divider) mounted within chassis of electronic device into Thomas’s console, in order to isolate the inside components thermally and protect the components’ integrity. In regard to claim 5, Malone discloses wherein the first divider is configured to direct a second air flow to enter from a front panel of the housing, to circulate through the first power unit disposed outside the compartment, and to exit through the back panel of the housing (in Malone, teaches use of baffle to create two separate airflow paths: one for each heat-generating component group to ensure each receives dedicated fresh cool air rather than sharing re-circulating heated air. Col. 1:55 thru col. 2:26; col. 3:13 thru col. 4:43; FIGS. 1–3. The two-path airflow separation is explicitly disclosed). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply Malone’s flexible air baffle (i.e. physical divider) mounted within chassis of electronic device into Thomas’s console, in order to isolate the inside components thermally and protect the components’ integrity. In regard to claim 6, Malone discloses wherein the first divider is configured to provide Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) insulation between the first power unit and the second power unit (in Malone, metal baffle/divider disclosed as structural partition within electronic enclosure. Metal dividers used as EMR shielding is a well-known technique in electronics (see MPEP § 2144.03, common knowledge of POSITA). A POSITA would recognize that a metal divider serving dual purposes (thermal and EMR isolation) between two power units in a device handling audio signals is an obvious design choice to prevent switching noise crosstalk. In regard to claim 7, Malone discloses the second divider between PDU and first power supply to direct air from PDU away from first power supply (in Melon, explicitly teaches placement of an air baffle between two electronic components within the same enclosure to prevent hot exhaust air from one component from reaching another heat-sensitive component. Abstract: "flexible air baffle that mounts on a chassis of an electronic device... and obstructs air flow between an air inlet vent and an air exhaust vent." Col. 1:55 thru col. 2:26; col. 3:13 thru col. 4:43). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply Malone’s flexible air baffle (i.e. physical divider) mounted within chassis of electronic device into Thomas’s console, in order to protect temperature-sensitive power supplies from heated exhaust air from adjacent power distribution components. 9. Claims 14-15 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Thomas in view of Barnes et al. (“Barnes”) (US No. 5,400,206). In order to expedite and avoid piecemeal prosecution, the following rejection is made to the extent that the claims are understood, by considering those elements which are understood and interpreting their function in a manner which is consistent with the recited goals of the claims, and then applying the best available art. The examiner relies on the entire teachings of Thomas and Barnes references; the applicant should carefully consider the entire teachings of the above-mentioned references to better understand the examiner’s position. In regard to claim 14, Thomas discloses interface PCB 34 with power outputs 59A–59E for distributing power to surgical peripherals. The PDU implicitly must protect against short circuits to comply with surgical environment safety requirements. Thomas does not explicitly disclose the specific retry mechanism. But Thomas does not expressly disclose wherein the first power unit is further configured to: (a) detect a short circuit at a port of the plurality of ports; (b) upon detecting the short circuit, disable the port for a predefined time period; and (c) enable the port after the predefined time period. In the same field of endeavor, Barnes discloses the first power unit is further configured to: (a) detect a short circuit at a port of the plurality of ports; (b) upon detecting the short circuit, disable the port for a predefined time period; and (c) enable the port after the predefined time period (as shown in Fig. 1, which is reproduced below for ease of reference and convenience, Barnes discloses Claim 1 explicitly recites: "means for comparing a magnitude of a current to a predetermined value... means for interrupting said current... means for reinitiating said current flow upon the lapse of a predetermined period of time after said current is stopped... means for counting the number of times that said current exceeds said predetermined value... means for preventing a reinitiation... after said current exceeds said predetermined value a preselected number of times". See col. 5:46 thru col. 6:25. This is a direct, element-by-element disclosure of the three steps of claim 14). PNG media_image4.png 435 627 media_image4.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to design Thomas's power distribution system would have been motivated to implement the known retry-circuit technique of Barnes to protect ports from momentary short circuits as a standard design choice in any power distribution unit serving multiple external devices. In regard to claim 15, Barnes discloses wherein the first power unit is further configured to: repeat steps (a)-(c) for a predefined number of iterations; and disable the port if the short circuit is detected at the port in each iteration of the predefined number of iterations (in Barnes, Claim 1: "means for counting the number of times that said current exceeds said predetermined value" and "means for preventing a reinitiation of said current after said current exceeds said predetermined value a preselected number of times". Col. 5:46 thru col. 6:25: the counting circuit counts overcurrent events and permanently disables the circuit after the preselected number is reached. This is identical to claim 15's "disable the port if the short circuit is detected at the port in each iteration of the predefined number of iterations". It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to design Thomas's power distribution system would have been motivated to implement the known retry-circuit technique of Barnes to protect ports from momentary short circuits as a standard design choice in any power distribution unit serving multiple external devices. 10. Claims 16-18 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Thomas in view of Rhee et al. (“Rhee”) (US No. 5,081,625). In order to expedite and avoid piecemeal prosecution, the following rejection is made to the extent that the claims are understood, by considering those elements which are understood and interpreting their function in a manner which is consistent with the recited goals of the claims, and then applying the best available art. The examiner relies on the entire teachings of Thomas and Rhee references; the applicant should carefully consider the entire teachings of the above-mentioned references to better understand the examiner’s position. In regard to claim 16, Thomas discloses Thomas discloses processing module 32 (microcontroller) that boots upon powering the console. Col. 4, ll. 20–35: the console is powered on and the processing module initializes to control surgical peripherals. Thomas's PDU (Interface PCB 34) distributes power to surgical devices requiring continuous power. The fail-safe need is implied by the critical surgical environment context. But Thomas does not expressly disclose wherein the first power unit comprises a microcontroller and is further configured to: upon receiving power, boot the microcontroller; identify a failed boot of the microcontroller; and automatically enable the plurality of ports. In the same field of endeavor, Rhee discloses a microcontroller and is further configured to: upon receiving power, boot the microcontroller; identify a failed boot of the microcontroller; and automatically enable the plurality of ports (as shown in Fig. 3, which is reproduced below for ease of reference and convenience, Rhee discloses watchdog circuit that detects failed microprocessor boot (failure to complete initialization within a predetermined time) and generates a reset/output signal. Col. 153 thru col. 2:10: "Upon power-up, the source voltage level detector biases the triggering circuit... When the source voltage level reaches a predetermined value, a first monostable multivibrator in the watchdog timer is triggered..." If the microprocessor fails to respond, the watchdog detects failure and generates an output that directly teaching identification of failed boot and automatic generation of control output). PNG media_image5.png 480 657 media_image5.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a microcontroller-managed power system (as in Thomas) for a critical environment would have been motivated to implement the known watchdog fail-safe technique of Rhee to ensure continuous operation in the event of a boot failure, as a standard, well-known technique in safety-critical embedded systems. In regard to claim 17, Rhee discloses wherein the plurality of ports are automatically enabled via a one-shot circuit (in Rhee, explicitly discloses a monostable multivibrator (one-shot circuit) as the mechanism for detecting boot failure and generating the fail-safe output. Abstract: "The watchdog timer circuit... utilizes a single astable multivibrator circuit." Col. 153 thru col. 2:10: first monostable multivibrator is triggered on power-up; second monostable multivibrator monitors the microprocessor status signal. The one-shot (monostable multivibrator) is precisely identified in the claims: "a first monostable multivibrator in the watchdog timer" that directly mapping to claim 17's "one-shot circuit”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a microcontroller-managed power system (as in Thomas) for a critical environment would have been motivated to implement the known watchdog fail-safe technique of Rhee to ensure continuous operation in the event of a boot failure, as a standard, well-known technique in safety-critical embedded systems. In regard to claim 18, Rhee discloses wherein the first power unit is further configured to: identify a successful boot of the microcontroller, and enable the plurality of ports based on a previous state of each port of the plurality of ports (in Rhee, discloses the successful boot path (microprocessor responds within the watchdog timeout window) as the normal operating mode where the microprocessor takes control. See Col. 153 thru col. 2:10. Reading/restoring previous state on successful boot is taught by Thomas; the combination provides a complete disclosure of claim 18). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a microcontroller-managed power system (as in Thomas) for a critical environment would have been motivated to implement the known watchdog fail-safe technique of Rhee to ensure continuous operation in the event of a boot failure, as a standard, well-known technique in safety-critical embedded systems. Examiner's note : Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the Applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passages as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 12. Claim 9 is 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. 13. The following is an Examiner's statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 9 is allowable over the prior art of record because the prior arts, cited in its entirety, or in combination, do not teach wherein the second power unit is dedicated to provide power to the audio amplifier. RECOMMENDATION: To pursue allowability, Applicant should amend claim 1 (and conform claims 19 and 20) to recite: (1) the second power unit as a physically separate and distinct power assembly from the first power unit, enclosed separately within the housing; (2) the second power unit being dedicated exclusively to providing power to the audio amplifier; and (3) the physical separation serving to reduce electromagnetic interference, switching noise crosstalk, or audio signal degradation between the power units. This combination represents the strongest potential path to allowance. Conclusion 14. Claims 1-8, 10-20 are rejected. Claim 9 is objected. 07-96 15. The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hildick-Smith et al. (US Pub No. 2024/0048908) disclose a system and method to adjust power levels between interconnected loudspeaker assemblies is described herein, the system comprising: a primary loudspeaker assembly, and at least one secondary loudspeaker assembly interconnected with the primary loudspeaker assembly and adapted to receive an audio signal from the primary loudspeaker assembly; an interconnection verification circuit located in the primary loudspeaker assembly. Jen et al. (US Pub No. 2018/0131163) disclose a power distribution unit includes a power input terminal, a main body, plural power-providing units, a coupling module and a hot-swappable module. The plural power-providing units are installed on the main body and electrically connected with plural electronic devices to provide electric power to the plural electronic devices. Cudak et al. (US Pub No. 2016/0062425) disclose the power distribution controller shares power between the plurality of battery-powered electronic devices based on: which tasks, from multiple pending tasks on the plurality of battery-powered electronic devices, are selected for completion; a power requirement for each of the tasks that have been selected for completion; a priority of the tasks, from the multiple pending tasks on the plurality of battery-powered electronic devices, that have been selected for completion; and a quantity of amp-hours that are available to charge batteries on the plurality of battery-powered electronic devices. Cong (US Pub No. 2013/0318368) discloses the power supply unit includes first and second power units. First terminals of the first electronic switches are coupled to the second power unit, second terminals of the first electronic switches are coupled to the corresponding motherboards, and third terminals of the first electronic switches are coupled to the processor. Malinouskas et al. (US Pub No. 2011/0121049) disclose a surgical system and method includes a surgical instrument configured to wirelessly transmit identifying data specific to the surgical instrument and a console configured to receive the identifying data. Samaha (US Pub No. 2011/0196991) discloses a network connectable device which may draw power from a network connection and distribute data and power to peripheral devices connected to the device. 16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to examiner Raymond Phan, whose telephone number is (571) 272-3630. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 6:30AM- 3:00PM. The Group Fax No. (571) 273-8300. Communications via Internet e-mail regarding this application, other than those under 35 U.S.C. 132 or which otherwise require a signature, may be used by the applicant and should be addressed to [ raymond.phan@uspto.gov ]. 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, Andrew Jung can be reached at (571) 270-3779. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. All Internet e-mail communications will be made of record in the application file. PTO employees do not engage in Internet communications where there exists a possibility that sensitive information could be identified or exchanged unless the record includes a properly signed express waiver of the confidentiality requirements of 35 U.S.C. 122. This is more clearly set forth in the Interim Internet Usage Policy published in the Official Gazette of the Patent and Trademark on February 25, 1997 at 1195 OG 89. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see hop://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application should be directed to the TC 2100 central telephone number is (571) 272-2100. /RAYMOND N PHAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 2 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 3 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 4 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 5 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 6 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 7 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 8 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 9 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 10 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 11 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 12 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 13 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 14 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 15 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 16 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 17 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 18 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 19 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 20 Art Unit: 2175 Application/Control Number: 19/033,281 Page 21 Art Unit: 2175
Prosecution Insights