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 .
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.
Claims 1, 3, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (CN 109036543 A) in view of Xu (CN113068167A) and in further view of Weast (US 20160174071 A1).
As for Claim 1, Zhang discloses
A method for inter-device communication, applied to a mobile terminal (i.e. target device), comprising:
in response to receiving a to-be-processed data packet (i.e. health data sent to the target device), determining whether the to-be-processed data packet needs to be processed by analyzing a flag field in the to-be-processed data packet(i.e. A The flag bit is used to determine whether the health data has been transmitted completely. When the target device detects the flag bit, it means that the received health data is complete.)( ¶ 0098 and 0100);
wherein the to-be-processed data packet being sent to the mobile terminal (i.e. monitoring device), and the to-be-processed data packet carries health data of a user collected by the first slave device (i.e. The target device receives health data sent by the monitoring device and sends the target data packet to the server)(¶ 0101-0102);
Zhang does not disclose in response to that the to-be-processed data packet does not need to be processed, obtaining a destination address of the to-be-processed data packet; and in response to the destination address being consistent with a Bluetooth address of a second slave device connected to the local, forwarding the to-be-processed data packet to the second slave device to allow the user view the health data by the second slave device;
In an analogous art, Xu teaches in response to that the to-be-processed data packet does not need to be processed, obtaining a destination address of the to-be-processed data packet (i.e. when the master Bluetooth device receives the data packet first, whether the slave Bluetooth device meets a first trigger condition (e.g. nack1 not received flag ) for enabling the master Bluetooth device to forward the data packet to the slave Bluetooth device is judged, and if the first trigger condition is met, the master Bluetooth device forwards the data packet to the slave Bluetooth device through the monitoring link. To forward the packet to that particular Bluetooth device, the forwarding device would inherently obtain the destination address of the Bluetooth device from the packet.)( ¶ 0013 and 0015);
and in response to the destination address being consistent with a Bluetooth address of a second slave device connected to the mobile terminal (i.e. the master Bluetooth device forwards the data packet to the slave Bluetooth device through the monitoring link) (¶ 0013 and 0036).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Zhang to include in response to that the to be-processed data packet does not need to be processed, obtaining a destination address of the to-be-processed data packet; and in response to the destination address being consistent with a Bluetooth address of a second slave device connected to the local, forwarding the to-be-processed data packet to the second slave device to allow the user view the data by the second slave device as taught by Xu because Xu's teaching of “forwarding and viewing the data” is not limited to any particular data type, and Zhang explicitly discloses that the data packet contains health data. Substituting Zhang’s health data into Xu’s viewing framework would have been a predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions (MPEP § 2143, KSR v. Teleflex), resulting in the user viewing the health data via the second slave device.
Zhang in view of Xu does not disclose wherein the second slave device is an augmented reality (AR) device in response to the first slave device being a wearable device, and the second slave device is the wearable device in response to that the first slave device being the AR device.
In an analogous art, Weast teaches wherein the second slave device is an augmented reality (AR) device (i.e. head worn wearable device 104 – Fig. 1) in response to the first slave device being a wearable device (i.e. wrist based wearable device 106 – Fig.1) , and the second slave device is the wearable device in response to that the first slave device being the AR device (i.e. the first and second slave device are interchangeable based on which one is authenticated first.) (¶0009)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Zhang in view of Xu to include wherein the second slave device is an augmented reality (AR) device in response to the first slave device being a wearable device, and the second slave device is the wearable device in response to that the first slave device being the AR device as taught by Weast for the benefit of allowing either device to serve as first or second slave to improve flexibility in pairing and communication between multiple devices.
As for Claim 3, Zhang, Xu, and Weast disclose, in particular Xu discloses in response to receiving a heartbeat packet (i.e. ack/nack packets can be used as heartbeat packets since they are response packets used to determine whether a device can still communicate.), determining whether the heartbeat packet needs to be forwarded (i.e. uses ack/nack confirmation flags to determine whether another Bluetooth device received/responded to a packet. If the slave device fails to acknowledge, the master Bluetooth device forwards the packet to the slave)( ¶ 0009); wherein the heartbeat packet is sent from the first slave device to the mobile terminal(i.e. the master Bluetooth device(e.g. ar headset can be master or slave device depending on which order it was connected.) sends an ack2 flag to the central device(local mobile terminal)( ¶ 0009));in response to that the heartbeat packet needs to be forwarded, sending the heartbeat packet to the second slave device ( i.e. shows forwarding of an Ack packet from the master slave device(e.g. ar headset) to the slave device(e.g. second slave device) according to the first data packet forwarding rule. )( ¶ 0011);
in response to failing to receive a first response data packet fed back by the second slave device based on the heartbeat packet, feedbacking to the first slave device that the second slave device did not respond (i.e. if one Bluetooth device does not receive a response, the system uses nack1/nack2 no received flags to indicate to the other Bluetooth device that the packet was not received.)( ¶ 0058);
and in response to receiving the first response data packet fed back by the second slave device based on the heartbeat packet, forwarding the first response data packet to the first slave device to allow the first slave device determine that the second slave device being in a connected state with the mobile terminal(i.e. when a Bluetooth device receives a data packet from another slave Bluetooth device, it replies with an Ack1 confirmation flag(heartbeat); after receiving the Ack1 confirmation, the second slave Bluetooth device sends an Ack2 confirmation(first response data fed back by second slave device) to the central device(local mobile terminal), thereby indicating successful connection of the second device to the central device(local mobile terminal).)( ¶ 0058)
Motivation to combine is similar to that of Claim 1.
As for Claim 9, Zhang in view of Xu and Weast disclose, in particular Weast teaches,
A device for inter-device communication (i.e. Computer System 400; Computer System 400 may be a mobile phone. Using the smartphone 108, the user 102 may authenticate the head worn wearable device 104)(¶0038 and 0012), comprising: a memory (i.e. main memory 404)(¶0039; main memory 404 – Fig.4), a processor(i.e. processor 402 – Fig. 4)(¶0039), and a program for inter-device communication stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the program for inter-device communication is configured for implementing the method for inter-device communication according to claim 1 (i.e. machine readable medium 422 carries instructions that cause the machine to perform any one or more of the methodologies of the present disclosure which includes inter-device communication to the peripheral devices.)(¶0041)
Motivation to combine is similar to that of Claim 1.
As for Claim 10, Zhang in view of Xu and Weast disclose, in particular Weast teaches,
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (machine readable medium 422 may contain a non-transitory mechanism for storing information)(¶0036), wherein a program for inter-device communication is stored on the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, and the method for inter-device communication according to claim 1 are implemented when the program for inter- device communication is executed by a processor. (i.e. Embodiments may also be implemented as instructions stored on a machine-readable storage device, which may be read and executed by at least one processor to perform the operations described herein)(¶0036 and 0041; machine-readable medium 422 and processor 402 – Fig. 4)
Motivation to combine is similar to that of Claim 1.
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Xu in view of Weast, as combined in Claim 1 above, and further in view of Russell (US 9210733 B2).
As for Claim 2, Zhang, Xu and Weast fail to disclose sending the Bluetooth address of the second slave device paired successfully for a first time to the first slave device to allow the first slave device save the Bluetooth address of the second slave device, and sending a Bluetooth address of the first slave device paired successfully for a first time to the second slave device to allow the second slave device save the Bluetooth address of the first slave device.
In an analogous art, Russell teaches sending the Bluetooth address of the second slave device paired successfully for a first time to the first slave device to allow the first slave device save the Bluetooth address of the second slave device (i.e. the pairing apparatus 102 writes the Bluetooth address of the second Bluetooth device 234 to the memory 252 of the first Bluetooth device 232, specifically to the memory location indicated at 254; Step 304 – Fig. 3 and Col.6 lines 55-60), and sending a Bluetooth address of the first slave device paired successfully for a first time to the second slave device to allow the second slave device save the Bluetooth address of the first slave device.(i.e. the pairing apparatus 102 also determines the Bluetooth address of the first Bluetooth device 232 and writes 306 it to the memory location 270 within the memory 268 of the second Bluetooth device 234; Step 306 Fig. 3 and Col.6 lines 55-60)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Zhang, Xu, and Weast to include sending the Bluetooth address of the second slave device paired successfully for a first time to the first slave device to allow the first slave device save the Bluetooth address of the second slave device, and sending a Bluetooth address of the first slave device paired successfully for a first time to the second slave device to allow the second slave device save the Bluetooth address of the first slave device as taught by Russell for the benefit of enabling each slave device to store each other’s Bluetooth addresses thereby improving the efficiency and reliability of later Bluetooth connections.
As for Claim 4, Zhang in view of Xu, Weast and Russell disclose, in particular Zhang discloses
in response to the to-be-processed data packet needing to be processed, extracting the health data of the user carried in the to-be-processed data packet and saving to the mobile terminal(i.e. the target device receives health data from the monitoring device and the target device can package the health data, the monitoring device's identification information, and the target device's identification information into a target data packet and send it to the server. The server(local) analyzes the target data packets transmitted by the target device to obtain the user's health status results. The server extracts the health data and at least temporarily stores it before processing.)( ¶ 0102-0103 and 0105-0106)
Motivation to combine is similar to that of Claim 2.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Russell.
As for Claim 5, Zhang discloses
determining whether a mobile terminal is disconnected from the first slave device(i.e. determines the mobile terminal is unavailable when the monitoring device switches to using a target device to assist with transmitting the health data.)(¶0152); and
in response to the mobile terminal being not disconnected from the first slave device(i.e. When the monitoring device receives data transmission instructions from multiple mobile terminals simultaneously, it can select any one of these mobile terminals as the target device and send health data to that target device.)(¶0101); wherein destination address of the to-be-processed data packet is Bluetooth address of a second slave device or Bluetooth address of the mobile terminal (i.e. The target device (mobile terminal) receives the connection request sent by the monitoring device(slave device) and parses whether the identification information of the
monitoring device carried in the connection request is consistent with the prestored
identification information. The target device can store identification information of monitoring devices that are bound to it. When the identification information of the monitoring device carried in the connection request matches the pre-stored identification information, it indicates that the target device and the monitoring device are bound together. At this time, the target device can send a data transmission instruction to the monitoring device to realize the transmission of health data. When the health data is sent over Bluetooth it is sent to the Bluetooth address of the mobile terminal.)(¶0086-0090)
Zhang fails to disclose wherein after the determining whether the mobile terminal is disconnected from the first slave device, the method further comprises: in response to the mobile terminal being disconnected from the first slave device, obtaining the Bluetooth address of the second slave device by querying a local Bluetooth address book; wherein the Bluetooth address of the second slave device being sent to the first slave device after the mobile terminal completes a first pairing with the second slave device; initiating a connection request to the second slave device based on the Bluetooth address of the second slave device; and in response to connecting successfully, sending the to-be-processed data packet to the second slave device to allow the second slave device display the health data to the user.
In an analogous art, Russel discloses,
wherein after the determining whether the mobile terminal is disconnected from the first slave device, the method further comprises:
in response to the mobile terminal being disconnected from the first slave device, obtaining the Bluetooth address of the second slave device by querying a local Bluetooth address book (i.e. the memory of each Bluetooth device is configured to store the address of the other Bluetooth device, and the pairing apparatus memory 110 can store the addresses of one or both wireless devices being paired. Memory 252 has a memory location labeled second Bluetooth device address 254)(memory 252 – fig.2; Col. 5 lines 47-56);
wherein the Bluetooth address of the second slave device being sent to the first slave device after the mobile terminal completes a first pairing with the second slave device (i.e. determines the Bluetooth address of the second Bluetooth device and writes the Bluetooth address of the second Bluetooth device to the first Bluetooth device)(Step 304 – Fig.3);
initiating a connection request to the second slave device based on the Bluetooth address of the second slave device (i.e. Step 504 selects a Bluetooth address of a second Bluetooth device written to memory, Step 508 bypasses Bluetooth device discovery, Step 510 receives an indication to initiate a Bluetooth connection, and Step 512 establishes a Bluetooth connection with the second Bluetooth device.)(Step 504, Step 508, Step 510, Step 512 - Fig.4);
and in response to connecting successfully, sending the to-be-processed data packet to the second slave device to allow the second slave device display the health data to the user (i.e., Examples of output capabilities include, but are not limited to: visual displays) (Col. 7, lines 60-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Zhang to include in response to the mobile terminal being disconnected from the local, obtaining the Bluetooth address of the second slave device by querying a local Bluetooth address book; wherein the Bluetooth address of the second slave device being sent to the local after the mobile terminal completes a first pairing with the second slave device; initiating a connection request to the second slave device based on the Bluetooth address of the second slave device; and in response to connecting successfully, sending the to-be-processed data packet to the second slave device to allow the second slave device display the health data to the user as taught by Russell because Russell’s teaching of “viewing the data” is not limited to any particular data type, and Zhang explicitly discloses that the data packet contains health data. Substituting Zhang’s health data into Russell’s viewing framework would have been a predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions (MPEP § 2143, KSR v. Teleflex), resulting in the user viewing the health data via the second slave device.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Russell, as applied to claim 5 above, and in further view of Liang (CN 117749668 A).
As for Claim 7, Zhang in view of Russell fails to disclose sending a heartbeat packet to the mobile terminal; wherein destination address of the heartbeat packet is Bluetooth address of the mobile terminal or the Bluetooth address of the second slave device; and in response to receiving feedback information that the second slave device does not respond within a consecutive preset number of times, and failing to receive a second response data packet fed back by the mobile terminal based on the heartbeat packet, determining that the mobile terminal is disconnected from the local; wherein the feedback information is sent by the mobile terminal to the local.
In an analogous art, Liang discloses sending a heartbeat packet to the mobile terminal(i.e. when a slave does not receive heartbeat packet information from a master device(mobile terminal) the slave device sends request heartbeat packet information to master.)( ¶ 0115);
wherein destination address of the heartbeat packet is Bluetooth address of the mobile terminal or the Bluetooth address of the second slave device (i.e. the slave device sends a request heartbeat packet that is forwarded to the master device(mobile terminal) wherein the request heartbeat packet includes the address of the master device.)( ¶ 0018);
and in response to receiving feedback information that the second slave device does not respond within a consecutive preset number of times (i.e. if the master does not receive the slaves heartbeat response within a preset condition, including within a preset time or consecutively at least two times, it sends forwarded heartbeat packet information through a third device)( ¶ 0133 and 0156) and failing to receive a second response data packet fed back by the mobile terminal based on the heartbeat packet, determining that the mobile terminal is disconnected from the first slave device(i.e. if the master does not receive the heartbeat response fed back by the slave device under a first preset condition.it tries forwarding the heartbeat through a third device, and if forwarded heartbeat responses of the slave device are not received under a second preset condition, the master judges that the connection is lost)( ¶ 0203);
wherein the feedback information is sent by the mobile terminal to the first slave device (i.e. the heartbeat response packet is sent from master device(mobile terminal) to the slave device) (¶ 0115).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Zhang in view of Russell to include sending a heartbeat packet to the mobile terminal; wherein destination address of the heartbeat packet is Bluetooth address of the mobile terminal or the Bluetooth address of the second slave device; and in response to receiving feedback information that the second slave device does not respond within a consecutive preset number of times, and failing to receive a second response data packet fed back by the mobile terminal based on the heartbeat packet, determining that the mobile terminal is disconnected from the local; wherein the feedback information is sent by the mobile terminal to the local as taught by Liang for the benefit of improving detection of disconnection between Bluetooth devices.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang, in view of Zhang and Russell.
As for Claim 8, Liang discloses
A system for inter-device communication, comprising: a mobile terminal, a first slave device and a second slave device( i.e. a Bluetooth system including a first slave device 1 and a second slave device 2 configured to be connected to a master device where the master device can be a mobile phone(mobile terminal))( ¶ 0120 and 0061);
wherein destination address of the to-be-processed data packet is the Bluetooth address of the second slave device or Bluetooth address of the mobile terminal (i.e. the slave device sends a request heartbeat packet that is forwarded to the master device(mobile terminal) wherein the request heartbeat packet includes the address of the master device.)( ¶ 0018)).
Liang does not disclose wherein the mobile terminal is configured for determining whether the to-be-processed data packet needs to be processed by analyzing a flag field in the to-be-processed data packet in response to receiving a to-be-processed data packet, wherein the to-be-processed data packet being sent to local by the first slave device, and the to-be-processed data packet carries health data of a user collected by the first slave device; and the first slave device is further configured for encapsulating collected user's health data into the to-be-processed data packet, and sending the to-be-processed data packet to the mobile terminal in response to the mobile terminal being not disconnected from the local, so as to allow the mobile terminal to process the to-be-processed data packet;
In an analogous art, Zhang discloses
determining whether the to-be-processed data packet needs to be processed by analyzing a flag field in the to-be-processed data packet in response to receiving a to-be-processed data packet, wherein the to-be-processed data packet being sent to the mobile terminal(i.e. the target device(mobile terminal) receives health data from the monitoring device(first slave) and when the target device detects a flag bit, it determines that the received health data has been transmitted completely.))( ¶ 0098 and 0100);
and the first slave device is further configured for encapsulating collected user's health data into the to-be-processed data packet, and sending the to-be-processed data packet to the mobile terminal in response to the mobile terminal (i.e. server; the instant specification describes a terminal as including a server)( ¶ 0136-0137) being not disconnected from the local, so as to allow the mobile terminal to process the to-be-processed data packet (teaches a target device packages the received health data into a target data packet and sends it to the server. The target data packet can include health data, the identification information of the monitoring device, and the identification information of the target device)( ¶ 0126-0127);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Liang to include the teachings of Zhang for the benefit of enabling the mobile terminal of Liang to selectively process data packets, thereby reducing unnecessary processing and improving timely handling of user health data.
Liang in view of Zhang does not disclose the mobile terminal is further configured for obtaining a destination address of the to-be-processed data packet in response to that the to-be-processed data packet does not need to be processed; the mobile terminal is further configured for forwarding the to-be-processed data packet to the second slave device to allow the user view the health data by the second slave device in response to the destination address being consistent with a Bluetooth address of the second stave device connected to the local.
In an analogous art, Russell discloses the mobile terminal is further configured for obtaining a destination address of the to-be-processed data packet in response to that the to-be-processed data packet does not need to be processed (i.e. a first Bluetooth device storing and detecting a second Bluetooth device address and using that stored address to establish a connection with the second device)(Step 306 – Fig.3 and Col.6 lines 55-60);
the mobile terminal is further configured for forwarding the to-be-processed data packet to the second slave device (Col. 5, line 67 to Col. 6, line 2) to allow the user view the health data by the second slave device in response to the destination address being consistent with a Bluetooth address of the second stave device connected to the mobile terminal(i.e., Examples of output capabilities include, but are not limited to: visual displays) (Col. 7, lines 60-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Liang and Zhang to include the mobile terminal is further configured for obtaining a destination address of the to-be-processed data packet in response to that the to-be-processed data packet does not need to be processed; the mobile terminal is further configured for forwarding the to-be-processed data packet to the second slave device to allow the user view the health data by the second slave device in response to the destination address being consistent with a Bluetooth address of the second stave device connected to the local as taught by Russell because Russell’s teaching of “viewing the data” is not limited to any particular data type, and Zhang explicitly discloses that the data packet contains health data. Substituting Zhang’s health data into Russell’s viewing framework would have been a predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions (MPEP § 2143, KSR v. Teleflex), resulting in the user viewing the health data via the second slave device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not deemed fully persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument (Page 7, 3rd ¶) stating Zhang does not disclose determining whether a received data packet needs to be processed by analyzing a flag field, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Zhang discloses that a when a monitoring device sends health data to a target device, it may carry a flag bit. The flag bit is used to determine whether the health data has been transmitted completely. When the target device detects the flag bit, it means
that the received health data is complete (¶0099 and 0100). If the flag bit in the flag field has not been detected, the system cannot yet process the complete health data because it is still waiting to receive the remainder. Therefore, detecting the flag bit simultaneously determines both completion and processing readiness.
Furthermore, with regards to Zhang not disclosing “forwarding the a data packet from a first slave device to a second device through a mobile terminal based on a destination address” (Page 8, 2nd ¶), the examiner respectfully argues that the claim language states wherein the to-be-processed data packet being sent to the mobile terminal which is taught by ¶102 of Zhang as stated in the rejection. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Furthermore, the independent claim broadly recites “determining whether the to-be-processed data packet needs to be processed by analyzing a flag field,” but does not recite the subsequent steps of obtaining a destination address and forwarding the packet to a second slave device. Limitations appearing only in the specification or in unrecited functional workflows cannot be used to assert patentability over the prior art. As taught by Zhang, the target device analyzes the flag field to determine the status of the received data packet (i.e., whether transmission is complete and whether further processing/handling of the packet is required), which directly satisfies the broad language of the in response to limitation. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
In response to the argument that Xu does not disclose obtaining the destination address only when the data packet does not require processing (Page 8, 4th ¶), the examiner respectfully argues that Xu teaches when the to be processed data packet is not received, and therefore not needed to be processed, the slave device sends a nack1 packet to the mobile terminal to signal the event so that that the mobile terminal can send the to be processed data packet to the slave device. A person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would readily recognize that directing a packet to a specific slave device requires evaluating destination routing information. Therefore, the teaching meets the claim in response to that the to-be-processed data packet does not need to be processed, obtaining a destination address of the to-be-processed data packet. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
In response to the applicants argument that Weast does not disclose the specific BLE communication architecture of the present application, in which a mobile terminal acts as a relay node between a first slave device and a second slave device that cannot directly communicate with each other (Page 9, 1st ¶), the examiner respectfully argues that the claim language only speaks to wherein the second slave device is an augmented reality (AR) device in response to the first slave device being a wearable device device, and the second slave device is the wearable device in response to that the first slave device being the AR device which suggests that they are interchangeable. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
In response to applicant's argument (Page 9, 3rd ¶) that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Modifying Zhang’s multi-terminal network to incorporate the structured forwarding techniques taught by Xu, such that a device handles packets by either processing them locally or routing them onward, represents a predictable combination of known networking elements to achieve predictable results (i.e., efficient data distribution among network nodes). A POSITA would have been motivated to combine these teachings with a reasonable expectation of success. Accordingly, the rejection under § 103 is maintained.
Conclusion
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 Jonathan Estrada whose telephone number is (571) 272-9978. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00 EST.
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, Christopher Parry can be reached at (571) 272-8328. 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.
/JONATHAN ESTRADA/Examiner, Art Unit 2451
/Chris Parry/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2451
Prosecution Insights