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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “camera module” and “communication module” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 –
(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.
Claims 1, 6, 9, 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0197773 to Butler et al.
As concerns claim 1, a mobile device comprising: a camera module (Fig. 1, 112a; 0108-camera);
a communication module (Fig. 42-network interface 4216) providing a wireless link (0368-wireless) for communication with a server (0423-edge server); and
a processor (0524-0525-processor 4202; Fig. 42) functionally connected to the camera module and the communication module, wherein the processor collects video data (0108-camera video) through the camera module and determines whether to perform an offloading (0423-computation offloading) function for analyzing the video data by utilizing computing resources of the server (0423-computation offloading to servers) according to a wireless link status (0064-based on real-time load status; 0448-offload based on network capabilities and conditions) of the communication module based on an offloading policy (0448-offload “based on”, thus conditional “policy”; 0424-automated resource management and workload orchestration functionality (“policy”)), and the offloading policy is determined by learning a change in video analysis performance (0307-optimally tune through setting policies; 0358-visual analytics, adapt video; 0423-device application or client application operating in a UE (“mobile device” with camera) offload workloads) of the mobile device (Fig. 26, 2662-mobile device; other devices shown can be “mobile device”; Fig. 21-client compute node) and the server according to a change in the wireless link status (0064-based on real-time load status; 0448-offload based on network capabilities and conditions).
As concerns claim 9, a selective offloading method of a mobile device, the selective offloading method comprising:
checking a wireless link status (0064-based on real-time load status; 0448-offload based on network capabilities and conditions) when video data (0108-camera video stream) is collected through a camera module (Fig. 1, 112a; 0108-camera);
performing video analysis (0358-visual analytics, adapt video; 0356-visual analytics) on the video data by utilizing computing resources of the mobile device (Fig. 26, 2662-mobile device; other devices shown can be “mobile device”; Fig. 21-client compute node) or a server (0423-edge server) based on an offloading policy (0448-offload “based on”, thus conditional “policy”; 0424-automated resource management and workload orchestration functionality (“policy”)) according to the wireless link status; and
updating the offloading policy based on a correlation between video analysis performance according to the wireless link status (0064-based on real-time load status; 0448-offload based on network capabilities and conditions; 0307-optimally tune through setting policies; 0358-visual analytics, adapt video; 0423-device application or client application operating in a UE (“mobile device” with camera) offload workloads).
As concerns claim 17, a mobile device comprising: a memory (0529) including at least one instruction; and a processor (0524-0525-processor 4202; Fig. 42) functionally connected to the memory, wherein, when the at least one instruction is executed, the processor is configured to:
check a wireless link status (0064-based on real-time load status; 0448-offload based on network capabilities and conditions) on a communication path with a server (0423-edge server) performing edge computing-based video analysis (0358-visual analytics, adapt video; 0356-visual analytics) when video data (0108-camera video stream) is collected;
analyze the video data by selectively utilizing computing resources of the server or the mobile device (Fig. 26, 2662-mobile device; other devices shown can be “mobile device”; Fig. 21-client compute node) based on an offloading policy (0064-based on real-time load status; 0448-offload based on network capabilities and conditions) according to the wireless link status; and
update the offloading policy by learning a change in video analysis performance for the video data according to a change in the wireless link status (0064-based on real-time load status; 0448-offload based on network capabilities and conditions).
As concerns claim 6, the mobile device of claim 1, wherein the processor determines and updates the offloading policy according to a change in the video analysis performance due to a change in the wireless link status using an online learning algorithm (0217-derived from machine learning).
As concerns claim 14, the selective offloading method of claim 9, wherein the updating includes determining and updating the offloading policy according to a change in the video analysis performance due to a change in the wireless link status using an online learning algorithm (0217-derived from machine learning).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, 7, 8, 10-13, 15, 16 and 18-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892. US Patent Application Publication 2025/0139966 disclose offloading module reducing frame size (0058).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN B WALSH whose telephone number is (571)272-7063. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-3:30 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, Christopher L 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.
/JOHN B WALSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2451
Prosecution Insights