Details
Claims 1-13 are pending.
Claims 1-13 are rejected.
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: “a subdivision unit arranged to subdivide”, “an interface unit set up for reading”, “a packetization unit arranged to add”, “a transmission interface unit arranged for transmitting”, and “a receiving interface unit arranged to receive” in claim 12.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the payload data" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation " the payload data " in line 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rangarajan et al (Pub. No.: US 2017/0019479 A1) in view of User YOSHIMOCHI et al (Pub. No.: US 2015/0372845 A1).
As per claim 1, Rangarajan discloses a method for operating a universal data transport system (Rangarajan, Fig 1 item 106 “Flexible deterministic network”) for a vehicle architecture (Rangarajan, Fig 1 item 100 “a vehicle”), comprising:- dividing (100) at least one physical data channel into a plurality of virtual data channels (Rangarajan, Fig 1 item 106, paragraph 0030, wherein “The switching mechanism 182 may also include or may generate one or more virtual channels 184. A virtual channel 184 may be established between a particular pair of nodes 108, 110a-110n, 142, 144a-144n through the switch mechanism 182 for communication between the particular pair of nodes”);- reading out (101) user data in a transmitter of the data transport system (Rangarajan, paragraph 0019, wherein “One or more applications 116 may run on the processor 112. The one or more applications 116 may be configured for controlling operation of the remote data concentrator 108 and to receive and process signals from a plurality of sensors 117 associated with different systems, subsystems or components for operation and control of the vehicle”);- adding (102) description data describing the payload data to the payload data according to a target data format to create at least one data set (Rangarajan, paragraph 0023, wherein “In an aircraft, the VMS nodes 110a-110n and remote data concentrator 108 may communicate with one another over the flexible deterministic network 106 using Aeronautical Radio, Incorporated (ARINC) 664 or A 664 message protocol which is a static, deterministic protocol”, wherein the message protocol inherently involves adding description data describing the payload data such as header fields associated the payload data included with the communicated message);- a transmission (103) of the at least one data set by means of the virtual data channels from the transmitter to a receiver by means of static addressing (Rangarajan, paragraph 0019-0020, wherein “The routing table 120 may include a static part 122 and a dynamic part 124. The static part 122 may be configured for routing messages to the VMS nodes 110a-110n or other components over the flexible deterministic network 106 that communicate using static, deterministic type messages. Static, deterministic messages may have a predetermined bandwidth or length. Static, deterministic messages may also be transmitted at certain times or time intervals or time slots and/or at particular frequencies or under certain conditions or states”) and- receiving (104) the at least one data set in the receiver and reading out the user data for its use (Rangarajan, paragraph 0019, wherein “One or more applications 116 may run on the processor 112. The one or more applications 116 may be configured for controlling operation of the remote data concentrator 108 and to receive and process signals from a plurality of sensors 117 associated with different systems, subsystems or components for operation and control of the vehicle”). Rangarajan does not explicitly show wherein several data streams are bundled in a transport frame and transmitted serially. However, YOSHIMOCHI discloses wherein several data streams are bundled in a transport frame and transmitted serially (YOSHIMOCHI, abstract, Fig 4, 12, paragraph 0171, wherein “A transmission device divides a BB stream as a stream of BB (Baseband) frames into divisional streams by distributing the BB frames of the BB stream to data slices. The dividing of the BB stream is performed by limiting the data rate ratio between the data rates of the divisional streams. A reception device recomposes the original BB stream from the divisional streams obtained from data transmitted from the transmission device. The present technology can be applied to CB such as PLP (Physical Layer Pipe) bundling”).
Therefore, it would have it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate Rangarajan with YOSHIMOCHI to achieve the claimed limitations because this would have provided channel bounding that can be performed at lowered costs (see YOSHIMOCHI par. 0016-0017).
As per claim 2, claim 1 is incorporated and Rangarajan and YOSHIMOCHI do not explicitly discloses wherein the number of virtual data channels per physical data channel is a maximum of 128. However, choosing the number 128 as a maximum for the number of virtual data channels per physical data channel is considered as a matter of design choice and therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the above limitation into Rangarajan and YOSHIMOCHI because this would have provided one way of limiting the number of virtual channels per physical channel which help manage and control the transmission of data;
As per claim 3, claim 1 is incorporated and Rangarajan further discloses wherein a bandwidth is allocated separately for each virtual data channel (Rangarajan, paragraph 0031, wherein “A static virtual channel 184a may be provided or established for transmitting a static, deterministic message and a dynamic channel 184b may be provided or established for transmitting a dynamic, non-deterministic message. A static virtual channel 184a will have a predetermined bandwidth to conform to the static, deterministic message protocol. A dynamic virtual channel 184b may have a variable bandwidth that corresponds to the bandwidth of the dynamic, non-deterministic message being transmitted”);
As per claim 4, claim 1 is incorporated and Rangarajan and YOSHIMOCHI do not explicitly discloses wherein all virtual data channels are operated at least temporarily in a duplex mode. However, using duplex mode is well known in the art and therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the above limitation into Rangarajan and YOSHIMOCHI because this would have provided a way of improving the performance of the system by allowing data to be sent and received over the channels simultaneously;
As per claim 5, claim 1 is incorporated and Rangarajan further discloses wherein physical and/or virtual data channels of different numbers are present for each communication direction (Rangarajan, paragraph 0031, wherein “A static virtual channel 184a may be provided or established for transmitting a static, deterministic message and a dynamic channel 184b may be provided or established for transmitting a dynamic, non-deterministic message. A static virtual channel 184a will have a predetermined bandwidth to conform to the static, deterministic message protocol. A dynamic virtual channel 184b may have a variable bandwidth that corresponds to the bandwidth of the dynamic, non-deterministic message being transmitted”);
As per claim 6, claim 1 is incorporated and Rangarajan further discloses wherein the virtual data channels are set up exclusively for continuous or discontinuous data records (Rangarajan, paragraph 0020, wherein “The end system 114 may couple or connect the remote data concentrator 108 to the flexible deterministic network 106. While the end system 114 may be shown in FIG. 1 as being associated with the remote data concentrator 108, the end system 114 may actually be considered to be part of the flexible deterministic network 106 and may be reconfigured in association with the flexible deterministic network 106 as described herein. The end system 114 may include a routing table 120 for routing messages to other components or systems over the flexible deterministic network 106. The routing table 120 may include a static part 122 and a dynamic part 124. The static part 122 may be configured for routing messages to the VMS nodes 110a-110n or other components over the flexible deterministic network 106 that communicate using static, deterministic type messages. Static, deterministic messages may have a predetermined bandwidth or length. Static, deterministic messages may also be transmitted at certain times or time intervals or time slots and/or at particular frequencies or under certain conditions or states. The dynamic part 124 of the routing table 120 may be configured for routing messages to components of the MMS 104 or other components over the flexible deterministic network 106 that may communicate using dynamic, non-deterministic type messages”);
As per claim 7, claim 1 is incorporated and Rangarajan further discloses wherein virtual data channels are prioritized independently of one another (Rangarajan, paragraph 0034, wherein “Operation or performance of mission systems may not be as critical as performance of vehicle systems which may be important to prevent damage or loss of the vehicle 100. Therefore, VMS 102 communications or messages may take precedence over MMS 104 communications or messages with respect to configuring the flexible deterministic network 106 and end systems 114, 134, 154, 170. Accordingly, a dynamic, non-deterministic message may not be transmitted or the network 106 and end systems 114, 134, 154 and 170 may not be reconfigured for communicating the dynamic, non-deterministic message if there is insufficient bandwidth for the message on the network 106 because of static, deterministic message traffic. The network 106 and end systems 114, 134, 154 and 170 may be reconfigured for communicating or transmitting dynamic, non-deterministic message traffic if there is sufficient available bandwidth on the flexible deterministic network as determined by the processor 180 or one of the applications 110, 128, 152 or 164 operating on one of the nodes”);
As per claim 8, claim 1 is incorporated and Rangarajan further discloses wherein network nodes of the data transport system act alternately as transmitters or receivers (Rangarajan, paragraph 0023, wherein “In an aircraft, the VMS nodes 110a-110n and remote data concentrator 108 may communicate with one another over the flexible deterministic network 106 using Aeronautical Radio, Incorporated (ARINC) 664 or A 664 message protocol which is a static, deterministic protocol”);
As per claim 9, claim 1 is incorporated and Rangarajan further discloses wherein the user data are output in the receiver by means of an output unit and/or the receiver represents a data sink (Rangarajan, paragraph 0021, wherein “Each VMS node 110a-110n may include a processor 126 and one or more applications 128 running on the processor 126. Each VMS node 110a-110n may be associated with one or more systems 130-132, subsystems or components of the vehicle 100 that control operation and maneuvering of the vehicle 100. Examples of the systems 130-132, subsystems or components of the vehicle 100, if the vehicle 100 is an aircraft, may include but is not necessarily limited to flight controls, landing gear, cabin and cockpit environmental systems, electrical, pneumatic and hydraulic systems, communications systems, navigation systems and other systems or subsystems for controlling operation and maneuvering of the aircraft when airborne and on the ground. The applications 128 running on the processor 126 of each VMS node 110a-110n may be configured to control operation of one or more associated systems 130-132, subsystems or components. The processor 126 may be similar to the processor 112 of the remote data concentrator 208 or may be a unique device, such as a microprocessor or other computing device programmed to perform specific functions to control a vehicle system, subsystem or component”);
As per claim 10, claim 1 is incorporated and Rangarajan and YOSHIMOCHI do not explicitly discloses wherein the method uses only volatile memories. However, choosing to use only volatile memories is considered as a matter of design choice and therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the above limitation into Rangarajan and YOSHIMOCHI because this would have provided one way of improving the system performance by maximizing data processing speed;
As per claim 11, claim 1 is incorporated and YOSHIMOCHI further discloses wherein the user data are present as video data and/or audio data (YOSHIMOCHI, paragraph 0035, wherein “The transmission device 11 transmits television programs and the like (digital broadcasting) (data transmission). That is, the transmission device 11 transmits (sends) a stream of data to be transmitted, such as image data and audio data as a television program”);
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under the same rationale as claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMZA N ALGIBHAH whose telephone number is (571)270-7212. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 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, Wing Chan can be reached on (571) 272-7493. 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.
/HAMZA N ALGIBHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2441
Prosecution Insights