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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on June 26, 2025. Claims 1-8 have been amended. Claims 1-8 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 discloses 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 5767277 (hereinafter,"Tsuboi") in view of JP 5987810 (hereinafter, "Fukuda").
Regarding claim 1, Tsuboi discloses a data transfer method of an in-vehicle relay device (“a gateway apparatus for relaying a communication connection between communication networks” (para 0001)) that is connected to a plurality of electronic controllers mounted on a vehicle via a communication line and is configured to relay data transmitted to the communication line (“in-vehicle network system, a plurality of ECUs (electronic control units, Electronic Control Unit ) that control various vehicular operations are communicably connected via an in-vehicle network, and each ECU transmits and receives to and from other ECUs, information related to a control operation that each ECU is in charge of, thereby realizing appropriate control in the vehicle as a whole” (para 0005)), the data transfer method comprising: by the in-vehicle relay device (Fig. 1, #10 and “The gateway device 10” (para 0032)),
upon receiving a specific request from an external tool connected to the vehicle, transferring the specific request to the plurality of electronic controllers that are transmission targets of the specific request (“the diagnostic device 130 sends an FF frame 310 to the bus 106 toward ECU110, and the FF frame 310 is sent to the bus 104 via the gateway device 10 and received by ECU110” (para 0065) and “a diagnosis device 130 is connected to the bus 106 of the network 102 from the outside of the vehicle via a connector or the like (not illustrated) provided in the bus 106 when the vehicle operation is diagnosed” (para 0034));
setting a communication cycle based on a number of the plurality of electronic controllers … (“the cycle designation detection unit 230 of the gateway device 10 receives each FC frame transmitted from the plurality of ECUs and stores a lower limit value that designates the longest cycle among the lower limit values of the frame transmission cycle designated by each FC frame, and the transmission interval adjustment unit 232 can control the transfer interval of the CF frame from the transmission buffer 220a to the transmission MB214a using the stored lower limit value” (para 0095)); and
upon receiving response data to the specific request from the plurality of electronic controllers, transferring the response data received within a prescribed time to the external tool for each communication cycle (“when the ECU that has received the FF frame transmits the FC frame to the diagnosis device in response to the reception of the FF frame and designates the lower limit value of the frame transmission cycle shorter than the retention time of the FF frame, the subsequent CF frame is transmitted from the diagnosis device at a time interval shorter than the retention time in the gateway device, and it is predicted that a large amount of the transmitted CF frames is accumulated in the gateway device” (para 0101)).
However, Tsuboi does not explicitly teach
setting a communication cycle based on … a load of the communication line.
Fukuda, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
setting a communication cycle based on … a load of the communication line (“a load determination unit (14312) that determines whether or not a communication load in the communication line reaches a first reference value; and an update unit (15313) that updates the transmission interval to a value longer than a current transmission interval when the load determination unit determines that the communication load reaches the first reference value” (claim 1)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tsuboi with the teachings of Fukuda in order to update the transmission interval to a value longer than a current transmission interval when the load determination unit determines that the communication load reaches the first reference value; see Fukuda at least at [claim 1].
Regarding claim 2, Tsuboi discloses the data transfer method according to claim 1. Additionally, Tsuboi discloses comprising, by the in-vehicle relay device, storing the received response data in a storage (“the cycle designation detection unit 230 stores the received frames in the transmission buffer 220b of the storage device 204 in chronological order” (para 0077)), acquiring the received response data within the prescribed time from the storage (“the transmission interval adjustment unit 232 refers to the lower limit of the frame transmission cycle stored by the cycle designation detection unit 230, and controls the frame transfer processing to the transmission 220b so that the transfer interval of the CF frame from the transmission buffer MB216b to the transmission MB216b becomes a time interval equal to or larger than the lower limit.” (para 0054)), and transferring the acquired received response data to the external tool for each communication cycle (“transmitting the stored data to the one terminal device according to the designation of the data transmission interval indicated by the stored information.” (para 0029)).
Regarding claim 3, Tsuboi discloses the data transfer method according to claim 1. However, Tsuboi does not explicitly teach comprising, by the in-vehicle relay device, setting the communication cycle to be longer as the load of the communication line increases.
Fukuda, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
comprising, by the in-vehicle relay device, setting the communication cycle to be longer as the load of the communication line increases (“a load determination unit (14312) that determines whether or not a communication load in the communication line reaches a first reference value; and an update unit (15313) that updates the transmission interval to a value longer than a current transmission interval when the load determination unit determines that the communication load reaches the first reference value” (claim 1)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tsuboi with the teachings of Fukuda in order to update the transmission interval to a value longer than a current transmission interval when the load determination unit determines that the communication load reaches the first reference value; see Fukuda at least at [claim 1].
Regarding claim 4, Tsuboi discloses the data transfer method according to claim 1. Additionally, Tsuboi discloses comprising, by the in-vehicle relay device, setting the communication cycle to be longer as the number of the plurality of electronic controllers increases (“the cycle designation detection unit 230 of the gateway device 10 receives each FC frame transmitted from the plurality of ECUs and stores a lower limit value that designates the longest cycle among the lower limit values of the frame transmission cycle designated by each FC frame, and the transmission interval adjustment unit 232 can control the transfer interval of the CF frame from the transmission buffer 220a to the transmission MB214a using the stored lower limit value” (para 0095)).
Regarding claim 6, Tsuboi discloses the data transfer method according to claim 1. Additionally, Tsuboi discloses comprising, by the in-vehicle relay device, preferentially transferring, to the external tool, response data of the received response data in which a reception interval between a previous reception and a current reception is longer than the prescribed time (“when the frame stored in the head transmission buffer 220b is a CF frame but is not the first CF frame, that is, when the frame is a subsequent CF frame, it is determined whether or not the elapsed time from the previous CF frame transfer measured by the timer is equal to or greater than the lower limit” (para 0056)).
Regarding claim 8, Tsuboi discloses an in-vehicle relay device comprising:
a controller (Fig. 1, #10) that is connected to a plurality of electronic controllers mounted on a vehicle via a communication line and is configured to relay data transmitted to the communication line (Fig. 1, #1) and “a gateway apparatus for relaying a communication connection between communication networks, and more particularly to a gateway apparatus capable of relaying a communication between terminal apparatuses” (para 0001)),
wherein the controller is configured to:
upon receiving a specific request from an external tool connected to the vehicle, transfer the specific request to the plurality of electronic controllers that are transmission targets of the specific request (“the diagnostic device 130 sends an FF frame 310 to the bus 106 toward ECU110, and the FF frame 310 is sent to the bus 104 via the gateway device 10 and received by ECU110” (para 0065) and “a diagnosis device 130 is connected to the bus 106 of the network 102 from the outside of the vehicle via a connector or the like (not illustrated) provided in the bus 106 when the vehicle operation is diagnosed” (para 0034));
set a communication cycle based on a number of the plurality of electronic controllers … (“the cycle designation detection unit 230 of the gateway device 10 receives each FC frame transmitted from the plurality of ECUs and stores a lower limit value that designates the longest cycle among the lower limit values of the frame transmission cycle designated by each FC frame, and the transmission interval adjustment unit 232 can control the transfer interval of the CF frame from the transmission buffer 220a to the transmission MB214a using the stored lower limit value” (para 0095)); and
upon receiving response data to the specific request from the plurality of electronic controllers, transfer the response data received within a prescribed time to the external tool for each communication cycle (“when the ECU that has received the FF frame transmits the FC frame to the diagnosis device in response to the reception of the FF frame and designates the lower limit value of the frame transmission cycle shorter than the retention time of the FF frame, the subsequent CF frame is transmitted from the diagnosis device at a time interval shorter than the retention time in the gateway device, and it is predicted that a large amount of the transmitted CF frames is accumulated in the gateway device” (para 0101)).
However, Tsuboi does not explicitly teach
set a communication cycle based on … a load of the communication line; and
Fukuda, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
set a communication cycle based on … a load of the communication line (“a load determination unit (14312) that determines whether or not a communication load in the communication line reaches a first reference value; and an update unit (15313) that updates the transmission interval to a value longer than a current transmission interval when the load determination unit determines that the communication load reaches the first reference value” (claim 1)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tsuboi with the teachings of Fukuda in order to update the transmission interval to a value longer than a current transmission interval when the load determination unit determines that the communication load reaches the first reference value; see Fukuda at least at [claim 1].
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 5767277 (hereinafter,"Tsuboi"), in view of JP 5987810 (hereinafter,"Fukuda") as applied to claim1 above, and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20050027404 (hereinafter, "Ban").
Regarding claim 5, Tsuboi discloses the data transfer method according to claim 1. However, Tsuboi does not explicitly teach wherein identification information is set to each of the plurality of electronic controllers, and the identification information is added to the response data.
Ban, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein identification information is set to each of the plurality of electronic controllers, and the identification information is added to the response data (“wherein said at least one device includes a plurality of the devices so that the request is transmitted from any one of the plurality of devices, said request includes source information indicative of any one of the devices as a source of transmitting the request, and identification information indicative of a content of the request” (claim 9)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tsuboi with the teachings of Ban in order to determine whether the received request corresponds to the previously specified request according to at least one of the source information and the identification information; see Ban at least at [claim 9].
Regarding claim 7, Tsuboi discloses the data transfer method according to claim 1. However, Tsuboi does not explicitly teach comprising, upon the communication line being provided in plurality and the communication lines being connected to the in-vehicle relay device, setting the communication cycle for each of the communication lines by the in-vehicle relay device.
Ban, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
comprising, upon the communication line being provided in plurality and the communication lines being connected to the in-vehicle relay device (“an in-vehicle LAN (Local Area Network) composed of a plurality of communication lines is provided in the vehicle, and a plurality of electronic control units (ECUs) are also installed in the vehicle to be communicably coupled to the communication lines of the in-vehicle LAN” (para 0005)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tsuboi with the teachings of Ban in order to determine whether the received request corresponds to the previously specified request according to at least one of the source information and the identification information; see Ban at least at [claim 9],
Fukuda, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
setting the communication cycle for each of the communication lines by the in-vehicle relay device (“the communication load in the communication line is compared with the first reference value, and when the communication load has reached the first reference value, it is considered that the communication load in the communication line has been increased, and the transmission interval at which the electronic control unit is transmitting the diagnostic data is updated to a longer value” (para 0009)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tsuboi with the teachings of Fukuda in order to update the transmission interval to a value longer than a current transmission interval when the load determination unit determines that the communication load reaches the first reference value; see Fukuda at least at [claim 1].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ALHARBI whose telephone number is (313)446-6621. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 11:00AM – 7:30PM 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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ADAM M ALHARBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights