Detailed Action
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 has/have been considered but are moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by the amendments.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, all the limitations recited in claims 1, 9, 19 and 20 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Claims 1 and 20 recite steps of receiving temperature data at a plurality of gateway devices, transmitting copies of temperature data by each gateway device and selecting a first gateway of as plurality of gateway devices based on copies of temperature data and signal strength or availability of the gateways. Figures 5A, 5B and 6, which show the steps of the method, do not include the aforementioned steps. The figures must show all the steps recited in claims 1 and 20.
The figures do not show the steps recited in claim 9.
Claim 19 recites a system comprising a plurality of gateways. The figures do not show a plurality of gateways.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Objections
Claim(s) 13 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regards to claim 13, the claim ends with two periods. One of the periods must be deleted. For this reason, the claim is objected. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In regards to claim 1, the claim recites in lines 12-16 “selecting, by the server device, a first gateway device of the plurality of gateway devices as a primary gateway device for the sensor device based on the corresponding copies of the first temperature data received from the plurality of gateway devices and further based on, for each gateway device of the plurality of gateway”. It is unclear what parameters of the corresponding copies of the first temperature data received from the plurality of gateway devices are used to select the first gateway device. Paragraphs 0051 and 0065 of the applicant’s specification recite that the first gateway device is selected based on timestamps, signal strength or other indicators of transmissions received by the gateways or availability of the gateways. Since the limitations recited in lines 12-16 of the claim explicitly recite the limitations of signal strength and availability, it appears that the limitation of “based on the corresponding copies of the first temperature data received from the plurality of gateway devices” is referring to the timestamps recited in paragraphs 0051 and 0065. If this is the case, the limitation of “based on the corresponding copies of the first temperature data received from the plurality of gateway devices” is written so broadly that can include parameters that are not recited in the specification. Therefore, the limitation of “based on the corresponding copies of the first temperature data received from the plurality of gateway devices” constitute new matter, and the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement. No prior art was found for the claim as written. However, allowability of the claim cannot be determined until all the issues have been solved.
In regards to claims 2-18, the claims fail to comply with the written description requirement due to their dependency on claim 1.
In regards to claims 19 and 20, the claims have the same issues described in the rejection of claim 1 above. For this reason, the claims fail to comply with the written description requirement. No prior art was found for the claims as written. However, allowability of the claims cannot be determined until all the issues have been solved.
Closest Prior Art
In regards to claims 1, 19 and 20, Mirza et al. (US-12,359,980) teaches a method and a system for monitoring culinary temperatures [col. 1 L. 12-13]. Mirza teaches that the method comprises receiving, at a gateway device, temperature data transmitted from a sensor device [fig. 1 elements 140 (gateway) and 150 (sensor device), col. 5 L. 47-50]. Mirza also teaches that the method comprises transmitting the temperature data from the gateway device to a server device via Internet, WiFi or cellular protocols (a network communication protocol that is different from the sub-GHz communication protocol) fig. 1 elements 110 (server) and 140 (gateway), col. 4 L. 63-67, col. 3 L. 32-33, L. 40 and L. 63-65, col. 5 L. 1-13 and L. 47-50].
Teboulle et al. (US-10,505,666) teaches that plurality of gateway devices can be present in a system in which a device transmits data to a server [fig. 1 elements 11A and 11B, col. 6 L. 64-65]. Also, Teboulle teaches that the server can receive data from the device from the plurality of gateway devices and select a primary gateway device based on which gateway device has the strongest signal strength, and in response to the selection, the primary gateway device is used to send data to the device [col. 8 L. 31-35, L. 44-49, L. 52-62, col. 9 L. 3-10].
Myers et al. (US-8,477,830) teaches that a node of a network can transmit data at a transmission interval, and can receive updates to the transmission interval (configuration data) [col. 35 L. 33-38].
However, the prior art cited in this office action does not teach either by anticipation or combination the following limitations: selecting, by the server device, a first gateway device of the plurality of gateway devices as a primary gateway device for the sensor device based on the corresponding copies of the first temperature data received from the plurality of gateway devices and further based on, for each gateway device of the plurality of gateway devices, one or more of an availability of the gateway device or a signal strength of the sensor device at the gateway device; based on selecting the first gateway device as the primary gateway device, transmitting, from the server device to the first gateway device, first configuration data indicating one or more operational parameters for the sensor device; and transmitting, from only the first gateway device, the first configuration data to the sensor device via the sub-GHz communication protocol.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 FRANKLIN D BALSECA whose telephone number is (571)270-5966. The examiner can normally be reached 6AM-4PM EST M-F.
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, STEVEN LIM can be reached at 571-270-1210. 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.
/FRANKLIN D BALSECA/Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Prosecution Insights