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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 02/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argued on page 10 of Remarks that Goodman does not teach or suggest detecting the transmission of a device identifier.
Examiner disagrees. Goodman teaches and shows in fig. 1, fig. 11 and par. 0112: “Signal flow 1100 may include mobile device 180 detecting customer premises 140 (signal 1102). Mobile device 180 detects WiFi AP 150 and may log into WiFi AP 150. Par. 0057: Smart TV device interface 410 may detect that mobile device 180 is located in, or within a particular distance of, customer premises 140. Smart TV device interface 410 may detect a particular device and/or connection, such as WiFi AP 150 or a Bluetooth connection with a device in customer premises 140 based on, for example, a device identifier.” Goodman clearly teaches detecting the transmission of a device identifier as mentioned “Smart TV device interface 410 may detect a particular device and/or connection, such as WiFi AP 150 or a Bluetooth connection with a device in customer premises 140 based on, for example, a device identifier”.
Applicant also argued on page 11 of Remarks that Goodman is devoid of any teaching or suggestion of "detecting, by a user device, a transmission of a first premises device identifier from a first premises device; [and] detecting a transmission of a second premises device identifier from a second premises device."
Examiner disagrees. Goodman teaches and shows in fig. 1, fig. 11 and par. 0112: “Mobile device 180 detects WiFi AP 150 and may log into WiFi AP 150”. It is that Mobile device 180 detects WiFi AP 150 before logging into WiFi AP 150.
It is clear that Goodman teaches or suggests of "detecting, by a user device, a transmission of a first premises device identifier from a first premises device; [and] detecting a transmission of a second premises device identifier from a second premises device."
Applicant argued on page 11 of Remarks that Goodman does not teach or suggest "receiving, based on a sequence of detection between the detection of the transmission of the first premises device identifier from the first premises device and the detection of the transmission of the second premises device identifier from the second premises device, an advertisement campaign" as claimed.
Examiner disagrees. Goodman teaches par. 0113: Mobile device 180 may advertise caller ID application 400 to WiFi AP 150 (signal 1110) and WiFi AP 150 may forward the advertisement to gaming system 170 (signal 1112). Gaming system 170 may include caller ID application 505, may identify the advertisement, and may respond with a request to pair up with mobile device 180 (signal 1114) which may be forwarded by WiFi AP 150 to mobile device 180 (signal 1116) and par. 0114: Mobile device 180 may identify that mobile device 180 is registered with gaming system 170 and may send the caller ID information to gaming system 170 via WiFi AP 150 (signals 1134 and 1136). Gaming system 170 may generate a user interface that may be displayed on television 145. The user interface may include an option to answer the incoming call and to stream the audio to gaming system 170 and the user may select to stream the audio to gaming system 170 (signal 1140).
It is clear that Goodman teaches “receiving, based on a sequence of detection between the detection of the transmission of the first premises device identifier from the first premises device and the detection of the transmission of the second premises device identifier from the second premises device, an advertisement campaign" as claimed.
Applicant also argued on page 13 of Remarks that Goodman is silent with regard to any criteria or priority that may be used for identifying one of the smart TV devices to advertise, or send, the caller ID application, or to output the caller ID information or specific content.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., [regard to any criteria or priority that may be used for identifying one of the smart TV devices to advertise, or send, the caller ID application, or to output the caller ID information or specific content]) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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).
Applicant also argued on page 13 of Remarks that Goodman fails to further teach that the mobile device 180 sends the advertised caller ID application 400 based on detecting the WiFi AP 150 first and then subsequently detecting the gaming system 170, or vice versa.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., [ ) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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).
Applicant also argued on page 13 of Remarks that there is no teaching in Goodman of determining a sequence in which the device identifiers are detected, nor any teaching that the advertisement of the mobile device's 180 caller ID application 400 depends on such a sequence.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., [ determining a sequence in which the device identifiers are detected, nor any teaching that the advertisement of the mobile device's 180 caller ID application 400 depends on such a sequence ]) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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).
Applicant also argued on pages 13-14 of Remarks that Goodman is devoid of any teaching or suggestion of "receiving, based on a sequence of detection between the detection of the transmission of the first premises device identifier from the first premises device and the detection of the transmission of the second premises device identifier from the second premises device, an advertisement campaign.”
Examiner disagrees. Goodman teaches and shows in par. 0113: Mobile device180 may advertise caller ID application 400 to WiFi AP 150 (signal 1110) and WiFi AP 150 may forward the advertisement to gaming system 170 (signal 1112). Gaming system 170 may include caller ID application 505, may identify the advertisement, and may respond with a request to pair up with mobile device 180 (signal 1114) which may be forwarded by WiFi AP 150 to mobile device 180 (signal 1116) and par. 0114: Mobile device 180 may identify that mobile device 180 is registered with gaming system 170 and may send the caller ID information to gaming system 170 via WiFi AP 150 (signals 1134 and 1136). Gaming system 170 may generate a user interface that may be displayed on television 145. The user interface may include an option to answer the incoming call and to stream the audio to gaming system 170 and the user may select to stream the audio to gaming system 170 (signal 1140).”
It is clear that Goodman teaches "receiving, based on a sequence of detection between the detection of the transmission of the first premises device identifier from the first premises device and the detection of the transmission of the second premises device identifier from the second premises device, an advertisement campaign” as claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-9, 16-19, 21-24, 31-34 and 36-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Goodman et al. (US 2014/0181886 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 16, 31 and 40, Goodman et al. teach a method/ an apparatus comprising: one or more processors; and a memory storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to/ one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to/ a system comprising:
a first premises device configured to transmit a first premises device identifier (see fig. 1: WiFi AP 150); a second premises device configured to transmit a second premises device identifier (see fig. 1: Gaming system 170); and a user device (see fig. 1: mobile device 180) configured to: detecting, by a user device, a transmission of a first premises device identifier from a first premises device (see fig. 1, fig. 11 and par. 0112: Signal flow 1100 may include mobile device 180 detecting customer premises 140 (signal 1102). Mobile device 180 detects WiFi AP 150 and may log into WiFi AP 150. Par. 0057: Smart TV device interface 410 may detect that mobile device 180 is located in, or within a particular distance of, customer premises 140. Smart TV device interface 410 may detect a particular device and/or connection, such as WiFi AP 150 or a Bluetooth connection with a device in customer premises 140 based on, for example, a device identifier); detecting a transmission of a second premises device identifier from a second premises device device (see fig. 1, fig. 11 and par. 0112: Signal flow 1100 may include mobile device 180 detecting customer premises 140 (signal 1102). Mobile device 180 detects WiFi AP 150 and may log into WiFi AP 150. Par. 0057: Smart TV device interface 410 may detect that mobile device 180 is located in, or within a particular distance of, customer premises 140. Smart TV device interface 410 may detect a particular device and/or connection, such as WiFi AP 150 or a Bluetooth connection with a device in customer premises 140 based on, for example, a device identifier); and receiving, based on a sequence of detection between the detection of the transmission of the first premises device identifier from the first premises device and the detection of the transmission of the second premises device identifier from the second premises device, an advertisement campaign (see par. 0113: Mobile device 180 may advertise caller ID application 400 to WiFi AP 150 (signal 1110) and WiFi AP 150 may forward the advertisement to gaming system 170 (signal 1112). Gaming system 170 may include caller ID application 505, may identify the advertisement, and may respond with a request to pair up with mobile device 180 (signal 1114) which may be forwarded by WiFi AP 150 to mobile device 180 (signal 1116) and par. 0114: Mobile device 180 may identify that mobile device 180 is registered with gaming system 170 and may send the caller ID information to gaming system 170 via WiFi AP 150 (signals 1134 and 1136). Gaming system 170 may generate a user interface that may be displayed on television 145. The user interface may include an option to answer the incoming call and to stream the audio to gaming system 170 and the user may select to stream the audio to gaming system 170 (signal 1140)).
Regarding claims 2, 17, 32 and 41, Goodman et al. also teach wherein the advertisement
campaign is received based on at least one of a time between detection of the first premises
device identifier and the second premises device identifier, an occurrence of an event between
detection of the first premises device identifier and the second premises device identifier , or an
occurrence of an event at a location associated with the first premises device identifier or the
second premises device identifier (see par. 0057: Smart TV device interface 410 may detect that
mobile device 180 is located in, or within a particular distance of, customer premises 140 ).
Regarding claims 3, 8, 33 and 42, Goodman et al. teach wherein processor-executable
instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to
monitor for at least one premises device identifier, wherein the at least one premises device
identifier is associated with at least one premises device (see fig. 1, fig. 4, and pars. 0055-0061).
Regarding claims 4, 19 and 34, Goodman et al. teach wherein processor-executable
instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to:
determine that a user of the apparatus interacted with the advertisement campaign (see fig. 1, fig.
4, and pars. 0055-0061); and send, to a computing device, data indicating details of the user
interaction (see fig. 1, fig. 4, and pars. 0055-0061: streaming module 430 may receive streamed
audio input from the smart TV device and may incorporate the received audio input into the
telephone call and may send the incorporate audio input toward the other party associated with
the telephone call).
Regarding claims 6, 21 and 36, Goodman et al. teach wherein processor-executable
instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to
store data indicating the detection of the transmission of the first premises device identifier (see
fig. 1, fig. 4, and pars. 0055-0061: smart TV device interface 410 of the mobile device 180 may
detect a particular device and/or connection, such as WiFi AP 150 or a Bluetooth connection
with a device in customer premises 140 based on, for example, a device identifier such as TV
145, gaming system 170, personal computer 160).
Regarding claims 7, 22 and 37, Goodman et al. teach wherein detecting the transmission
of the first premises device identifier is caused by a first application associated with the
apparatus (see fig. 1, fig. 4, and pars. 0055-0061: smart TV device interface 410 of the mobile
device 180 may detect a particular device and/or connection, such as WiFi AP 150 or a
Bluetooth connection with a device in customer premises 140 based on, for example, a device
identifier such as TV 145, gaming system 170, personal computer 160).
Regarding claims 8, 23 and 38, Goodman et al. teach wherein detecting the transmission
of the second premises device identifier is caused by a second application associated with the
user device (see fig. 1, fig. 4, and pars. 0055-0061: smart TV device interface 410 of the mobile
device 180 may detect a particular device and/or connection, such as WiFi AP 150 or a
Bluetooth connection with a device in customer premises 140 based on, for example, a device
identifier such as TV 145, gaming system 170, personal computer 160).
Regarding claims 9, 24 and 39, Goodman et al. teach wherein detecting the transmission
of the first premises device identifier occurs at a first location, and wherein detecting the
transmission of the second premises device identifier occurs at a second location (see fig. 1, fig.
4, and pars. 0055-0061: smart TV device interface 410 of the mobile device 180 may detect a
particular device and/or connection, such as Wifi AP 150 or a Bluetooth connection with a
device in customer premises 140 based on, for example, a device identifier such as TV 145,
gaming system 170, personal computer 160).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 20 and 35 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.
Regarding claims 5, 20 and 35 are objected as indicated in the previous office action.
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 DAVID Q NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7844. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 AM - 3:00 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, Jinsong Hu can be reached at 5712723965. 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.
/DAVID Q NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights