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 action is in response to the reply received 6/8/2026.
Claims 1, 16 and 20 were amended 6/8/2026.
Claims 1-20 are have been examined and are currently pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 16, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: “distinguishes the particular screen from other of the plurality of screens” is grammatically incorrect. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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, 16 and 20 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.
Claims 1, 16, 20 and therefore their dependent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: how the image frames are selected as a unique identifier in the limitation of “identifying the particular screen presented in the image frames based on detection of a specific region in the image frames selected as a unique identifier that distinguishes the particular screen from other of the plurality of screens”. The specification recites in paragraph 34 that the screen identification module detects the particular screen presented by picking a specific region of the captured screen image that serves as a unique identifier, however it is unclear if the picking is implemented using a machine-learning module or if the picking is already available through pre-selected templates (paragraph 35). This lack of clarity is created due to the missing step of how the unique identifier is “picked” or selected.
Allowable Subject Matter
The claims are allowable over the prior art of Ahmed (US 2017/0195377 A1), Drozdzal (US 8,422,755 B2), Dey (US 2020/0285771 A1), Jhaveri (US 20210287783 A1), Bakker (EP 3660741 A1), Gentles (US 7,5939,18 B2), and Mizobe (US 2016/0306936 A1) and are allowable over the 101 rejection. A new search was conducted and found the prior art of Prokle (WO 2020/016048 A1) that teaches different display screens for medical professionals, however it did not explicitly teach a unique identifier of a specific region of the screen displayed.
The amended claim limitations of the independent claims 1, 16, and 20 are not taught by the prior art and have a practical application that overcomes the abstract idea. Specifically, the claim limitation of “identifying the particular screen presented in the image frames based on detection of a specific region in the image frames selected as a unique identifier that distinguishes the particular screen from other of the plurality of screens…modifying the image frames based on the standard display format” in combination with the other claim limitations overcomes the prior art and creates a practical application. A specific GUI that standardizes a format is an improvement of technological and provides a technical solution to a technological problem. The abstract idea is overcome and the 101 rejection has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
The arguments filed 6/8/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding the arguments pertaining to the 112(a) rejection, these arguments are persuasive and the amendments overcome the 112(a) rejection and it has been withdrawn.
Regarding the arguments pertaining to the 101 rejection, these arguments are persuasive and the amendments overcome the 101 rejection and it has been withdrawn.
Regarding the arguments pertaining to the 103 rejection, these arguments are persuasive and the amendments overcome the 103 rejection and it has been withdrawn.
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 KIMBERLY A SASS whose telephone number is (571)272-4774. The examiner can normally be reached 7AM-5PM (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, JASON DUNHAM can be reached at 571-272-8109. 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.
/KIMBERLY A. SASS/Examiner, Art Unit 3686
Prosecution Insights