DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to Amendment filed 08/05/2025.
Claims 25-45 are pending in this application. In the Amendment, claims 25, 33, 41 and 45 are amended. This action is made Final.
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 with respect to claims amended 08/05/2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 25, 30-31, 33, 38-39 and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (“Ahn”, US 2012/0032783) in view of Sumter et al. (“Sumter”, US 2018/0083899) and further in view of Dutta et al. (“Dutta”, US 2013/0290536).
As per claim 25, Ahn teaches a method, comprising:
obtaining user experience (UX) capability information of at least two terminal devices (Ahn, para.71-73, discover module 504 obtains capability info of devices), wherein the UX capability information of the at least two terminal devices indicates a UX capability corresponding to each of at least one interaction manner supported by the at least two terminal devices (Ahn, para.49-51, audio capable 322, touch screen capable 324);
receiving a target task request (Ahn, para.26, 62, execution of electronic reader system to render a displayable page of multimedia content), wherein the target task request requests processing on at least two UX elements of a target task (Ahn, para.28, 67, Fig.1, displayable page 110 includes embedded content elements 116), the target task request comprises UX requirement information of the at least two UX elements (Ahn, para.30-33; content attribute 120 includes requirements for rendering), and the UX requirement information of the at least two UX elements indicates a UX capability requirement corresponding to each of at least one interaction manner that supports the at least two UX elements in achieving a service objective (Ahn, para.33, audio requirement 136, touch screen requirement 138);
determining, based on the UX capability information of the at least two terminal devices and the UX requirement information of the at least two UX elements, a corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices, wherein the UX element that needs to be processed is in the at least two UX elements (Ahn, para.53-54, 74-78, rank module 302 determines which device to render the UX element); and
providing, for each of the at least two terminal devices, the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices (Ahn, para.59-65, 79-81, render module 508 sends UX element to best suited device).
However, Ahn does not teach the providing comprising: providing, by a communication apparatus for a first terminal device of the at least two terminal devices, a first subset of the at least two UX elements that needs to be processed by the first terminal device: and providing, by the communication apparatus for a second terminal device of the at least two terminal devices, a second subset of the at least two UX elements that needs to be processed by the second terminal device. Sumter teaches a method of distributing content wherein the providing is by a communication apparatus for a first terminal device of the at least two terminal devices (Sumter, para.18, 20-22, 29, broker device provides content), a first subset of the at least two UX elements that needs to be processed by the first terminal device (Sumter, para.26, 51, 68, 75, first set of data sent to audio device); and providing, by the communication apparatus for a second terminal device of the at least two terminal devices (Sumter, para.18, 20-22, 29, broker device provides content), a second subset of the at least two UX elements that needs to be processed by the second terminal device (Sumter, para.26, 51, 68, 75, second set of data sent to visual device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Sumter’s teaching with Ahn’s method in order to allow the user to experience the devices in their highest fidelity (Sumter, para.26-27).
Furthermore, the method of Ahn and Sumter does not teach the determining comprising: determining, based on a multiplication of (1) a first user expectation degree of a j-th terminal device for an i-th UX element and (2) a dot product of a first feature vector indicating j-th UX capability information of the j-th terminal device of the at least two terminal devices and a second feature vector comprising i-th quantified one or more UX requirements of the i-th UX element of the at least two UX elements, the corresponding UX element. Dutta teaches a method of resource allocation wherein the determining is based on a multiplication of (1) a first user expectation degree of a j-th terminal device for an i-th UX element (Dutta, para.24, 38-39, attribute weights to indicate priority/importance) and (2) a dot product of a first feature vector indicating j-th UX capability information of the j-th terminal device of the at least two terminal devices and a second feature vector comprising i-th quantified one or more UX requirements of the i-th UX element of the at least two UX elements, the corresponding UX element (Dutta, Fig.3, resource vector 310, Fig.5, request vector 510; para.14, 25, 27-37, dot product of vectors; resource vector includes capabilities, request vector includes desired/required values). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Dutta’s teaching with the method of Ahn and Sumter in order to quickly choose a device based on nearest distance (Dutta, para.49).
As per claim 30, the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta teaches the method according to claim 25, wherein the target task request comprises screen requirement information of the at least two UX elements, wherein the screen requirement information indicates a maximum height, a minimum height, a maximum width, and a minimum width that a user interface (UI) element of the corresponding UX element has when the UI element is displayed on a display screen of one of the at least two terminal devices (Ahn, para.30, 32; content resolution 128, content size 130 includes requirements for rendering), wherein the method further comprises:
obtaining screen information of the at least two terminal devices, wherein the screen information of the at least two terminal devices indicates a height and a width of the display screen (Ahn, para.49-50, 72, discover module 504 obtains resolution/screen size attribute), and wherein the determining the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices comprises:
determining, based on the UX capability information and the screen information of the at least two terminal devices and the UX requirement information and the screen requirement information of the at least two UX elements, the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices (Ahn, para.50, 53-54, 74-78, rank module 302 determines which device to render the UX element).
As per claim 31, the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta teaches the method according to claim 30, wherein the method further comprises: determining screen usage information of the at least two UX elements based on the UX capability information of the at least two terminal devices and the UX requirement information of the at least two UX elements, wherein the screen usage information of the at least two UX elements indicates a height and a width that the UI element of the corresponding UX element has when the UI element of the corresponding UX element is displayed on the display screen (Ahn, para.30, 32; content resolution 128, content size 130 includes requirements for rendering); and
providing, for each of the at least two terminal devices, the screen usage information of the at least two UX elements that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices (Ahn, para.59-65, 79-81, render module 508 sends UX element to best suited device).
Claims 33 and 41 are similar in scope to claim 25, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 38-39 are similar in scope to claims 30-31 respectively, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 26-27, 32, 34-35, 40 and 42-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (“Ahn”, US 2012/0032783), Sumter et al. (“Sumter”, US 2018/0083899) and Dutta et al. (“Dutta”, US 2013/0290536) in view of Yuasa et al. (“Yuasa”, US 2006/0236232).
As per claim 26, the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta teaches the method according to claim 25, wherein the method further comprises: obtaining user information of the at least two terminal devices, wherein the user information of the at least two terminal devices indicates whether the at least one user has permission to access the at least two terminal devices (Ahn, para.55-56, usage permission 336), and wherein the determining the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices comprises: determining, based on the UX capability information and the user information of the at least two terminal devices, the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices (Ahn, para.55-56, accessibility entry 332 determines requirements for using device for rendering content).
Although the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta teaches an accessibility attribute for the device (Ahn, para.55-56), the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta does not teach wherein the target task request comprises a user permission of the at least two UX elements, wherein the user permission of the at least two UX elements indicates whether at least one user has permission to interact with the at least two UX elements and determining based on the UX capability requirement and the user permission of the at least two UX elements, the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices. Yuasa teaches a method of distributing content including user permission of UX elements, wherein the user permission of UX elements indicates whether a user has permission to interact with the UX elements and determining based on the UX capability requirement and the user permission of the UX elements, the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by the terminal devices (Yuasa, para.182, 215-222, 286, 316, renderer selected based on viewer-restricted content). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Yuasa’s teaching with the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta in order to restrict content to specific users.
As per claim 27, the method of Ahn, Sumter, Dutta and Yuasa teaches the method according to claim 26, wherein, for a target user having the permission to access the at least two terminal devices, the target user has permission to interact with the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by the at least two terminal devices (Ahn, para.55-56, accessibility entry 332).
As per claim 32, the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta teaches the method according to claim 25, however does not teach wherein the method further comprises: before the providing the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices: displaying an allocation policy confirmation interface, so that a user performs confirmation, wherein the allocation policy confirmation interface indicates the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices. Yuasa teaches a method of distributing content wherein before providing the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices: displaying an allocation policy confirmation interface (Yuasa, Figs.11-15), so that a user performs confirmation, wherein the allocation policy confirmation interface indicates the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices (Yuasa, para.190-217, user sets compatible devices to content). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Yuasa’s teaching with the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta in order to customize rendering to a user’s preferred device.
Claims 34 and 42 are similar in scope to claim 26, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 35 and 43 are similar in scope to claim 27, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 40 is similar in scope to claim 32, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 28-29, 36-37 and 44-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (“Ahn”, US 2012/0032783), Sumter et al. (“Sumter”, US 2018/0083899) and Dutta et al. (“Dutta”, US 2013/0290536) in view of Vasudevan et al. (“Vasudevan”, US 2004/0267965).
As per claim 28, the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta teaches the method according to claim 25, wherein the method further comprises: obtaining UX preference information of the at least two terminal devices, wherein the UX preference information of the at least two terminal devices indicates a UX preference corresponding to each of at least one UX category (Ahn, para.53-54, 74-78, rank module 302 determines which device to render the UX element; higher rank most preferred), the corresponding UX element belongs to one of the at least one UX category (Ahn, para.31, content type 126), and
wherein the determining the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices comprises: determining, based on the UX capability information and the UX preference information of the at least two terminal devices and the UX requirement information of the at least two UX elements, the corresponding UX element that needs to be processed by each of the at least two terminal devices (Ahn, para.53-54, 74-78, rank module 302 determines which device to render the UX element).
However, the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta does not teach the UX preference corresponding to the UX category indicates an expectation degree of a user for using the at least two terminal devices to process the corresponding UX element belonging to the one of the at least one UX category. Vasudevan teaches a method of distributing content on multiple devices that includes a UX preference corresponding to the UX category indicates an expectation degree of a user for using the terminal devices to process the corresponding UX element belonging to the UX category (Vasudevan, para.41, 44-45, 114, mapping of content to devices; para.98, user preferences database 512, para.127-131, content types indicate utility range for using device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Vasudevan’s teaching with the method of Ahn, Sumter and Dutta in order to measure and rank the quality of rendering on the devices to best suit a user’s preference.
As per claim 29, the method of Ahn, Sumter, Dutta and Vasudevan teaches the method according to claim 28, wherein the at least two terminal devices comprise the communication apparatus and at least one second terminal device (Ahn, Fig.1, devices 108, 112), the at least one second terminal device and the communication apparatus establish a communication connection (Ahn, para.62, paired), and the method is performed by the communication apparatus, and wherein the obtaining the UX preference information of the at least two terminal devices comprises:
receiving second UX preference information of the at least one second terminal device from the at least one second terminal device (Ahn, para.71-73, discover module 504; Vasudevan, para.51, 54, 58, resource monitoring subsystem 208);
displaying a UX preference management interface, wherein the UX preference management interface comprises: a category identifier of the at least one UX category and at least one pattern combination that is in a one-to-one correspondence with the category identifier of the at least one UX category (Vasudevan, Fig.14, para.127-131, 139, each content type has a corresponding value to a device); and
determining first UX preference information of the communication apparatus based on a service operation performed by the user on the at least one pattern combination (Vasudevan, para.127-131, user preference modified by user request).
Claims 36 and 44 are similar in scope to claim 28, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 37 is similar in scope to claim 29, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
As per claim 45, the method of Ahn, Sumter, Dutta and Vasudevan teaches the method of claim 28, the first subset including a first UX element corresponding to a first interaction manner, the second subset including a second UX element corresponding to a second interaction manner (Sumter, para.26, 51, 68, 75, second set of data sent to visual device), the method further comprising: after the receiving the target task request, processing, by the communication apparatus, the at least two UX elements of the target task (Sumter, para.18, 20-22, 49, 76, broker device processes data to suitable format),
wherein the UX preference information indicates the first user expectation degree (Dutta, para.37-38, attribute weights), and
wherein the first feature vector and the second feature vector each comprise numerical values on a same range scale for corresponding interaction manners (Dutta, Fig.3, resource vector 310, Fig.5, request vector 510; para.14, 25, 27-37).
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cuervo Laffaye et al. (US 2016/0323161) teaches a method of using vector dot product to select a node.
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAJEDA MUHEBBULLAH whose telephone number is (571)272-4065. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Tue/Thur-Fri 10am-8pm.
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, William L Bashore can be reached on 571-272-4088. 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.
/S.M./
Sajeda MuhebbullahExaminer, Art Unit 2174
/WILLIAM L BASHORE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights