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 .
The following action is in response to the amendment/remarks of 02/17/2026 and supplemental amendment/remarks of 02/27/2026.
By the amendment of 02/17/2026, claims 1, 12, 18 and 19 have been amended.
By the amendment of 02/27/2026, claim 1 was amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been considered below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues (Remarks 02/17/2026 pages 8-9, Remarks 02/27/2026 page 7), regarding the 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 1 and 12 over GOODSITT in view of YANG, that GOODSITT fails to disclose or suggest the input data includes hardware data associated with an input device, of the host device, used to receive the input data as now required by the amended claims. The Examiner agrees. Particularly that while GOODSITT discloses the input data includes hardware data of an input device used to the input data, GOODSITT fails to disclose wherein the hardware data identifies an input device of the host device used to receive the input data. Accordingly, the 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 1-6 and 12-17 over GOODSITT in view of YANG is withdrawn.
Similarly, the 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 7-11 over GOODSITT, YANG and LI is withdrawn.
On further search and consideration, the prior art of KOBRES (US 2014/0241523 A1) was found to meet the deficiencies of GOODSITT, YANG and LI as presented in the new grounds of rejection below.
Applicant argues (Remarks 02/17/2026 page 9), regarding the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 18, that GOODSITT is cited in the rejection. The Examiner notes that claims 18-20 are not rejected over GOODSITT. Claims 18-20 were rejected under 35 USC 103 over LI in view of XU. The rejection has been updated to reflect the amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 18-20 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.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 recites the limitation: “a second graphical element displayed on the host device, the first graphical element including a second connection identifier that is different form the first connection identifier, the encryption key, and the address for the server”. While the claim states that the second connection identifier is included in the first graphical element, it is unclear due to the structuring of the limitation whether the second graphical element also or alternatively or exclusively includes the second connection identifier, the encryption key and the address for the server or if the first graphical element includes the second connection identifier, the encryption key and the address for the server. If the latter, then it is further unclear how capturing the second graphical element would lead to encrypting and transmitting the second content data.
Regarding claims 19-20, claims 19-20 depend from claim 18 and are similarly rejected.
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 (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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. 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 1-6 and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GOODSITT (US 2020/0012777 A1) in view of KOBRES (US 2014/0241523 A1) and in further view of YANG (US 2020/0213403 A1).
Regarding claim 1, GOODSITT discloses a computer-implemented method for rendering a persistent display of content data (GOODSITT ¶8: establishing a session at a public terminal), the method comprising:
receiving, at a server from a host device over a first connection (GOODSITT ¶42-43: secure server, ¶47), input data, wherein the input data includes hardware data an input device used to input the input data (GOODSITT ¶48: receiving physical user input in the form of an a physical hardware card, ¶20: well-known examples including CAC Card, credit cards and/or keycards or RFID fobs, CAC Card or HSPD-12 include input data such as identification numbers);
verifying, by the server, that the input data corresponds to input by a user physically located at the host device based on the hardware data in the input data (GOODSITT ¶48);
based on verifying that the input data corresponds to the input by the user physically located at the host device, generating, by the server, a connection identifier (GOODSITT ¶49: generate a code to begin connection process after receiving physical credentials);
transmitting, from the server to the host device, the connection identifier to cause the host device to display a graphical element conveying the connection identifier (GOODSITT ¶55, ¶57: transmitting code to terminal for display);
receiving, by the server from a guest device, a confirmation input including the connection identifier captured by the guest device from the graphical element (GOODSITT ¶58-67: confirmation inputs from the user device confirming the connection);
based on receiving the confirmation input, establishing, by the server, a temporary interim connection including the first connection and a second connection between the server and each of the guest device and host device (GOODSITT ¶68-70: establish connection sessions and between the server and guest device and host device, Fig. 2 250, 251);
terminating, by the server, the interim connection (GOODSITT ¶77-78: end session when instructions are complete).
While GOODSITT discloses the input data includes hardware data of an input device used to the input data (¶20, ¶48: CAC card data is transmitted along with CAC identification), GOODSITT fails to disclose wherein the hardware data identifies an input device of the host device used to receive the input data.
KOBRES discloses methods for establishing a secure connection to a host device (KOBRES ¶7-8). In particular, KOBRES discloses transmitting hardware data identifying the input device of the host device to verify the input device of the host device before establishing a secure connection (KOBRES ¶51-59: peripheral identification and security information to verify the card reader has not been tampered, ¶74: establish connection after verification based on the hardware data, Fig. 8). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art and the teachings of GOODSITT and KOBRES before them before the effective filling of the claimed invention to combine the transmitted hardware data identifying an input device receiving input of the host device, as taught by KOBRES, with the input data including hardware data of an input device of GOODSITT. One would have been motivated to make this combination in order to provide additional security against third party hardware, as suggested by KOBRES (KOBRES ¶5-8).
While GOODSITT and KOBRES disclose transmitting data from the guest device which changes the display of the host device via the first and second connections (GOODSITT ¶68-70, ¶78), GOODSITT and KOBRES fail to disclose wherein the data for display on the host device is content data and is received and transmitted by the server and wherein the temporary interim connection limitation is that the temporary interim connection is between the guest device and the host device.
YANG discloses methods for connecting first and second devices using a server (YANG ¶6), an analogous art. Particularly, YANG discloses sending content data from a first device to the server (YANG ¶43-46: target information received by server from mobile first device) and the server sending this content data to the second device for display (YANG ¶47-49: server transmits target information for display at second device, Fig. 2) and the established connection is through the server to each of the first device and second device and between the guest device and the host device (YANG ¶50). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art and the teachings of GOODSITT, KOBRES and YANG before them before the effective filing of the claimed invention to combine the receiving content data from a first device by a server and transmitting by the server to a second device the content data for display on the second device over a connection through the server between the first and second devices, as suggested by YANG, with the transmitting of data for display on a public terminal device of GOODSITT and KOBRES. One would have been motivated to combine these features in order to provide a reduction in operating costs in a fast and convenient method for sharing content data, as suggested by YANG (YANG ¶82), such as providing a custom narrative region on the terminal GUI of GOODSITT (GOODSITT (¶90-95, ¶98-101, Fig. 6B “Welcome Chris”).
Regarding claim 2, GOODSITT, KOBRES and YANG disclose the method of claim 1, and KOBRES further discloses wherein the hardware data includes at least one of a model number or a serial number (KOBRES ¶39), and the method further comprises, prior to receiving the input data:
receiving, by the server as part of a registration process, the hardware data from the host device (KOBRES ¶39), and
storing, by the server, the hardware data (KOBRES ¶39).
Regarding claim 3, GOODSITT, KOBRES and YANG disclose the method of claim 1, and GOODSITT further discloses wherein the input data includes sensor data captured by the host device indicating that at least one of the user or the guest device is physically present at the host device (GOODSITT ¶31: card reader), and verifying the input data corresponds to input from a user physically located at the host device is based on the sensor data (GOODSITT ¶31, ¶48).
Regarding claim 4, GOODSITT, KOBRES and YANG disclose the method of claim 1, and GOODSITT further discloses receiving, by the server from the host device, a signal indicating at least one of the user or the guest device is not in proximity to the host device (GOODSITT ¶42: network connections performed using, ex. Wi-Fi network); and
wherein terminating the interim connection is based on the signal (GOODSITT ¶42: Wi-Fi network is range limited).
Regarding claim 5, GOODSITT, KOBRES and YANG disclose the method of claim 1, and GOODSITT further discloses wherein the graphical element further communicates an encryption key (GOODSITT ¶60).
Regarding claim 6, GOODSITT, KOBRES and YANG disclose the method of claim 1, and GOODSITT further discloses wherein the content data, when received by the server, is encrypted with the encryption key (GOODSITT ¶60: data when received by server is encrypted).
Regarding claims 12-17, claims 12-17 recite limitations similar to claims 1-6, respectively, and are similarly rejected.
Claims 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GOODSITT in view of KOBRES in further view of YANG and in further view of LI (US 8,610,730 B1).
Regarding claim 7, GOODSITT, KOBRES and YANG disclose the method of claim 1, and YANG further discloses wherein the content data is stored in a data structure (YANG ¶79-81: link URL).
GOODSITT, KOBRES and YANG fail to disclose wherein the data structure further comprises a permission for the content data and one or more attributes of the content data.
LI discloses methods for exchanging data to be displayed at a second device using connection codes (LI col 1 lines 52-63), an analogous art. In particular, LI discloses that the data of a content displayed at a second device comprises permission for manipulation of attributes of the data (LI col 11 lines 58-67, col 12 lines 1-5). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art and the teachings of GOODSITT, KOBRES, YANG and LI before them before the effective filing of the claimed invention to combine the permission and attribute data structure of displayed content of LI with the displayed content data structure of GOODSITT, KOBRES and YANG. One would have been motivated to make this combination to ensure that interactions with a displayed content reach the permitted content and not other content that may be displayed, as suggested by LI (LI col 12 lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 8, GOODSITT, KOBRES, YANG and LI disclose the method of claim 7, and LI further discloses receiving, at the host device, a touch-based annotation to the content data (LI col 6 lines 47-67: touch-based annotation to the displayed content is received from the touch-based device by the display monitor, col 11 lines 58-67, col 12 lines 1-5); and storing the annotation as one of the attributes in the data structure (LI col 11 lines 58-67, col 12 lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 9, GOODSITT, KOBRES, YANG and LI disclose the method of claim 7, and LI further discloses receiving, at the host device, a touch-based movement of the content data to reposition the content data on a display of the host device (LI col 6 lines 47-67, col 11 lines 58-67, col 12 lines 1-5: the display monitor receives the touch-based movement repositioning data from the touch device); and based on the touch-based movement, storing position data of the content data as one of the attributes in the data structure (LI col 11 lines 58-67, col 12 lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 10, GOODSITT, KOBRES, YANG and LI disclose the method of claim 7, and LI further discloses wherein the permission prevents write access to the one or more attributes when the host device is not operating in a predetermined mode (LI col 4 lines 13-15, col 10 lines 31-37: images are not displayable until an arbitrary state mode is exited).
Regarding claim 11, GOODSITT, KOBRES, YANG and LI disclose the method of claim 10, and LI further discloses wherein the predetermined mode is an arbitrary mode (LI col 10 lines 32-34). The Examiner takes Official Notice that it is old and well known in the GUI arts that an arbitrary display mode of a computer display is a lock screen mode. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art and the teachings of GOODSITT, KOBRES, YANG and LI before them before the effective filing of the claimed invention to make the arbitrary display mode of GOODSITT, KOBRES, YANG and LI a lock screen mode. One would have been motivated to make this lock screen mode to use known methods for securing computers used in public spaces, as is well known in the GUI art.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LI and in view of XU (US 2013/0251149 A1).
Regarding claim 18, LI discloses a computer-implemented method for rendering a persistent display of content data (LI col 1 lines 48-51), the method comprising:
capturing, by a camera of a guest device, a first graphical element displayed on a host device (LI col 4 lines 12-21: display code-embedded graphic on remote display, col 4 lines 35-40: mobile device 102 utilizing camera to capture QR code 104), the first graphical element including a first connection identifier and an address for a server (LI col 4 lines 48-50: QR code includes embedded information including a link/address to a remote server, col 8 lines 45-48, and col 10 lines 65-67: QR code includes display ID/connection identifier); and
based on the address for the server, transmitting, by the guest device to the server, the first content data for display on the host device (LI col 4 lines 52-62: sending content to display on the remote display by first sending to the remote server);
subsequent to transmitting the encrypted first content data (LI col 5 lines 55-59: after, repeat similar process for another guest device mobile computing device):
capturing, by a camera of the guest device, a second graphical element displayed on a host device (LI col 4 lines 12-21: display code-embedded graphic on remote display, col 4 lines 35-40: mobile device 102 utilizing camera to capture QR code 104), the first graphical element including a second connection identifier that is different from the first connection identifier, and an address for a server (LI col 4 lines 48-50: QR code includes embedded information including a link/address to a remote server, col 8 lines 45-48, and col 10 lines 65-67: QR code includes display ID/connection identifier, col 10 lines 42-44: different displays have different display IDs/different connection identifiers); and
based on the address for the server, transmitting, by the guest device to the server, the second content data for display on the host device (LI col 4 lines 52-62: sending content to display on the remote display by sending to the remote server).
LI fails to disclose wherein the first and second graphical element include an encryption key which is used by the guest device to encrypt the first and second content data to be displayed at the respective host device.
XU discloses a method for transmitting data for display between devices (XU ¶10, ¶13), an analogous art. In particular, XU discloses generating an encryption key (XU ¶44-48) which is used by a guest device to encrypt the content data to be displayed at a display device (XU ¶50-56). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art and the teachings of LI and XU before them before the effective filing of the claimed invention to combine the inclusion of a generated encryption key in a graphical element to encrypt content data for transmission and display, as suggested by XU, with the graphical elements for transmission and display of content of LI. One would have been motivated to make this combination in order to increase security in an environment requiring transmission of content by network between devices, as suggested by XU (XU ¶3-4, ¶7).
Regarding claim 19, LI and XU disclose the method of claim 18, and LI further discloses:
transmitting, by the server, the encrypted content data to the host device (LI col 4 lines 60-61: information sent to server is sent for display to the remote display); and
displaying, by the host device, the content data (LI col 4 lines 60-61).
Regarding claim 20, LI and XU disclose the method of claim 18, and LI further discloses wherein the graphical element is a Quick Response (QR) code (col 4 lines 39-41: QR code).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
GUEH (US 2014/0358777 A1) – pertains to secure ATM transactions using a portable device.
Joy, Anjalin, Caren Babu, and D. Abraham Chandy. "Enhanced security mechanism for ATM machines." 2021 7th International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS). Vol. 1. IEEE, 2021.
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 ANDREW L TANK whose telephone number is (571)270-1692. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9a-6p.
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, Matthew Ell can be reached at 571-270-3264. 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.
/ANDREW L TANK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2141
Prosecution Insights