DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I, claims 1-5 and 10-14 in the reply filed on 1/26/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Invention I and Invention II have common features such as a display, a communication unit, and a processor, and there is no serious burden on the Examiner if the restriction is not required. This is not found persuasive because Invention I and Invention II are directed to separate and distinct apparatuses. Invention I is directed to a mobile device that control call routing and manages switching between devices. Invention II is directed to an output device that receives a forward call and sends a request back to the mobile device. These are different devices with different features. Each side has its own processor and logic.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 10, 11, 13 and 14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by McKillop et al. (US 2009/0003620).
Regarding claims 1 and 10, McKillop discloses a mobile device 203 (FIG. 1 and paragraph 39, lines 4-5: “the data processing system 203 may be a … wireless cellular telephone”) comprising: a display 231 (paragraph 39, lines 15-17: “The I/O (input/output) devices 231 may include … a display device”); a communication unit 223 comprising one or more communication modules (paragraph 39, line 2: “wireless mobile telephony transceiver 223”) configured to:
receive a call (paragraph 70, lines 2-3: “transceiver … to … receive voice, digital data and/or media signals through antenna system”); and connect with output devices 201 capable of outputting the call through a wireless communication (paragraph 38, lines 3-10: “the peripheral 201 … communicates with the data processing system 203 … a peripheral may be … wireless … output devices”), a processor 221 configured to:
control the display 1707 shown in FIG. 17D to display a list comprising information of more than one output devices (paragraph 108, lines 4-5: “routing screen 1707 containing a list of devices is presented as shown in FIG. 17D”) being in connection with the mobile device through the wireless communication (paragraph 106, lines 1-3: “the data processing system … may be a communications device that incorporates telephone capabilities … and interacts with … external audio devices (peripherals)”);
control the communication unit to forward (or route) the call to a first output device (or peripheral) among the output devices being in connection with the mobile device (paragraph 101, lines 16-17: “In operation 477, the data from the communication, such as the audio data of the phone call, is routed through the wireless phone peripheral, such as the second peripheral 455”; paragraph 105, lines 9-10: “cause the system 450 to route audio of a VOIP phone call”); and
in response to a request (by a user) to change an output device (or peripheral) to which the call is forwarded, control the communication unit to change the output device to which the call is forwarded (paragraph 107, lines 6-7: “when a user presses the toggle button 1709, the audio routing icon is highlighted to indicate that the audio is being routed to the speaker.”) from the first output device (speaker of phone) to a second output device (headset) among the output devices being in connection with the mobile device (paragraph 42, lines 15-17: “the wireless phone in operation 265 automatically selects a configuration (such as, for example, switching off the speaker and microphone on the wireless phone and switching on the speaker and microphone of the wireless headset”).
Regarding claims 2 and 11, McKillop discloses that the processor 221 is further configured (paragraph 39, lines 27-28: “The processing system 221 may retrieve and store computer program instructions and data from the memory 229 in order to allow the user to operate the data processing system 203.”) to: generate the request to change the output device to which the call is forwarded based on a user input to the mobile device when the call is forwarded to the first output device (paragraph 106, lines 5-6: “the user can select the audio device to use when an audio application is initiated or is executing.”); and in response to the request, control the communication unit to change the output device to which the call is forwarded from the first output device (speaker of phone) to the second output device (headset) among the output devices being in connection with the mobile device (paragraph 42, lines 15-17: “the wireless phone in operation 265 automatically selects a configuration (such as, for example, switching off the speaker and microphone on the wireless phone and switching on the speaker and microphone of the wireless headset”)).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, McKillop discloses that the processor is further configured to: control the display to display the list, in response to a user input (corresponding to pressing a routing button 1715), when the communication unit receives the call (paragraph 107, lines 11-12: “When the user presses the routing menu button 1715, an audio routing screen appears, such as screens 1705 and 1707 illustrated in FIGS. 17C and 17D.”; the routing screens display the list of devices).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, McKillop discloses that the processor is further configured to: control the display to display the list as distinguishing the first output device (corresponding to a headset), when the mobile device forwards the call to the first output device, and control the display to display the list as distinguishing the second output device (corresponding to a speaker), when the mobile device forwards the call to the second output device (paragraph 108, lines 1-6: “the routing screen 1705 has three buttons: a Bluetooth headset button 1719, an earpiece button 1721, and a speakerphone button 1723. The currently selected device is indicated with an icon 1725 … when there are too many available devices to be displayed as buttons, routing screen 1707 containing a list of devices is presented as shown in FIG. 17D, with the currently selected device visually highlighted in some fashion.”).
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3 and 12 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over McKillop et al. (US 2009/0003620) in view of Levin et al. (US 2011/0188410)
Regarding claims 3 and 12, McKillop fails to disclose that the processor is further configured to: via the communication unit, receive a request message from the first output device or the second output device when the call is forwarded to the first output device; generate the request to change the output device to which the call is forwarded based on the received request message; and in response to the request, control the communication unit to change the output device to which the call is forwarded from the first output device to the second output device among the output devices being in connection with the mobile device.
However, in an analogous art, Levin discloses that a processor is configured to: via a communication unit (corresponding to a server), receive a request message from a first output device (corresponding to a client computer) or a second output device when a call is forwarded to the first output device (corresponding to establishing a telephone call) (paragraph 41, lines 2-3: “At operation 602, the client computer establishes a telephone call with a first electronic device.”; paragraph 43, lines 1-2: “At operation 604, the client computer sends a request to a server computer to transfer the telephone call to a second electronic device.”); generate a request to change the output device (to the second electronic device) to which the call is forwarded based on the received request message (paragraph 45, lines 1-2: “At operation 606, the client computer receives a response from the server computer that the second electronic device has received the SIP Refer message”); and in response to the request, control the communication unit to change (corresponding to handing off) the output device to which the call is forwarded from the first output device (corresponding to the client computer) to the second output device (corresponding to the second electronic device) among the output devices being in connection with the mobile device (paragraph 45, lines 2-3: “At operation 608, the telephone call is handed off from the client computer to the second electronic device.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device in McKillop by incorporating these features taught in Levin for the purpose of allowing dynamic switching of a call between output devices, thereby improving user flexibility and control of call handling.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rahman et al. (US 2010/0151788) discloses a headset that transfers an application to an audio gateway.
Gilmore et al. (US 2007/0202926) discloses that a mobile communication device routes call audio to an audio device associated with a ringer that is ringing when a user answers a call.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAM BHATTACHARYA whose telephone number is (571)272-7917. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays, 9-5:30.
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 D. Anderson can be reached at (571) 272-4177. 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.
/SAM BHATTACHARYA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646