Detailed Action
1. This office action is in response to communication filed December 11, 2025. Claims 1-21 are currently pending and claim 1, 8, and 15 are the independent claims.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. 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 Amendment
3. This Final Office Action is in response to the applicant’s remarks and arguments filed on December 11, 2025.
Claims 1, 5, 8, 15, and 17-21 are amended. Claims 1-21 remain pending in the application. Claims 2-4, 6-7, 9-14, and 16 filed on May 8, 2023 are being considered on the merits along with amended claims 1, 5, 8, 15, and 17-21.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant's arguments filed on December 11, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 section on pages 10-11 of Remarks, the Applicant respectfully submitted that the cited references in the rejections of independent claims 1, 8, and 15 fail to teach or disclose all of the features of the amended independent claims 1, 8, and 15.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. After further search and revisiting of the prior art, the amendments to independent claims 1, 8, and 15 do not overcome the previous rejection of Patnaik in view of Clark et al. The rejections in section 5 Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 below clearly disclose the rejections in greater detail. As such, independent claims 1, 8, and 15 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 despite amendments, and further all claims 1-21 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
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.
5. Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patnaik (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0266986) in view of Clark et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0144283) – hereinafter “Clark”.
Regarding independent claim 1, Patnaik discloses:
A method to localize remote desktops to a local operating system (OS) on a client device, (Abstract “One method, performed by a remote desktop application executing on a client device, includes detecting an input for opening a file of the client device at a VM associated with the remote desktop application. … The method further includes an operation for causing presentation of a user interface (UI) of the application in the remote desktop application, the UI comprising information about the opened file.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop contains remote desktop applications executing on a client device to open both local and remote files.
the method comprising:
installing a remote desktop client on the client device to operate as at least one background service that communicates with the local OS of the client device; ([0030] “One general aspect includes a method, performed by a remote desktop application executing on a client device, that includes an operation for detecting an input for opening a file of the client device at a virtual machine (VM) associated with the remote desktop application.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop client detects an input for opening a file on the VM.
identifying, by the remote desktop client, a remote desktop component associated with a remote desktop to register with the local OS for localization, wherein identifying includes obtaining, from a connection server, remote desktop information that identifies the remote desktop and the remote desktop component; ([0043] “The cloud service stores the files of the user in a remote location, such as a cloud storage server. In some cases, the files in the remote location maybe synchronized with a local folder that stores copies of all or some of the files in the cloud storage, that is, the cloud service guarantees that the copies on the cloud storage and the local machine are the same. This way, when a client device accesses a file from the cloud storage, the local copy may be used if the local copy is current.” and [0049] “At operation 302, the VM server collects information on the associations available for the VM, that is, which programs are available for opening files and the information is stored by the VM server, e.g., in a database. At operation 304, the associations available for the VM are configured in the remote desktop executing on the client device.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the local and remote files are guaranteed to be the same copy of the file whether in the cloud or on the local device. There are associations made between remote desktop and its components so that they can properly exist on the client device.
registering, by the remote desktop client, the remote desktop component with the local OS, wherein the registering causes the remote desktop component to be presented on a user interface (UI) of the local OS together with local content including one or more of: local drives, folders, files or applications; (Fig. 2 and [0041-0042] “FIG. 2 is a UI 102 showing cloud storage on the local client device accessible by the VM, according to some example embodiments. The UI 202 corresponds to the desktop view of the client device 104. In the illustrated example, the UI 202 includes the remote desktop window 212 for interfacing with the remote VM. Further, the UI 202 presents a desktop for the OS executing on the computing device. The desktop includes several folders, such as “This PC” folder 204 for accessing the file system of the client device, a cloud folder 206 for accessing a file directory provided by a cloud service, and a network folder for presenting network information of the client device.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop components are shown on the UI in the cloud folder directly next to PC and Network folders.
receiving, on the UI of the local OS of the client device, a request to invoke the remote desktop component; and ([0048-0050] “Associations refer to mapping a file type (e.g., as defined by its extension in the file name) to the application that will open the file when the file is selected for opening. At operation 304, the associations available for the VM are configured in the remote desktop executing on the client device. During use of the redirection option for opening files from the cloud server, operations 306, 308, 310, and 312 are performed. At operation 306, the remote desktop, executing on the client device, invokes an association to open a certain file selected by the user on the remote desktop window.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop component is invoked based on the association to open a file on the remote desktop window.
redirecting, by the remote desktop component, the request to the remote desktop, wherein the remote desktop component is executed in response to the request. ([0050] “During use of the redirection option for opening files from the cloud server, operations 306, 308, 310, and 312 are performed. At operation 306, the remote desktop, executing on the client device, invokes an association to open a certain file selected by the user on the remote desktop window. At operation 308, the command is translated by the remote desktop (e.g., formatted for transmittal to the server with instructions to open an application with the given file), and, at operation 308, the remote desktop sends the request to the VM server with information about the location of the filed to be opened (e.g., the location of the file on cloud storage).”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop component redirects the request to the VM server with information about the request of the location of the file that is to be opened.
Patnaik does not explicitly disclose:
receiving, by the remote desktop client from the remote desktop, information regarding the identified remote desktop component that enables registration of the remote desktop component with the local OS; and
presenting, by the local OS, a user interface (UI) that shows the registered remote desktop component as being local on the client device along with local content that resides on the local device.
However, Clark discloses:
receiving, by the remote desktop client from the remote desktop, information regarding the identified remote desktop component that enables registration of the remote desktop component with the local OS; and ([0011] “Given user credentials for the remote application or service, the file usage aggregator module can retrieve the remote file usage statistics from one or more remote hosts via a Web API (application programming interface) or other interface. The file usage aggregator module can then present a single view of usage characteristics of files from both local and remote sources.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the information regarding remote files and applications is received which can be used to present usage characteristics for local and remote files.
presenting, by the local OS, a user interface (UI) that shows the registered remote desktop component as being local on the client device along with local content that resides on the local device. (Fig. 4 Desktop Sidebar 138 and [0027] “In embodiments, in addition to being viewable in a full-function file browser 112, a selected number of sorted files from local and remote sources can be shown in a desktop sidebar 138, or other visible or readily accessible selected area or part of the user interface 132 of client 102.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote files are shown in the same desktop sidebar as local files.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add receiving, by the remote desktop client from the remote desktop, information regarding the identified remote desktop component that enables registration of the remote desktop component with the local OS; and presenting, by the local OS, a user interface (UI) that shows the registered remote desktop component as being local on the client device along with local content that resides on the local device as seen in Clark's invention into Patnaik's invention because these modifications allow use of known technique to improve similar method in the same way such that registered remote desktop components are presented on the same UI as the client device so all files, whether remote or local, can be accessed at the same time for efficient work by the user.
Regarding claim 2, Patnaik discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the remote desktop component includes one or more of: the remote desktop, a drive of the remote desktop, a folder of the remote desktop, a remote application installed on the remote desktop, or a remote file on the remote desktop. (Fig. 2 and [0043-0044] “The cloud service stores the files of the user in a remote location, such as a cloud storage server. In some cases, the files in the remote location maybe synchronized with a local folder that stores copies of all or some of the files in the cloud storage, that is, the cloud service guarantees that the copies on the cloud storage and the local machine are the same. This way, when a client device accesses a file from the cloud storage, the local copy may be used if the local copy is current. In this example, the remote desktop window 212 includes a “This PC” file folder 210 with information on the file system of the VM. The file system of the VM includes a local C: drive (local to the VM), a D: drive that corresponds to the C: drive on the client device named Desktop-0A42, and a drive E: that corresponds to the cloud storage of the client device.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop in Fig. 2 shows folders including Desktop, Documents, and Downloads and drives including local VM C: drive, client device C: drive mapped to the D: drive, and cloud storage E: drive which contain files that are guaranteed to be the same on the local client device and VM.
Regarding claim 3, Patnaik discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the registered remote desktop component presented on the UI includes a remote application, wherein the local content includes a local file, (Fig. 6, Remote Desktop 112 + Applications 612 + Local File 504 and [0068] “In the remote desktop 112, the applications 612 are shown as available for the VM and are executed on the VM server 402 when needed. In this scenario, the local file 504 is to be opened by the VM and associated with one of the applications 612 available on the VM.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop is used to open a local file with a remote application.
and wherein the method further comprises:
in response to selection of the local file for opening by the remote application presented on the UI, redirecting the local file to the remote desktop; ([0069] “Initially, the remote desktop 112 gets 621 the association information and stores 622 the information on the association manager 614. When the user selects 623, on the remote desktop 112, the local file 504 on the client device 104 for opening, the association manager 614 launches 624 the application 612 in the remote desktop with the parameters associated with the association for the local file 504.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop 112 receives the local file 504 for opening in the remote application 612.
opening the local file on the remote desktop using the remote application; and ([0070] “Then, the VM server 402 opens 627 the application (e.g., application 612) on the VM with the local file VM copy 508. The application is then shown in the remote desktop 112.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the local file is opened in the VM and shown in the remote desktop.
presenting the local file in a window of the remote application, wherein the window has content of the remote desktop cropped out. ([0070] “Then, the VM server 402 opens 627 the application (e.g., application 612) on the VM with the local file VM copy 508. The application is then shown in the remote desktop 112.” and [0052] “It is noted that embodiments are described with reference to remote desktops, but the same principles may be applied to remote-application environments where the window of an application is presented instead of the desktop on the VM.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the local file is opened in the application and shown in a window of an application rather than as an entire desktop.
Regarding claim 4, Patnaik discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the registered remote desktop component presented on the UI includes the remote desktop, wherein the local content includes a local file, (Fig. 6, Remote Desktop 112 + Applications 612 + Local File 504 and [0068] “In the remote desktop 112, the applications 612 are shown as available for the VM and are executed on the VM server 402 when needed. In this scenario, the local file 504 is to be opened by the VM and associated with one of the applications 612 available on the VM.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop is used to open a local file with a remote application.
and wherein the method further comprises:
in response to selection of the local file for opening on the remote desktop presented on the UI, redirecting the local file to the remote desktop; ([0069] “Initially, the remote desktop 112 gets 621 the association information and stores 622 the information on the association manager 614. When the user selects 623, on the remote desktop 112, the local file 504 on the client device 104 for opening, the association manager 614 launches 624 the application 612 in the remote desktop with the parameters associated with the association for the local file 504.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop 112 receives the local file 504 for opening in the remote application 612.
opening the local file on the remote desktop using a default remote application installed on the remote desktop; and ([0070] “Then, the VM server 402 opens 627 the application (e.g., application 612) on the VM with the local file VM copy 508. The application is then shown in the remote desktop 112.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the local file is opened in the VM and shown in the remote desktop.
presenting the local file in a window of the default remote application, wherein the window has content of the remote desktop cropped out. ([0070] “Then, the VM server 402 opens 627 the application (e.g., application 612) on the VM with the local file VM copy 508. The application is then shown in the remote desktop 112.” and [0052] “It is noted that embodiments are described with reference to remote desktops, but the same principles may be applied to remote-application environments where the window of an application is presented instead of the desktop on the VM.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the local file is opened in the application and shown in a window of an application rather than as an entire desktop.
Regarding claim 5, Patnaik discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the registered remote desktop component presented on the UI includes a remote folder, (Fig. 2 and [0043-0044] “The cloud service stores the files of the user in a remote location, such as a cloud storage server. In some cases, the files in the remote location maybe synchronized with a local folder that stores copies of all or some of the files in the cloud storage, that is, the cloud service guarantees that the copies on the cloud storage and the local machine are the same. This way, when a client device accesses a file from the cloud storage, the local copy may be used if the local copy is current. In this example, the remote desktop window 212 includes a “This PC” file folder 210 with information on the file system of the VM. The file system of the VM includes a local C: drive (local to the VM), a D: drive that corresponds to the C: drive on the client device named Desktop-0A42, and a drive E: that corresponds to the cloud storage of the client device.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the remote desktop in Fig. 2 shows folders including Desktop, Documents, and Downloads and drives including local VM C: drive, client device C: drive mapped to the D: drive, and cloud storage E: drive which contain files that are guaranteed to be the same on the local client device and VM.
and wherein the method further comprises:
in response to selection of a remote file, in the remote folder presented on the UI, for opening, checking the remote desktop to determine if the remote file is located on the remote desktop; ([0057] “The cloud file 510 may have a copy on the client device 104, referred to as cloud file client copy 502. The cloud file client copy 502 may be a copy of the cloud file 510 (e.g., when the cloud storage is synchronized), or may be a reference to the cloud file 510, and when the client device 104 needs to access the cloud file 510, then the cloud file 510 is copied to the client device 104.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the cloud file may be a file already stored on the necessary device or just a reference to the file and must be copied to access it.
in response to the remote file being located on the remote desktop, opening the remote file on the remote desktop using a remote application installed on the remote desktop; and ([0080] “In other embodiments, the association information kept by the VM server 402 is used to automatically trigger the download of the cloud file 510. Thus, for the remote desktop 112, the operations are the same for opening a local file or a cloud file, but the VM server 402 will detect when the file to open is in cloud storage and will automatically download from cloud storage.” and [0077] “At operation 726, the VM server downloads the cloud file 510 from storage and stores the transferred file as cloud file VM copy 506. Then, the VM server 402 opens 627 the application 612 on the VM for the cloud file VM copy 506, which is shown in the remote desktop 112.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the cloud file is downloaded automatically to be located on the necessary remote desktop and opened in the application on the VM and shown in the remote desktop.
in response to the remote file being located on some other remote desktop, redirecting the remote file to the remote desktop and opening the remote file using the remote application installed on the remote desktop. ([0076-0077] “At operation 625, the remote desktop 112 sends a request to the VM server 402 to open the cloud file 510 on the VM with the corresponding application (e.g., application 604), and the request includes the location of the cloud file 510. At operation 726, the VM server downloads the cloud file 510 from storage and stores the transferred file as cloud file VM copy 506. Then, the VM server 402 opens 627 the application 612 on the VM for the cloud file VM copy 506, which is shown in the remote desktop 112.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the cloud file is downloaded and opened in the application on the VM and shown in the remote desktop.
Regarding claim 6, Patnaik discloses the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose:
performing a search on the local OS for local content, including a keyword search; and
presenting a hitlist that matches the search for local content, wherein the hitlist includes the registered remote desktop component.
However, Clark discloses:
performing a search on the local OS for local content, including a keyword search; and ([0011] “The file usage aggregator module can, in some embodiments, include a search function to perform a unified search for files by file name or content, from both the local and remote sources. The file usage aggregator module can display annotated information for each file in the unified file usage list, for example showing the file name, last time of access, or other information.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, there is a search function to perform a search for files by file name.
presenting a hitlist that matches the search for local content, wherein the hitlist includes the registered remote desktop component. ([0011] “The file usage aggregator module can, in some embodiments, include a search function to perform a unified search for files by file name or content, from both the local and remote sources. The file usage aggregator module can display annotated information for each file in the unified file usage list, for example showing the file name, last time of access, or other information.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the search for files by file name shows both local and remote sources.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add performing a search on the local OS for local content, including a keyword search; and presenting a hitlist that matches the search for local content, wherein the hitlist includes the registered remote desktop component as seen in Clark's invention into Patnaik's invention because these modifications allow use of known technique to improve similar methods in the same way such that searching registered remote desktop components on the same UI as the client device is possible so that all files, whether remote or local, can be accessed in the same search for efficient work by the user.
Regarding claim 7, Patnaik discloses the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose:
monitoring the remote desktop for a change in the remote desktop component; and
in response to detection of the change, updating the registration of the remote desktop component with the local OS.
However, Clark discloses:
monitoring the remote desktop for a change in the remote desktop component; and ([0018] “File usage aggregator module 108 can refresh or receive local usage data 118 and remote file usage data 120 at predetermined update periods, when notified of updates to file usage data, or at other times.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the file usage data is received at predetermined update periods.
in response to detection of the change, updating the registration of the remote desktop component with the local OS. ([0018] “File usage aggregator module 108 can refresh or receive local usage data 118 and remote file usage data 120 at predetermined update periods, when notified of updates to file usage data, or at other times.”) The citation is interpreted to read on the claimed invention because under broadest reasonable interpretation, the file usage data for local and remote files are updated when notified of an update to the file usage data.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add monitoring the remote desktop for a change in the remote desktop component; and in response to detection of the change, updating the registration of the remote desktop component with the local OS as seen in Clark's invention into Patnaik's invention because these modifications allow use of known technique to improve similar methods in the same way such that data synchronization is ensured so that the remote files are always up to date in the exact same way that local files can be accessed in their most recent save state.
Regarding claim 8, it is a non-transitory computer-readable medium claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 1. Thus, claim 8 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, it is a non-transitory computer-readable medium claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 2. Thus, claim 9 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 10, it is a non-transitory computer-readable medium claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 3. Thus, claim 10 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 11, it is a non-transitory computer-readable medium claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 4. Thus, claim 11 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 12, it is a non-transitory computer-readable medium claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 5. Thus, claim 12 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 5 above.
Regarding claim 13, it is a non-transitory computer-readable medium claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 6. Thus, claim 13 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 14, it is a non-transitory computer-readable medium claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 7. Thus, claim 14 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 15, it is a computing device claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 1. Thus, claim 15 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 16, it is a computing device claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 2. Thus, claim 16 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 17, it is a computing device claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 3. Thus, claim 17 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 18, it is a computing device claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 4. Thus, claim 18 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 19, it is a computing device claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 5. Thus, claim 19 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 5 above.
Regarding claim 20, it is a computing device claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 6. Thus, claim 20 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 21, it is a computing device claim having the same limitations as cited in method claim 7. Thus, claim 21 is also rejected under the same rationale as addressed in the rejection of claim 7 above.
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Prior art including Harshith Katta Rajasekhar (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0199056) and Bafna et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0224233) disclose connections between local computing devices and remote computing devices that attach and share file systems.
Examiner has cited particular columns/paragraphs/sections and line numbers in the references applied and not relied upon to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
When responding to the Office action, applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the reference(s) cited or the objections made. A showing of how the amendments avoid such references or objections must also be present. See 37 C.F.R. 1.111(c).
When responding to this Office action, applicant is advised to provide the line and page numbers in the application and/or reference(s) cited to assist in locating the appropriate paragraphs.
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.
/D.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2198
/PIERRE VITAL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2198