DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed 16 June 2026.
Claims 12-14, 16, 19, and 26 were amended.
Claims 1-11, 18, 22-25, and 27-29 were cancelled.
Claims 12-17, 19-21, 26, and 30-34 are pending in this Office Action.
Response to Amendment
The objection to claim 26 regarding minor informalities was addressed and is withdrawn.
The rejection of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) regarding a lack of antecedent basis was addressed and is withdrawn.
The rejection of claim 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) regarding a lack of antecedent basis was addressed and is withdrawn.
The rejections of claim 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) regarding a lack of antecedent basis were addressed and are withdrawn.
The rejections of claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) regarding a lack of antecedent basis are moot due to cancellation of the aforementioned claim.
The rejection is respectfully maintained as set forth in the last Office Action mailed on 17 March 2026. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 12-17, 26, and 30-34 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive and the old rejection maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed 16 June 2026 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive for the reasons set forth below.
Applicants Argue: Wang fails to disclose Claim 12’s step of “receiving a selection operation performed on identifiers.”
In Response: The examiner respectfully submits that USPTO personnel are to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim should not be read into the claim. E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 1369, 67 USPQ2d 1947, 1950 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (claims must be interpreted “in view of the specification” without importing limitations from the specification into the claims unnecessarily). In re Prater, 415 F.2d 1393, 1404-05, 162 USPQ 541, 550- 551 (CCPA 1969). See also In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (“During patent examination the pending claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow.... The reason is simply that during patent prosecution when claims can be amended, ambiguities should be recognized, scope and breadth of language explored, and clarification imposed.... An essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct, and unambiguous. Only in this way can uncertainties of claim scope be removed, as much as possible, during the administrative process.”). See MPEP § 2106 (II) C.
The Microsoft Computer Dictionary, Fifth Edition, defines the term “operation” as “a specific action carried out by a computer in the process of executing a program.”
Wang teaches receiving a selection operation performed on (a frame may comprise a MAC broadcast address and a group ID, which may be a filter adapted to indicate if a peer is to receive/accept the incoming data frame or not) identifiers of (a frame may comprise a MAC broadcast address and a group ID. Group ID may be used (e.g., to address a group of receivers)) – see Wang, page 7, paragraph 96) the receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10).
The examiner respectfully submits that the act of filtering, which determines whether or not a peer accepts frame, is functionally equivalent to a selection operation.
This renders the rejection proper, and thus the rejection stands.
Applicants Argue: To show the claimed “synchronizing…to the receiving end devices,” the Office Action cites Column 1 Lines 13-24 of Atzmon. But this only describes a list of peers for a single device, and not a list distributed to multiple devices.
In Response: The examiner respectfully submits the citation used for the aforementioned limitation, Atzmon, col. 2, lines 13-24, describes a list of peers, wherein that initial list includes about 50 peers. It follows that, at one time, each of those 50 peers were once new peers. As such, each of those 50 new peers would have asked “from the tracker a list of IP addresses of peers to connect to.” As new peers join the torrent and other peers leave the torrent, each remaining peer (e.g., the 50 now-established peers) in the torrent will “connect [to] the tracker to receive a set of new peers when its set falls below some given threshold.”
Therefore, if a single receiving end device (i.e., peer) receives a list of peers upon entrance into the P2P network, by the decentralized nature of P2P networks, every peer that entered said P2P network would have received a list of peers of which to request a fragment from.
This renders the rejection proper, and thus the rejection stands.
Applicants Argue: The cited paragraphs in Wang also do not show a ledger synchronized to multiple devices.
In Response: The examiner respectfully directs Applicants’ attention to the response in the aforementioned paragraphs. This renders the rejection proper, and thus the rejection stands.
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.
Claims 12-17, 26, and 30-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (U.S. 2015/0312953) and further in view of Atzmon et al. (U.S. 9,386,056).
With respect to claim 12, Wang teaches a file sharing method (Wang, page 2, paragraphs 45-48) performed by a transmitting-end device (sender – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) for sharing files with (MAC data frames may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10), the method comprising: receiving a selection operation performed on identifiers of (Wang, page 7, paragraph 96) the receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10), wherein the selection operation triggers (Wang, page 7, paragraph 96) the transmitting-end device (sender – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) to send a to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) to corresponding receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10) including a first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9), a second device (receiver – see Wang, page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4), and a third device (helper – see Wang, page 9, paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10); sending the to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) to the first device (sender may transmit MAC frames to the distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9); after sending the to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) to the first device (sender may transmit MAC frames to the distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9), sending, by the transmitting-end device (sender – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9), the to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) to the third device (sender may transmit MAC frames to the helper, an intermediate peer (a helper may be a distributor) – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 9-10 and paragraph 89, lines 1-2); indicating to (the distributor may forward the MAC frames to receiver – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 10-11) the first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) to send (the distributor may forward the MAC frames – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 10-11) the to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) to the second device (the distributor may forward the MAC frames to receiver – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 10-11), or indicating to the second device to obtain the to-be-shared file from the first device; the to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) among the receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10); each receiving-end device (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10); and the receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10).
Wang does not explicitly teach generating a first ledger for recording sharing record information of; updating the first ledger based on transmission state information of; and synchronizing an updated first ledger to.
However, Atzmon teaches generating a first ledger for recording sharing record information of (Atzmon, col. 2, lines 13-24); updating the first ledger based on transmission state information of (Atzmon, col. 2, lines 13-24); and synchronizing an updated first ledger to (Atzmon, col. 2, lines 13-24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang in view of Atzmon in order to enable generating a first ledger for recording sharing record information of; updating the first ledger based on transmission state information of; and synchronizing an updated first ledger to. One would be motivated to do so in order to define the protocols and algorithms by which a file can be shared by the protocol participants which are referred to as peers (Atzmon, col. 1, lines 51-53).
With respect to claim 13, the combination of Wang and Atzmon teaches the invention described in claim 12, including the method wherein the sending the to-be-shared file to the first device comprises: receiving, from the first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9), a first indication message indicating that the first device successfully receives the to-be-shared file from (Wang, page 8, paragraph 110, lines 2-3) the transmitting-end device (sender – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9).
The combination of references is made under the same rationale as claim 12 above.
With respect to claim 14, the combination of Wang and Atzmon teaches the invention described in claim 12, including the method, wherein after the receiving the selection operation performed on the identifiers of the receiving-end devices, the method further comprises: displaying transmission state information of transmitting (Atzmon, col. 12, lines 38-48) the to-be-shared file to (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) the receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10), wherein the transmission state information of the receiving-end devices comprises first state information (Atzmon, Fig. 3, element 130; col. 11, lines 6-7) and second state information (Atzmon, Fig. 3, element 125; col. 11, lines 7-10), the first state information indicates that the to-be-shared file is being sent to a corresponding receiving-end device (Atzmon, Fig. 3, element 130; col. 11, lines 6-7), and the second state information indicates that the to-be-shared file is ready to be sent to the corresponding receiving-end device (Atzmon, Fig. 3, element 125; col. 11, lines 7-10), wherein in sending the to-be-shared file (Atzmon, Fig. 3, element 130; col. 11, lines 6-7) to the first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9), transmission state information (Atzmon, Fig. 3, element 130; col. 11, lines 6-7) of the first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) is the first state information (Atzmon, Fig. 3, element 130; col. 11, lines 6-7), and transmission state information of the second device (receiver – see Wang, page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4) and the third device (helper – see Wang, page 9, paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10) is the second state information (Atzmon, Fig. 3, element 125; col. 11, lines 7-10).
The combination of references is made under the same rationale as claim 12 above.
With respect to claim 15, the combination of Wang and Atzmon teaches the invention described in claim 14, including the method further comprising: displaying transmission state information of (Atzmon, col. 12, lines 38-48) the third device (helper – see Wang, page 9, paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10) as the first state information (Atzmon, Fig. 3, element 130; col. 11, lines 6-7) in a process in which the transmitting-end device (sender – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) sends the to-be-shared file to (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) the third device (helper – see Wang, page 9, paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10); and displaying transmission state information of (Atzmon, col. 12, lines 38-48) the second device (receiver – see Wang, page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4) as the first state information (Atzmon, Fig. 3, element 130; col. 11, lines 6-7) in a process in which the first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) sends the to-be-shared file to (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) the second device (receiver – see Wang, page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4).
The combination of references is made under the same rationale as claim 12 above.
With respect to claim 16, the combination of Wang and Atzmon teaches the invention described in claim 12, including the method wherein the selection operation further triggers the transmitting-end device (sender – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) to add the corresponding receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10) to a sharing group (Wang, page 6, paragraphs 87-90) that comprises the transmitting-end device (sender – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9), and the method further comprises: creating the sharing group (Wang, page 6, paragraphs 87-90) that comprises the transmitting-end device (sender – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9), generating a device list of (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) the sharing group (Wang, page 6, paragraphs 87-90), and sending a first request message to (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) the receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10), wherein the first request message requests (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) the receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10) to join (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) the sharing group (Wang, page 6, paragraphs 87-90), and the device list comprises a device identifier (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) of the transmitting-end device (sender – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9); and receiving a first response message from (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) the first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9), adding a device identifier of (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) the first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) to the device list, and broadcasting the device list, wherein the first response message (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) indicates that (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) the first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) agrees to join (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) the sharing group (Wang, page 6, paragraphs 87-90), and the first response message comprises the device identifier of (Wang, pages 3-4, paragraph 59) the first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9).
The combination of references is made under the same rationale as claim 12 above.
With respect to claim 17, the combination of Wang and Atzmon teaches the invention described in claim 16, including the method further comprising: when each receiving-end device (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10) in the sharing group (Wang, page 6, paragraphs 87-90) successfully receives the to-be-shared file (Wang, page 8, paragraph 104, lines 9-11), deleting a device identifier of each receiving-end device from the device list (Wang, page 8, paragraph 104, lines 11-17).
The combination of references is made under the same rationale as claim 12 above.
With respect to claim 26, Wang teaches a transmitting-end device comprising: a memory storing executable instructions; a processor configured to execute the executable instructions to: receive a selection operation performed on identifiers of (Wang, page 7, paragraph 96) multiple receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10), wherein the selection operation triggers (Wang, page 7, paragraph 96) the transmitting-end device (sender – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) to send a to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) to corresponding receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10) including a first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9), a second device (receiver – see Wang, page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4), and a third device (helper – see Wang, page 9, paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10); send the to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) to the first device (sender may transmit MAC frames to the distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9); after sending the to-be-shared file with (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) the first device (sender may transmit MAC frames to the distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9), send the to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) to the third device (sender may transmit MAC frames to the helper, an intermediate peer (a helper may be a distributor) – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 9-10 and paragraph 89, lines 1-2); indicate to (the distributor may forward the MAC frames to receiver – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 10-11) the first device (distributor – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9) to send (the distributor may forward the MAC frames – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 10-11) the to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) to the second device (the distributor may forward the MAC frames to receiver – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 10-11), or indicate to the second device to obtain the to-be-shared file from the first device; the to-be-shared file (a MAC data frame may be transmitted to a peer – see Wang, page 5, paragraph 76, lines 4-5) among the plurality of receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10); each receiving-end device (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10); the receiving-end devices (distributor, receiver, and helper – see Wang, page 6, paragraph 88, lines 7-9; and page 9, paragraph 111, line 2-4 and paragraph 115, lines 6 and 9-10).
Wang does not explicitly teach generating a first ledger for recording sharing record information of; updating the first ledger based on transmission state information of; and synchronizing an updated first ledger to.
However, Atzmon teaches generating a first ledger for recording sharing record information of (Atzmon, col. 2, lines 13-24); updating the first ledger based on transmission state information of (Atzmon, col. 2, lines 13-24); and synchronizing an updated first ledger to (Atzmon, col. 2, lines 13-24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang in view of Atzmon in order to enable generating a first ledger for recording sharing record information of; updating the first ledger based on transmission state information of; and synchronizing an updated first ledger to. One would be motivated to do so in order to define the protocols and algorithms by which a file can be shared by the protocol participants which are referred to as peers (Atzmon, col. 1, lines 51-53).
Claims 30-34 do not teach or define any new limitations above claims 13-17 and therefore are rejected for similar reasons.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-21 are allowable.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicants are 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 extension fee 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 Alicia Baturay whose telephone number is (571) 272-3981. The examiner can normally be reached at 7am – 4pm, Mondays – Thursdays, Eastern Time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in person, or video conferencing using a USPTO-supplied, web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicants are encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) form at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamal Divecha can be reached at (571) 272-5863. The fax 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.
/Alicia Baturay/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2441
July 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights