Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/313,784

AUTOMATIC PROXIMITY DETECTION FOR CONTENT SHARING BETWEEN DEVICES

Final Rejection §103
Filed
May 08, 2023
Examiner
KE, PENG
Art Unit
2194
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
50%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
5y 2m
To Grant
75%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 50% of resolved cases
50%
Career Allow Rate
104 granted / 209 resolved
-5.2% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
5y 2m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
241
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.5%
-25.5% vs TC avg
§103
54.2%
+14.2% vs TC avg
§102
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
§112
8.8%
-31.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 209 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Detail Information In the amendment filed on 2/17/2026, claims 1-20 are pending and claims 1-3, 7, 10, 11, 13, and 17-20 are amended. This is a Final Action. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 2/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued Legallais does not teach “in response to a touch point of a first input from a input device being at display edge of the first UI, control the first transceiver to broadcast a first beacon.” Examiner disagrees. Legallais teaches success of the paring operation is determined based on the user trace input; Fig 4 c4:50-c5:24; and the tracing input requires touch inputs at multiple points of devices’ edge. See Figs. 1-3 c4:5-65. Since the success of paring is depends on user touching the display edge of the UI, the control of transceiver to connect with the Bluetooth beacon is connected based on user input at the edge of the UI. It is noted that the pairing process requires one device’s beacon to send out an inquiry requests and another device’s beacon to response with its address and other information. Therefore, Legallais teaches this limitation. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-11, and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Legallais US Patent 9,622,280 in view of Brikman US 10,120,556. 18/313,784 Legallais US Patent 9,622,280 in view of Brikman US 10,120,556 Claim 1 A system comprising: a first computing device comprising: a first memory; a first user interface (UI) that displays content; a first transceiver; and a first processor coupled to the first memory that: Legallais c7:55-c8:55; Legallais c3:40-c4:65; in response to a touch point of a first input from an input device being at a display edge of the first UI, controls the first transceiver to broadcast a first beacon, controls the first transceiver to receive a second beacon from a second computing device, the received second beacon including an identification of the second computing device proximate to the display edge of the first UI, generates a connection with the second computing device, and transfers, via the generated connection, the displayed content to the second computing device; and Legallais c7:55-c8:55; Legallais teaches use Bluetooth and inherent that Bluetooth includes Beacons for wireless communication c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Legallais teaches success of the paring operation is determined based on the user trace input; Fig 4 c4:50-c5:24; and the tracing input requires touch inputs at multiple points of devices’ edge. See Figs. 1-3 c4:5-65. the second computing device comprising: a second memory; a second UI; a second transceiver that receives, from the first transceiver, the broadcasted first beacon, receives a second input indicating a location confirmation, broadcasts the second beacon, and receives the displayed content from the first computing device; and a second processor coupled to the second memory that presents, on the second UI, the received displayed content at a display edge of the second UI proximate to the display edge of the first UI. Legallais c7:55-c8:55; Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Legallais does not specifically teaches transfer of displayed content. Brikman teaches transfer content using drag-and-drop operation. (see Brikman c12:25-c14:70) It would have been obvious at the time of the invention for a person ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to include Brikman’s teaching with method of Legallais in order to allow user to drag and drop files between device. Claim 2 The system of claim 1, wherein the touch point of the first input from the input device is defined by coordinates on the first computing device. Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Legallais c7:20-8:55; Claim 3 The system of claim 1, Wherein: the display edge of the first UI includes a first y-coordinate; the display edge of the second UI includes a second y-coordinate. Where first beacon includes the first y-coordinate; and wherein the second processor further: computes the second y-coordinate based on the first y-coordinate; and presents the received displayed content at the display edge of the second UI according to the computed second y-coordinate. Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Legallais c7:20-8:55; Claim 4 The system of claim 1, wherein the first processor further: determines that the received second beacon includes an indication to receive a payload. Legallais teaches use Bluetooth and inherent that Bluetooth includes Beacons for wireless communication. c3:40-c4:65; Claim 5 The system of claim 1, wherein the second input further indicates a position at which the received content is to be displayed on the second UI. Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Legallais c7:20-8:55; Claim 6 The system of claim 1, wherein the first processor further: determines, based on the received second beacon, a position of the second computing device relative to the first computing device and an orientation of the second computing device relative to the first computing device. Legallais teaches use Bluetooth and inherent that Bluetooth includes Beacons for wireless communication. c3:40-c4:65; Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Legallais c7:20-8:55; Claim 7 The system of claim 6, wherein the second processor further: presents, on the second UI, the received displayed content at the display edge of the second UI cording to the determined position and orientation of the second computing device relative to the first computing device. Legallais teaches use Bluetooth and inherent that Bluetooth includes Beacons for wireless communication. c3:40-c4:65; Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Legallais c7:20-8:55; Claim 11 The system of claim 1, wherein the first processor further: in response to broadcasting the first beacon, triggers a timer for acknowledgement from the second computing device, the timer including a time period to receive the acknowledgement; and receives the location confirmation based on the input being received at the second computing device within the time period to receive the acknowledgement, wherein the input received at the second computing device is the acknowledgement. Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Legallais c7:20-8:55; 18/313,784 Legallais US Patent 9,622,280 in view of Brikman US 10,120,556 Claim 8 The system of claim 1, wherein the first processor further: generates a representation of the displayed content; and transfers the generated representation of the displayed content to the second computing device. Brikman teaches transfer content using drag-and-drop operation. (see Brikman c12:25-c14:70) It would have been obvious at the time of the invention for a person ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to include Brikman’s teaching with method of Legallais in order to allow user to drag and drop files between device. Claim 9 The system of claim 8, wherein the first processor further: executes an authorization protocol with the second computing device; in response to the executed authorization protocol, authorizes the second computing device to receive an entirety of the displayed content; and transfers the entirety of the displayed content to the second computing device. Brikman teaches transfer content using drag-and-drop operation. (see Brikman c12:25-c14:70) Brikman further teaches requirement of authorized user for the second device. (see Brikman c13:45-65) It would have been obvious at the time of the invention for a person ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to include Brikman’s teaching with method of Legallais in order to provide security to the system. Claim 10 The system of claim 1, wherein the touch point is a portion of a drag and drop input or defined by a pixel having a location on the first computing device. Brikman teaches transfer content using drag-and-drop operation. (see Brikman c12:25-c14:70) It would have been obvious at the time of the invention for a person ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to include Brikman’s teaching with method of Legallais in order to allow user to drag and drop files between device. As per claim 13, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 8. See rejection above. 18/313,784 Legallais US Patent 9,622,280 in view of Brikman US 10,120,556 Claim 14 The computer-implemented method of claim 13, further comprising: determining, based on the received second beacon, a position of the computing device relative to the UI and an orientation of the computing device relative to the UI; Wherein the touch point of the input from the input device is defined by coordinates on the UI broadcasting the first beacon; Wherein the display edge of a second UI indicates a second y-coordinate and the second beacon includes the second y-coordinate. Legallais teaches use Bluetooth and inherent that Bluetooth includes Beacons for wireless communication. c3:40-c4:65; Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Legallais c7:20-8:55; Brikman teaches transfer content using drag-and-drop operation. (see Brikman c12:25-c14:70) Claim 15 The computer-implemented method of claim 13, further comprising: generating a representation of the displayed content; and transferring the generated representation of the displayed content to the computing device. Brikman c12:25-c14:70 Claim 16 The computer-implemented method of claim 15, further comprising: executing an authorization protocol with the computing device; in response to the executed authorization protocol, authorizing the computing device to receive an entirety of the displayed content; and transferring the entirety of the displayed content to the computing device. Brikman teaches transfer content using drag-and-drop operation. (see Brikman c12:25-c14:70) Brikman further teaches requirement of authorized user for the second device. (see Brikman c13:45-65) It would have been obvious at the time of the invention for a person ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to include Brikman’s teaching with method of Legallais in order to provide security to the system. Claim 17 The system of claim 1, wherein the first processor further: in response to broadcasting the first beacon, triggers a timer for acknowledgement from the second computing device, the timer including a time period to receive the acknowledgement; and receives the confirmation location based on the input being received at the second computing device within the time period to receive the acknowledgement, wherein the input received at the second computing device is the acknowledgement. Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Legallais c7:20-8:55; As per claims 18, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 13. See rejection above. 18/313,784 Legallais US Patent 9,622,280 in view of Brikman US 10,120,556 Claim 19 The computer-readable medium of claim 18, wherein: The touch oint of the input rom the input device is defined by the coordinates on the second computing device; the display edge of the UI of the second computing device includes a first y-coordinate; the display edge of the UI of the first computing device includes a second y-coordinate; and the instructions further cause the processor to: compute the second y-coordinate based on the first y-coordinate; and present the received displayed content at the display edge of the UI of the first computing device according to the computed second y-coordinate. Legallais c7:20-c8:55; Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Claim 20 The computer-readable medium of claim 18, wherein: the received input confirming the location of the first computing device further indicates a position at which the received displayed content is to be displayed on the UI of the first computing device. Legallais c7:20-c8:55; Legallais c3:55-c4:65; Legallais c5:1-c6:45; Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Legallais US Patent 9,622,280 in view of Brikman US 10,120,556 and Berliner US 2022/0255995. 18/313,784 Legallais US Patent 9,622,280 in in view of Brikman US 10,120,556 and Berliner US 2022/0255995 Claim 12 The system of claim 1, wherein the first computing device further comprises a machine learning (ML) model, implemented on the first processor, that: infers an intention to share the displayed content; and based on the inferred intention to share the displayed content, presents, on the first UI, a prompt that, when selected, triggers the transfer of the displayed content to the second computing device. Berliner teaches using machine learning algorithms. (see Berliner p0144-p0147) It would have been obvious at the time of the invention for a person ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to include Berliner’s teaching with method of Legallais in order to improve the system performance. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PENG KE whose telephone number is (571)272-4062. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-5:00. 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, Kevin Young can be reached at (571) 270-3180. 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. PENG KE Primary Examiner Art Unit 2194 /PENG KE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2194
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 08, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 24, 2025
Interview Requested
Jan 02, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 05, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 17, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 07, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596493
TECHNIQUES FOR DETERMINING A MINIMUM HARDWARE CONFIGURATION USING PERFORMANCE HEADROOM METRICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585492
MEMORY MANAGEMENT METHOD AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12561592
MIGRATING CONTAINER-BASED QUANTUM PROCESSES TO QUANTUM ISOLATION ZONES (QIZs)
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12530230
MEMORY OPERATING-FREQUENCY ADJUSTMENT METHOD, SMART TERMINAL, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12517757
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ADJUSTING INSTRUCTION PIPELINE, MEMORY AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
50%
Grant Probability
75%
With Interview (+25.2%)
5y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 209 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month