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 .
Applicant’s Submission of a Response
Applicant’s submission of a response on 10/14/2025 has been received and considered. In the response, Applicant made no amendments. Therefore, claims 1 – 20 are pending. The Terminal Disclaimed filed on 10/14/2025 have been reviewed and approved on 10/18/2025. Further, Applicant amended the specification, which has been approved for entry.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 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 –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 3, 7 – 12 and 16, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hitomi et al. (US Pub. No. 2015/0126282 A1).
As per claim 1, Hitomi discloses a data processing system comprising: a network interface (see Fig. 1); and one or more processors coupled with the network interface (See Fig.1 and [0058]), the one or more processors configured to: enable execution of at least a portion of graphics processing operations of a gaming application associated with a cloud gaming system on a client device of the cloud gaming system (see [0080]) in response to a determination that one or more capabilities of the client device exceed a threshold (see [0366]); initiate transfer of at least the portion of the gaming application to the client device via the network interface (a Partial is delivered by downloading pages of an application until an executable threshold is reached, at which point the Partial may optionally be launched automatically, [0080]; initiate execution of the gaming application on a server device of the cloud gaming system during the transfer (while target device begins execution of the Partial, “the Body or entirety of an application can be delivered… while the application is already running, see [0083]); and configure the server device to stream output of the execution of the gaming application to the client device until after completion of the transfer of at least the portion of the gaming application (see [0096] and [0363]).
As per claim 2, Hitomi discloses the one or more processors are configured to initiate a transition of execution of the gaming application from the server device to the client device after completion of the transfer of at least the portion of the gaming application to the client device (Once a minimal portion of the application program is delivered on the target device, the user can launch the application program as if a complete version of the application were present in the target device's local memory. From the point of view of the target device's operating system and from the point of view of the application itself, that application appears to be located wholly locally on the target device, see [0101]).
As per claim 3, Hitomi discloses the transition of execution of the gaming application includes preservation of game state generated during execution of the gaming application on the server device (see [0372]).
As per claim 7, Hitomi discloses the server device is configured to receive network feedback from the client device during execution of the gaming application, the network feedback including metrics associated with a network connection between the server device and the client device (see [0178]).
As per claim 8, Hitomi discloses the metrics include round trip latency and packet loss (see [0178] and [0278]).
As per claim 9, Hitomi discloses the server device is configured to adjust a frequency of a graphics processor based on the metrics (server matches the characteristics of the target device, see [0366]).
As per claim 10, Hitomi discloses the server device is configured to adjust an encoding process for a frame of the gaming application based on the metrics (See [0366]).
As per claims 11 – 12, the instant claims are a method in which corresponds to the system of claims 1 – 3 and 7 – 10. Therefore, it is rejected for the reasons set forth above.
As per claims 16, 17 and 20, the instant claims are an apparatus in which corresponds to the system of claims 1 – 3 and 7 – 10. Therefore, it is rejected for the reasons set forth above.
Examiner’s Note
Claims 4 – 6, 13 – 15, 18 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Hitomi does not expressly disclose the gaming application is an encapsulated application that includes core logic and encapsulations associated with an encapsulation layer, the encapsulation layer configured to selectively relay API commands made by the core logic; the encapsulation layer is configurable to enable selectable execution of the gaming application by the server device and the client device and the encapsulations associated with the encapsulation layer include a file system encapsulation, an input device encapsulation, a graphics programming interface encapsulation, an audio device encapsulation, and a system interface encapsulation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s filing of the terminal disclaimer filed on 10/14/2025 overcame the double patenting rejection. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hitomi.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANKIT B DOSHI whose telephone number is (571)270-7863. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri. ~8:30 - ~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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at 571-272-4430. 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.
/ANKIT B DOSHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3715