DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/28/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davoodi et al. (US 2024/0348842) in view of Olshansky (US 2005/0201304), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2011/0270996).
Claim 1, Davoodi teaches a secure video transmission system comprising:
a secure network comprising at least one video source (i.e. sourced data) and an ingestion node (i.e. server nodes, RTMP server), wherein the ingestion node is adapted to normalize video data generated by the at least one video source and generate a user datagram protocol/real-time transport protocol (UDP/RTP) video stream and session description protocol (SDP) file (i.e. WebRTC within collaboration workspace) (p. 0037-0038, 0052, 0143-0151); and
a distribution network comprising at least one distribution node operably connected to the secure network (i.e. server nodes to WebRTC), wherein the SDP file (i.e. media config) and the UDP/RTP video stream are received at the distribution node through a firewall, wherein an external user can access the UDP/RTP video stream from the distribution node through the firewall (i.e. open in firewalls) by transmitting a request video URL (i.e. URL and stream key for access) to the distribution node (i.e. request by client devices) thereby permitting video data from the at least one video source to be viewed by the external user (i.e. secure access from client devices) (p. 0141-0151).
Davoodi is silent regarding the specific features of:
“wherein the SDP file and the UDP/RTP video stream are pushed from the secure network through a firewall to the distribution node”,
“wherein the external user and the secure network do not directly communicate and wherein the distribution node does not initiate a connection with the secure network”.
Olshansky teaches the specific features of:
“wherein the SDP file and the UDP/RTP video stream (i.e. SDP message) are pushed from the secure network (i.e. private network) through a firewall to the distribution node” (i.e. SMA) (p. 0021, 0025, 0035, 0065, 0114-0115, 0135-0136);
“wherein the distribution node does not initiate a connection with the secure network” (i.e. spoofed node) (p. 0136).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided video data through a private network work as tarught by Olshansky to the system of Davoodi to enable traversal of RTP data (p. 0135).
Kim teaches the specific feature of:
“wherein the external user (i.e. terminal) and the secure network (i.e. private network) do not directly communicate (i.e. private network restricts direction communication) (p. 0003-0014).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided direction communication prevention as taught by Kim to the system of Davoodi to maintain privacy of the network (p. 0004).
Claim 2, Davoodi teaches The transmission system of claim 1, wherein the distribution node (i.e. WebRTC) comprises at least one server (i.e. server nodes) (p. 0052, 0143).
Claim 3, Davoodi teaches the transmission system of claim 1, wherein the ingestion node comprises at least one video ingestion/transcoding server (i.e. uploading within collaboration server) (p. 0060-0069).
Claim 5, Davoodi teaches The transmission system of claim 1, wherein after the video data generated by the at least one video source and the at least one other video source is transmitted from the ingestion node (i.e. RTMP server), the video data generated by the at least one video source and the at least one other video source are in the same format (i.e. transcoded for the collaboration workspace) (p. 0143).
Claim 6, Davoodi teaches the transmission system of claim 1, wherein the video data generated by the at least one video source is live video data, and the external user (i.e. users) can view the live video data without directly accessing the secure network (i.e. when added to workspace) (p. 0074-0075).
Claim 8, Davoodi teaches the transmission system of claim 1, wherein the SDP file contains information regarding a UDP port for the UDP/RTP video stream (i.e. media connection configuration) (p. 0151).
Claim 9, Davoodi teaches the transmission system of claim 1, wherein the SDP file and the UDP/RTP video stream are transmitted from the ingestion node (i.e. RTMP server) through the firewall to the distribution node (i.e. WebRTC) (p. 0143).
Claim 10, Davoodi teaches the transmission system of claim 1, wherein the external user is an authorized external user (i.e. authorized users in the group) (p. 0069).
Claim(s) 4, 7, 11-17, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davoodi et al. (US 2024/0348842) in view of Olshansky (US 2005/0201304), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2011/0270996), and further in view of Allen et al. (US 2019/0320014).
Claim 4, Davoodi is silent regarding the transmission system of claim 1, wherein there is at least one other video source, wherein the video data generated by the at least one video source and the at least one other video source are in different formats.
Allen teaches the transmission system of claim 1, wherein there is at least one other video source (i.e. media device), wherein the video data generated by the at least one video source and the at least one other video source are in different formats (i.e. media device capabilities and shared and then connected) (p. 0069).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided multiple sources of different format capabilties as taught by Allen to the system of Davoodi to provide various devices that can establish connection (p. 0069).
Claim 7, Davoodi is not entirely clear in teaching the transmission system of claim 1, wherein the distribution node does not directly communicate with the at least one video source.
Allen teaches the transmission system of claim 1, wherein the distribution node (i.e. edge nodes) does not directly communicate with the at least one video source (102, data is communicated p2p to subscribers and not through the video source) (p. 0040-0042). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided decentralized network as taught by Allen to the system of Davoodi to provide secure network connections (p. 0039).
Claim 11 is analyzed and interpreted as a method of claims 1 and 4.
Claim 12 is analyzed and interpreted as a method of claims 1 and 4.
Claim 13 is analyzed and interpreted as a method of claim 3.
Claim 14 is analyzed and interpreted as a method of claim 9.
Claim 15 is analyzed and interpreted as a method of claim 8.
Claim 16 is analyzed and interpreted as a method of claim 9.
Claim 17 is analyzed and interpreted as a method of claim 1.
Claim 19 is analyzed and interpreted as a method of claim 10.
Claim 20 is analyzed and interpreted as a method of claims 1 and 9.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17, 19-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Claims 1-17, 19-20 are rejected.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20130091526 A1 IYER; Jayaraman et al. – RTP streams in wireless communication
US 6359902 B1 Putzolu; David M. – SDP and RTP communication with firewall logic
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSHFIKH I ALAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1710. The examiner can normally be reached 1:00PM-9:00PM.
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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at 571-272-4195. 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.
MUSHFIKH I. ALAM
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2426
/MUSHFIKH I ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426 6/8/2026
Prosecution Insights