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 .
Response to Amendment
1. This action is responsive to an amendment filed on 11/21/2025. Claims 1-24 are pending.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicants arguments filed in the 11/21/2025 remarks have been fully considered but are moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection which is deemed appropriate to address all of the needs at this time.
Claim Objections
3. Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: “medical image,”. The end of the sentence has a (,) which should be a (.). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
5. Claim(s) 1, 9, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackell et al. (US 2020/0344278) in view of Holtzclaw (US 2008/0294448) in further view of Shie et al. (US 2015/0324536).
Regarding claim 1, Mackell teaches a computing system comprising: a local store for containing at least one medical image; a display for displaying a medical image from the local store; an audio system for receiving audio input from a user of the computing system, wherein such audio input may relate to said medical image; a graphics system to allow the user to perform multiple different image manipulations of said medical image using graphics commands; conferencing software to perform real-time communications with one or more other computing systems as part of an on-line conference, wherein performing real-time communications includes: (see fig.1, ¶ 0015-0016, 0019-0025, 0064. The system having multiple end points and a meeting server, connect all users or participants in a video conference. During the video conferencing sharing content being slide presentations, sharing of images. These content is on the local drive on the user device. The server supports communications and sharing of content between any suitable number of endpoints of various types hosted by any suitable number of server devices (e.g., one or more host server devices). The server device(s) 50 also support(s) exchange of content in any suitable format, such as utilizing Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) and/or Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP), where data such as audio and/or video content is transported in packets from an endpoint where such content is generated (and compressed/encoded, e.g., utilizing a H.264/MPEG-4 compression standard to encode the packets) to a remote endpoint where the audio and/or video content is received (and uncompressed/decoded). The computing device includes input devices, such as a keyboard and a pointing device for interacting with a computer user and providing information to the processor. The pointing device e.g., may be a mouse, a trackball, or a pointing stick for communicating direction information and command selections to the processor and for controlling cursor movement on a display. Thus during a meeting a participant can present content (slides or images) which by command, can inherently move and present different images to all participants in the meeting.).
Mackell discloses sharing images and system configurations are setup and distributed through a server between participants in a conferencing session. However Mackell is vague on transmitting the graphics commands to a server and from the server to the one or more other computing systems; sharing the audio input from the user with the one or more other computing systems; and sharing the graphics commands with the one or more other computing systems to allow the one or more other computing systems to perform the different image manipulations on a local copy of the medical image stored on the one or more other computing systems locally as part of the on-line conference.
Holtzclaw teaches transmitting the graphics commands to a server and from the server to the one or more other computing systems; sharing the audio input from the user with the one or more other computing systems and sharing the graphics commands with the one or more other computing systems to allow the one or more other computing systems to perform the different image manipulations on a local copy of the medical image stored on the one or more other computing systems locally as part of the on-line conference (see fig. 4, ¶ 0021. Holtzcaw discloses a system wherein sharing and transferring control to other participants is granted by the host. This provides giving permission to modify or control the presentation. This also incudes having content stored on their devices. Sharing graphics commands and manipulating images stored on a computing system by uploading and downloading files to the personal devices. Audio permissions are completely obvious if not inherent in order to have other users speak to other participants in a live conference as taught by Holtzcaw and Mackell.).
Holtzclaw disclose features of transferring control to other participants for presentation and modification of a presentation. Mackell discloses having presentation being shared among participants from a local storage device and transferring the content via a meeting server to all participants and managing multiple content to be shared among the participants. Thus the combination of Holtzclaw to Mackell provides sharing graphics commands and manipulating images stored on a computing system by uploading and downloading files to the personal devices.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell to incorporate transferring control to other participants from a host so that the participants are able to modify or control the presentation. The modification provides the images or content to be manipulated by other participants in the located locally on the user device and provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
Shei discloses a telemedicine collaboration is connected via the network and servers between remote users. The system presents shared images that are presented between the terminals displays during the telemedicine conferencing session. The session includes voice and video in bidirectional communication during the image sharing process. The images would include medical images (see fig. 1-2, 6-8, ¶ 0020-0021, 0030).
Shie disclose medical imaging being shared during a conferencing session. Shie in combination with Mackell and Holtzclaw provides the medical imaging and collaboration during a conferencing session. The additional features as taught by Mackell and Holtzclaw can include imaging data as disclosed by Shie.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell and Holtzcaw to incorporate imaging data for sharing during a conferencing session. The modification provides the images (medical images) to provide to users in a conferencing session.
Regarding claim 9, Mackell teaches a method of operating a computing system comprising: holding at least one medical image in a local store of the computing system; displaying a medical image from the local store on a display of the computing system; receiving audio input from a user of the computing system, wherein such audio input relates to said medical image; the user performing multiple different image manipulations of said medical image using graphics commands of a graphics system; running conferencing software to perform real-time communications with one or more other computing systems as part of an on-line conference, wherein performing real-time communications includes: sharing the audio input from the user with the one or more other computing systems (see fig.1, ¶ 0015-0016, 0019-0025, 0064. The system having multiple end points and a meeting server, connect all users or participants in a video conference. During the video conferencing sharing content being slide presentations, sharing of images. These content is on the local drive on the user device. The server supports communications and sharing of content between any suitable number of endpoints of various types hosted by any suitable number of server devices (e.g., one or more host server devices). The server device(s) 50 also support(s) exchange of content in any suitable format, such as utilizing Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) and/or Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP), where data such as audio and/or video content is transported in packets from an endpoint where such content is generated (and compressed/encoded, e.g., utilizing a H.264/MPEG-4 compression standard to encode the packets) to a remote endpoint where the audio and/or video content is received (and uncompressed/decoded). The computing device includes input devices, such as a keyboard and a pointing device for interacting with a computer user and providing information to the processor. The pointing device e.g., may be a mouse, a trackball, or a pointing stick for communicating direction information and command selections to the processor and for controlling cursor movement on a display. Thus during a meeting a participant can present content (slides or images) which by command, can inherently move and present different images to all participants in the meeting.).
Mackell discloses sharing images and system configurations are setup and distributed through a server between participants in a conferencing session. However Mackell is vague on sharing the graphics commands with the one or more other computing systems by transmitting the graphics commands to a server and from the server to the one or more other computing systems to allow the one or more other computing systems to perform the different image manipulations on a local copy of the medical image stored on the one or more other computing systems locally as part of the on-line conference.
Holtzclaw teaches sharing the graphics commands with the one or more other computing systems by transmitting the graphics commands to a server and from the server to the one or more other computing systems to allow the one or more other computing systems to perform the different image manipulations on a local copy of the medical image stored on the one or more other computing systems locally as part of the on-line conference (see fig. 4, ¶ 0021. Holtzcaw discloses a system wherein sharing and transferring control to other participants is granted by the host. This provides giving permission to modify or control the presentation. This also includes having content stored on their devices. Sharing graphics commands and manipulating images stored on a computing system by uploading and downloading files to the personal devices. Audio permissions are completely obvious if not inherent in order to have other users speak to other participants in a live conference as taught by Holtzcaw and Mackell.).
Holtzclaw disclose features of transferring control to other participants for presentation and modification of a presentation. Mackell discloses having presentation being shared among participants from a local storage device and transferring the content via a meeting server to all participants and managing multiple content to be shared among the participants. Thus the combination of Holtzclaw to Mackell provides sharing graphics commands and manipulating images stored on a computing system by uploading and downloading files to the personal devices.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell to incorporate transferring control to other participants from a host so that the participants are able to modify or control the presentation. The modification provides the images or content to be manipulated by other participants in the located locally on the user device and provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
Shei discloses a telemedicine collaboration is connected via the network and servers between remote users. The system presents shared images that are presented between the terminals displays during the telemedicine conferencing session. The session includes voice and video in bidirectional communication during the image sharing process. The images would include medical images (see fig. 1-2, 6-8, ¶ 0020-0021, 0030).
Shie disclose medical imaging being shared during a conferencing session. Shie in combination with Mackell and Holtzclaw provides the medical imaging and collaboration during a conferencing session. The additional features as taught by Mackell and Holtzclaw can include imaging data as disclosed by Shie.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell and Holtzcaw to incorporate imaging data for sharing during a conferencing session. The modification provides the images (medical images) to provide to users in a conferencing session.
Regarding claim 17, Mackell teaches a computing system comprising: a local store for containing at least one medical image received from another computing system; a display for displaying a medical image from the local store; an audio system for providing an audio output from an audio signal, wherein such audio output may relate to said medical image; a graphics system to allow multiple different image manipulations of said medical image to be performed using graphics commands; conferencing software to perform real-time communications with one or more other computing systems as part of an on-line conference, wherein performing real-time communications includes: receiving the audio signal from another computing system (see fig.1, ¶ 0015-0016, 0019-0025, 0064. The system having multiple end points and a meeting server, connect all users or participants in a video conference. During the video conferencing sharing content being slide presentations, sharing of images. These content is on the local drive on the user device. The server supports communications and sharing of content between any suitable number of endpoints of various types hosted by any suitable number of server devices (e.g., one or more host server devices). The server device(s) 50 also support(s) exchange of content in any suitable format, such as utilizing Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) and/or Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP), where data such as audio and/or video content is transported in packets from an endpoint where such content is generated (and compressed/encoded, e.g., utilizing a H.264/MPEG-4 compression standard to encode the packets) to a remote endpoint where the audio and/or video content is received (and uncompressed/decoded). The computing device includes input devices, such as a keyboard and a pointing device for interacting with a computer user and providing information to the processor. The pointing device e.g., may be a mouse, a trackball, or a pointing stick for communicating direction information and command selections to the processor and for controlling cursor movement on a display. Thus during a meeting a participant can present content (slides or images) which by command, can inherently move and present different images to all participants in the meeting.).
Mackell discloses sharing images and system configurations are setup and distributed through a server between participants in a conferencing session. However Mackell is vague on receiving graphics commands from said another computing system via a server to perform the different image manipulations on a local copy of the medical image stored on the computing systems locally as part of the on-line conferencing.
Holtzclaw teaches receiving graphics commands from said another computing system via a server to perform the different image manipulations on a local copy of the medical image stored on the computing systems locally as part of the on-line conferencing (see fig. 4, ¶ 0021. Holtzcaw discloses a system wherein sharing and transferring control to other participants is granted by the host. This provides giving permission to modify or control the presentation. This also includes having content stored on their devices. Sharing graphics commands and manipulating images stored on a computing system by uploading and downloading files to the personal devices. Audio permissions are completely obvious if not inherent in order to have other users speak to other participants in a live conference as taught by Holtzcaw and Mackell.).
Holtzclaw disclose features of transferring control to other participants for presentation and modification of a presentation. Mackell discloses having presentation being shared among participants from a local storage device and transferring the content via a meeting server to all participants and managing multiple content to be shared among the participants. Thus the combination of Holtzclaw to Mackell provides sharing graphics commands and manipulating images stored on a computing system by uploading and downloading files to the personal devices.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell to incorporate transferring control to other participants from a host so that the participants are able to modify or control the presentation. The modification provides the images or content to be manipulated by other participants in the located locally on the user device and provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
Shei discloses a telemedicine collaboration is connected via the network and servers between remote users. The system presents shared images that are presented between the terminals displays during the telemedicine conferencing session. The session includes voice and video in bidirectional communication during the image sharing process. The images would include medical images (see fig. 1-2, 6-8, ¶ 0020-0021, 0030).
Shie disclose medical imaging being shared during a conferencing session. Shie in combination with Mackell and Holtzclaw provides the medical imaging and collaboration during a conferencing session. The additional features as taught by Mackell and Holtzclaw can include imaging data as disclosed by Shie.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell and Holtzcaw to incorporate imaging data for sharing during a conferencing session. The modification provides the images (medical images) to provide to users in a conferencing session.
6. Claim(s) 2, 5, 10, 13, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackell et al. (US 2020/0344278) in view of Holtzclaw (US 2008/0294448) in further view of Shie et al. (US 2015/0324536) further in view of Hulbert et al. (US 11,079,995).
Regarding claim 2, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 1, wherein the graphics commands and audio input are shared in synchronisation with one another.
Hulbert teaches wherein the graphics commands and audio input are shared in synchronisation with one another (see fig .10AA-10BB, col. 75, line 45-67, Electronic devices having content (e.g., files, documents, images, etc.) that may be available (e.g., stored or otherwise available) on the electronic devices. A user of an electronic device shares content with a user of another electronic device so that both users are able to concurrently view and/or interact with (e.g., edit, perform an action using) shared content at the respective electronic devices.(see fig. 10AA-10BB, col. 81, line 54-col. 82, line 19. Users are presented with documents or images which further have graphical commands to annotate the content shared between the users. Both users can annotate the document during the conference session. The system provide both synchronize images on both screens during a live session which video and audio are present during the conferencing session.).
The combination of Hulbert to Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie teaches the content or images being located on a client device and provide the users with control to annotate the content on the shared screen. This provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate storing images or content to share on a local device and provide the users with control to annotate the content on the shared screen The modification provides the images or content to be located locally on the user device and provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
Regarding claim 5, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 1, wherein sharing the graphics commands comprises intercepting the graphics commands directed to the graphics system and forwarding the intercepted graphics commands to the one or more other computing systems.
Hulbert teaches wherein sharing the graphics commands comprises intercepting the graphics commands directed to the graphics system and forwarding the intercepted graphics commands to the one or more other computing systems (see fig .10AA-10BB, col. 75, line 45-67, Electronic devices having content (e.g., files, documents, images, etc.) that may be available (e.g., stored or otherwise available) on the electronic devices. A user of an electronic device shares content with a user of another electronic device so that both users are able to concurrently view and/or interact with (e.g., edit, perform an action using) shared content at the respective electronic devices.(see fig. 10AA-10BB, col. 81, line 54-col. 82, line 19. Users are presented with documents or images which further have graphical commands to annotate the content shared between the users. Both users can annotate the document during the conference session. Both graphics for controlling the screen are presented each users screen in a collaboration session.).
The combination of Hulbert to Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie teaches the content or images being located on a client device and provide the users with control to annotate the content on the shared screen. This provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate storing images or content to share on a local device and provide the users with control to annotate the content on the shared screen The modification provides the images or content to be located locally on the user device and provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
Regarding claim 10, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the method of claim 9, wherein the graphics commands and audio input are shared in synchronisation with one another.
Hulbert teaches wherein the graphics commands and audio input are shared in synchronisation with one another (see fig .10AA-10BB, col. 75, line 45-67, Electronic devices having content (e.g., files, documents, images, etc.) that may be available (e.g., stored or otherwise available) on the electronic devices. A user of an electronic device shares content with a user of another electronic device so that both users are able to concurrently view and/or interact with (e.g., edit, perform an action using) shared content at the respective electronic devices.(see fig. 10AA-10BB, col. 81, line 54-col. 82, line 19. Users are presented with documents or images which further have graphical commands to annotate the content shared between the users. Both users can annotate the document during the conference session. The system provide both synchronize images on both screens during a live session which video and audio are present during the conferencing session.).
The combination of Hulbert to Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie teaches the content or images being located on a client device and provide the users with control to annotate the content on the shared screen. This provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate storing images or content to share on a local device and provide the users with control to annotate the content on the shared screen The modification provides the images or content to be located locally on the user device and provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
Regarding claim 13, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the method of claim 9, wherein sharing the graphics commands comprises intercepting the graphics commands directed to the graphics system and forwarding the intercepted graphics commands to the one or more other computing systems.
Hulbert teaches wherein sharing the graphics commands comprises intercepting the graphics commands directed to the graphics system and forwarding the intercepted graphics commands to the one or more other computing systems (see fig .10AA-10BB, col. 75, line 45-67, Electronic devices having content (e.g., files, documents, images, etc.) that may be available (e.g., stored or otherwise available) on the electronic devices. A user of an electronic device shares content with a user of another electronic device so that both users are able to concurrently view and/or interact with (e.g., edit, perform an action using) shared content at the respective electronic devices.(see fig. 10AA-10BB, col. 81, line 54-col. 82, line 19. Users are presented with documents or images which further have graphical commands to annotate the content shared between the users. Both users can annotate the document during the conference session. Both graphics for controlling the screen are presented each users screen in a collaboration session.).
The combination of Hulbert to Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie teaches the content or images being located on a client device and provide the users with control to annotate the content on the shared screen. This provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Shie to incorporate storing images or content to share on a local device and provide the users with control to annotate the content on the shared screen The modification provides the images or content to be located locally on the user device and provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
Regarding claim 18, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 17, wherein the received graphics commands and the received audio signal are in synchronisation with one another.
Hulbert teaches wherein the graphics commands and audio input are shared in synchronisation with one another (see fig .10AA-10BB, col. 75, line 45-67, Electronic devices having content (e.g., files, documents, images, etc.) that may be available (e.g., stored or otherwise available) on the electronic devices. A user of an electronic device shares content with a user of another electronic device so that both users are able to concurrently view and/or interact with (e.g., edit, perform an action using) shared content at the respective electronic devices.(see fig. 10AA-10BB, col. 81, line 54-col. 82, line 19. Users are presented with documents or images which further have graphical commands to annotate the content shared between the users. Both users can annotate the document during the conference session. The system provide both synchronize images on both screens during a live session which video and audio are present during the conferencing session.).
The combination of Hulbert to Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie teaches the content or images being located on a client device and provide the users with control to annotate the content on the shared screen. This provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate storing images or content to share on a local device and provide the users with control to annotate the content on the shared screen The modification provides the images or content to be located locally on the user device and provide both users the ability to change or modify content presented on the screen.
7. Claim(s) 3, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackell et al. (US 2020/0344278) in view of Holtzclaw (US 2008/0294448) in further view of Shie et al. (US 2015/0324536) in further view of Lamoncha (US 2021/0358605)
Regarding claim 3, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 1, wherein the computing system is configured to transmit a copy of said medical image to the one or more other computing systems prior to using the conference software to perform real-time communications with the one or more other computing systems as part of the on-line conference.
Lamoncha teaches wherein the computing system is configured to transmit a copy of said medical image to the one or more other computing systems prior to using the conference software to perform real-time communications with the one or more other computing systems as part of the on-line conference (see fig .6, ¶ 0077-0079. The images can be presented before the telehealth consultation session.)
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate prior to the session, receiving or retrieving images to review prior to session. The modification permits to look over images before going live in a telehealth session.
Regarding claim 11, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the method of claim 9, wherein the computing system is configured to transmit a copy of said medical image to the one or more other computing systems prior to using the conference software to perform real-time communications with the one or more other computing systems as part of the on-line conference.
Lamoncha teaches wherein the computing system is configured to transmit a copy of said medical image to the one or more other computing systems prior to using the conference software to perform real-time communications with the one or more other computing systems as part of the on-line conference (see fig .6, ¶ 0077-0079. The images can be presented before the telehealth consultation session.)
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate prior to the session, receiving or retrieving images to review prior to session. The modification permits to look over images before going live in a telehealth session.
8. Claim(s) 4, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackell et al. (US 2020/0344278) in view of Holtzclaw (US 2008/0294448) in further view of Shie et al. (US 2015/0324536) in further view of Fernandez et al. (US 2022/0150446).
Regarding 4, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 1, wherein the computing system is configured to transmit a link or reference to said medical image to the one or more other computing systems prior to using the conference software to perform real-time communications with the one or more other computing systems as part of the on-line conference.
Fernandez teaches wherein the computing system is configured to transmit a link or reference to said medical image to the one or more other computing systems prior to using the conference software to perform real-time communications with the one or more other computing systems as part of the on-line conference (see ¶ 0012. During the peer-to-peer video conference, the digital content uploaded to the client system may include one or more screen-shares associated with one or more screens or applications of the second device. The client system generates a content link that may provide access to the digital content and transmit the content link to the second device to be displayed on the second device, such that the digital content is loaded on the first device upon actuation of the content link via the second device.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate providing a link to digital content for presenting during the conferencing session. The modification provides a content link during the conferencing session.
Regarding 12, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the method of claim 9, wherein the computing system is configured to transmit a link or reference to said medical image to the one or more other computing systems prior to using the conference software to perform real-time communications with the one or more other computing systems as part of the on-line conference.
Fernandez teaches wherein the computing system is configured to transmit a link or reference to said medical image to the one or more other computing systems prior to using the conference software to perform real-time communications with the one or more other computing systems as part of the on-line conference (see ¶ 0012. During the peer-to-peer video conference, the digital content uploaded to the client system may include one or more screen-shares associated with one or more screens or applications of the second device. The client system generates a content link that may provide access to the digital content and transmit the content link to the second device to be displayed on the second device, such that the digital content is loaded on the first device upon actuation of the content link via the second device.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate providing a link to digital content for presenting during the conferencing session. The modification provides a content link during the conferencing session.
9. Claim(s) 6, 14, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackell et al. (US 2020/0344278) in view of Holtzclaw (US 2008/0294448) in further view of Shie et al. (US 2015/0324536) in further view of Dempski et al. (US 2004/0155902).
Regarding claim 6, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 1, wherein the graphics commands identify a medical image on which the image manipulation is to be performed, the type of image manipulation, and optionally one or more parameters relating to the image manipulation.
Dempski teaches wherein the graphics commands identify a medical image on which the image manipulation is to be performed, the type of image manipulation, and optionally one or more parameters relating to the image manipulation (see ¶ 0021. Manipulation of the virtual object as though it were a real three dimensional object floating in the "window" between the two conference rooms. This allows control by a person at either location at any time. The system may receive conflicting inputs as to how to move or manipulate the virtual object. In those situations, social conventions and etiquette will dictate how the virtual object or computer-generated image is manipulated. One person would have to socially defer to another person for control over the object, much as would occur if two people in the same room were trying to move an object in different directions at the same time.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate providing manipulating an image during a conferencing session. The modification provides manipulating the image during the conferencing session between the local and remote participants.
Regarding claim 14, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the method of claim 13, wherein the graphics commands identify a medical image on which the image manipulation is to be performed, the type of image manipulation, and optionally one or more parameters relating to the image manipulation.
Dempski teaches wherein the graphics commands identify a medical image on which the image manipulation is to be performed, the type of image manipulation, and optionally one or more parameters relating to the image manipulation (see ¶ 0021. Manipulation of the virtual object as though it were a real three dimensional object floating in the "window" between the two conference rooms. This allows control by a person at either location at any time. The system may receive conflicting inputs as to how to move or manipulate the virtual object. In those situations, social conventions and etiquette will dictate how the virtual object or computer-generated image is manipulated. One person would have to socially defer to another person for control over the object, much as would occur if two people in the same room were trying to move an object in different directions at the same time.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate providing manipulating an image during a conferencing session. The modification provides manipulating the image during the conferencing session between the local and remote participants.
Regarding claim 20, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 17, wherein the graphics commands identify a medical image on which the image manipulation is to be performed, the type of image manipulation, and optionally one or more parameters relating to the image manipulation.
Dempski teaches wherein the graphics commands identify a medical image on which the image manipulation is to be performed, the type of image manipulation, and optionally one or more parameters relating to the image manipulation (see ¶ 0021. Manipulation of the virtual object as though it were a real three dimensional object floating in the "window" between the two conference rooms. This allows control by a person at either location at any time. The system may receive conflicting inputs as to how to move or manipulate the virtual object. In those situations, social conventions and etiquette will dictate how the virtual object or computer-generated image is manipulated. One person would have to socially defer to another person for control over the object, much as would occur if two people in the same room were trying to move an object in different directions at the same time.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate providing manipulating an image during a conferencing session. The modification provides manipulating the image during the conferencing session between the local and remote participants.
10. Claim(s) 7, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackell et al. (US 2020/0344278) in view of Holtzclaw (US 2008/0294448) in further view of Shie et al. (US 2015/0324536) in further view of Eberting (US 2023/0223126).
Regarding claim 7, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 1, wherein performing real-time communications further includes: sharing a mouse or cursor position as controlled by the user with the one or more other computing systems.
Eberting teaches wherein performing real-time communications further includes: sharing a mouse or cursor position as controlled by the user with the one or more other computing systems (see ¶ 0271. During a video conference with one or more entities, screen sharing, document sharing, image sharing, video conferences, and/or other visual communication functionalities may allow the healthcare provider and/or an associated entity to draw graphics on screen (e.g., via a finger, mouse, stylus, or other input device), manipulate images, and/or otherwise provide live-time comments for viewing by both parties.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate providing sharing a mouse or other input device between two users at remote locations. The modification provides a conferencing users to share mouse cursor during conferencing session between the local and remote participants.
Regarding claim 15, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the method of claim 9, wherein performing real-time communications further includes: sharing a mouse or cursor position as controlled by the user with the one or more other computing systems.
Eberting teaches wherein performing real-time communications further includes: sharing a mouse or cursor position as controlled by the user with the one or more other computing systems (see ¶ 0271. During a video conference with one or more entities, screen sharing, document sharing, image sharing, video conferences, and/or other visual communication functionalities may allow the healthcare provider and/or an associated entity to draw graphics on screen (e.g., via a finger, mouse, stylus, or other input device), manipulate images, and/or otherwise provide live-time comments for viewing by both parties.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate providing sharing a mouse or other input device between two users at remote locations. The modification provides a conferencing users to share mouse cursor during conferencing session between the local and remote participants.
11. Claim(s) 8, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackell et al. (US 2020/0344278) in view of Holtzclaw (US 2008/0294448) in further view of Shie et al. (US 2015/0324536) in further view of Dauber et al. (US 2024/0073365).
Regarding claim 8, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 1, wherein at least part of the conferencing software runs inside a browser.
Dauber teaches wherein at least part of the conferencing software runs inside a browser (see ¶ 0038. Web conference software can be application based, browser based, operating system (OS) based, etc.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate conferencing software being part of the browser system. The modification provides incorporating conferencing software with browser based software.
Regarding claim 16, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the method of claim 9, wherein at least part of the conferencing software runs inside a browser.
Dauber teaches wherein at least part of the conferencing software runs inside a browser (see ¶ 0038. Web conference software can be application based, browser based, operating system (OS) based, etc.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate conferencing software being part of the browser system. The modification provides incorporating conferencing software with browser based software.
12. Claim(s) 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackell et al. (US 2020/0344278) in view of Holtzclaw (US 2008/0294448) in further view of Shie et al. (US 2015/0324536).
Regarding claim 19, Mackell and Holtzclaw do not teaches the computing system of claim 17, wherein the at least one medical image received from a server is downloaded over a secure connection with said server.
Shie teaches wherein the at least one medical image received from a server is downloaded over a secure connection with said server (see fig. 1-2, 6-8, ¶ 0020-0021, 0030. A telemedicine collaboration is connected via the network and servers between remote users. The system presents shared images that are presented between the terminals displays during the telemedicine conferencing session. The session includes voice and video in bidirectional communication during the image sharing process.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw to incorporate collaborating via network and servers between remote users. The modification provides collaborating via network and servers between remote users.
13. Claim(s) 21, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackell et al. (US 2020/0344278) in view of Holtzclaw (US 2008/0294448) in further view of Shie et al. (US 2015/0324536).
Regarding claim 21, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 1, wherein the medical image is a 3D image, and the graphics command comprises changing a view direction of the 3D image.
Kato teaches wherein the medical image is a 3D image, and the graphics command comprises changing a view direction of the 3D image (see ¶ 0213. The 3D images can be manipulated which can be rotated or zoomed in which changes the viewing direction of the image.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate using commands to rotate or zoom in on a 3D image during a conference session. The modification provides manipulating a 3D image.
Regarding claim 22, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 21, wherein the graphics command comprises at least one of panning across the image, zooming into a particular portion of the image, changing the contrast of the image, rotating the image, and changing the view direction of the 3D image, and wherein the graphics command is transmitted to the one or more other computing systems via the server.
Mackell teaches and wherein the graphics command is transmitted to the one or more other computing systems via the server (see fig.1, ¶ 0015-0016, 0019-0025, 0064. The system having multiple end points and a meeting server, connect all users or participants in a video conference. During the video conferencing sharing content being slide presentations, sharing of images. These content is on the local drive on the user device. The server supports communications and sharing of content between any suitable number of endpoints of various types hosted by any suitable number of server devices (e.g., one or more host server devices). The server device(s) 50 also support(s) exchange of content in any suitable format, such as utilizing Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) and/or Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP), where data such as audio and/or video content is transported in packets from an endpoint where such content is generated (and compressed/encoded, e.g., utilizing a H.264/MPEG-4 compression standard to encode the packets) to a remote endpoint where the audio and/or video content is received (and uncompressed/decoded). The computing device includes input devices, such as a keyboard and a pointing device for interacting with a computer user and providing information to the processor. The pointing device e.g., may be a mouse, a trackball, or a pointing stick for communicating direction information and command selections to the processor and for controlling cursor movement on a display. Thus during a meeting a participant can present content (slides or images) which by command, can inherently move and present different images to all participants in the meeting.).
Kato teaches wherein the graphics command comprises at least one of panning across the image, zooming into a particular portion of the image, changing the contrast of the image, rotating the image, and changing the view direction of the 3D image (see ¶ 0213. The 3D images can be manipulated which can be rotated or zoomed in which changes the viewing direction of the image.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate using commands to rotate or zoom in on a 3D image during a conference session. The modification provides manipulating a 3D image.
14. Claim(s) 23, 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackell et al. (US 2020/0344278) in view of Holtzclaw (US 2008/0294448) in further view of Shie et al. (US 2015/0324536) in further view of Long et al. (US 11,830,604).
Regarding claim 23, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie do not teach the computing system of claim 1, wherein the graphics command comprises reference information that specifies location of a portion of said medical image.
Long teaches wherein the graphics command comprises reference information that specifies location of a portion of said medical image (see fig. 5-6, col. 9, lines 1-col. 10. 7. Images provided to a user, a user can zoom in or change orientation of the image for a specific region of the image of interest.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate specifying an object in an image in order to scale in on that specific location of the image. The modification provides for locating specific area based on image object data for scaling in.
Regarding claim 24, Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie does not teach the computing system of claim 23, wherein the graphics command comprises orientation and magnification of the portion of said medical image.
Long teaches wherein the graphics command comprises orientation and magnification of the portion of said medical image (see fig. 5-6, col. 9, lines 1-col. 10. 7. Images provided to a user, a user can zoom in or change orientation of the image for a specific region of the image of interest.).
It would have been obvious to one of skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Mackell, Holtzclaw and Shie to incorporate specifying an object in an image in order to scale in on that specific location of the image. The modification provides for locating specific area based on image object data for scaling in.
Conclusion
15. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASSAD MOHAMMED whose telephone number is (571)270-7253. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7503. 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.
/ASSAD MOHAMMED/Examiner, Art Unit 2691
/DUC NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2691