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 .
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 - 4, 6 - 14, and 16 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application No. 2014/0321632 (Di Fabbrizio et al.).
With respect to claim 1, Di Fabbrizio et al. teach:
A method comprising:
receiving, from an initiating device, a call destined for a target account (see paragraph 0010 and Fig. 1);
establishing, at a server, a central call session for the call and connecting the
initiating device to the central call session (see paragraphs 0010 – 0011 and Fig. 1);
sending a central call session notification to a target device associated with the
target account, the central call session notification to prompt the target device to initiate a request to join the central call session (note paragraphs at least paragraphs 0010 and 0023);
receiving, from the target device, a response to the central call session notification (see paragraphs 0019, 0025 and 0035); and
when the response comprises the request to join the central call session, connecting the target device to the central call session to establish the call (see paragraphs 0019, 0025 and 0035).
In addition, note the last line of paragraph 0010, paragraph 0039 and paragraph 0041. With respect to “account”, such is inherent in SIP and other call protocols through registering. Also, note “registering” in paragraphs 0002, 0015, 0044 - 0045 and 0061.
With respect to claim 7, note the rejection of claim 1 above.
With respect to claim 11, note the rejection of claim 1 above.
With respect to claim 17, note the rejection of claim 1 above and paragraph 26, last line (memory) and processor 430 in Fig .4.
With respect to claims 2 – 3, 8 – 9,12 – 13 and 18 -19 and note paragraph 0046.
With respect to claims 4 and 14, see paragraphs 0026 and 0035.
With respect to claims 6 and 16, note paragraph 0034.
With respect to claims 10 and 20, see paragraph 0046.
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 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application No. 2014/0321632 (Di Fabbrizio et al.).
Di Fabbrizio et al. teach the claimed limitations except for the detecting a loss (dropped) of connectivity, when a timeout condition is detected, terminating the call session.
However, note that Di Fabbrizio et al. do detected a dropped on-hold connection and then notifying the user of such. However, Di Fabbrizio et al. do not speak to a timeout condition. However, the use of a timer, reaching a certain threshold is so notoriously old in the art that no art need be cited. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated a timer whenever and wherever it was deemed necessary.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note the Figs and Abstracts of the references cited on the accompanying 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William Deane whose telephone number is 571 - 272- 7484. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - FRIDAY from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ahmad Matar, can be reached on 571-272-7488.
The official fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571 -273-8300. However, unofficial faxes can be direct to the examiner's computer at 571 273 -7484.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://pair-direct.uspto.gov.
Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
27Nov2025
/WILLIAM J DEANE JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693