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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pre-appeal filed 06/01/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 8 under Wittke have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Qiu (Pub No US 2024/0022892).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (Pub No US 2024/0022892) in view of Wittke (Pub No US 2020/0296469). Hereinafter, referenced as Qiu and Wittke, respectively.
Regarding claim 1, Qiu discloses a method comprising: sending, by a first device (e.g. discover device A) and based on a request from a user (e.g. user request S301 to discover surrounding devices) to access a content item (Paragraph [0109]; e.g. video), a broadcast message associated with discovering nearby devices (e.g. discoverable device B, C, D and X) outputting the content item (Paragraphs [0112] [0113] [0122] [0123] figures 4 and 6; user triggers device A to simultaneously broadcasts a service query request and discover surrounding devices);
receiving, from a second device (e.g. discoverable device B), a response message to the broadcast message (Paragraphs [0112] [0013] figure 4; device B replies a message to the device A).
However, it is noted that Qui is silent to explicitly disclose causing output, by the first device and based on accessing the content item from the second device the content item, wherein the output of content item by the first device is at least partially synchronized with output of the content item by the second device based on synchronization information from the second device.
Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Wittke discloses causing output, by the first device (e.g. media device 110) and based on accessing the content item (e.g. The Flash) from the second device (Paragraph [0067]; devices may operate in a peer-to-peer manner sharing content amongst themselves without communicating with a central server), the content item, wherein the output of content item by the first device (e.g. media device 110) is at least partially synchronized with output of the content item by the second device based on synchronization information from the second device (Paragraphs [0019] [0085] [0086] figure 7; synchronize the content being shown by media device 104 at media device 110 based on a received progress point information of the currently generated content 710 being presented by media device 104. Wherein media device 110 may initiate a search for devices in close proximity 204 currently presenting content; paragraphs [0039] [0040] figures 1 and 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Qui by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Wittke, for the predictable result of allowing a visitor searching for nearby devices outputting video content and synchronizing the content presentation on both devices (Wittke – paragraph [0039]).
Regarding claim 2, Qiu and Wittke disclose the method of claim 1; however, it is noted that Qui is silent to explicitly disclose that the second device accesses the content item from a server device and stores the content item at least temporarily for output of the content item.
Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Wittke discloses that the second device accesses the content item from a server device and stores the content item at least temporarily for output of the content item (Paragraphs [0061] [0062] figure 5; content provider 508, wherein devices may operate in a peer-to-peer manner sharing content amongst themselves without the requesting device to communicate with a central server; paragraph [0067]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Qui by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Wittke, for the predictable result of allowing a visitor searching for nearby devices outputting video content and synchronizing the content presentation on both devices (Wittke – paragraph [0039]).
Regarding claim 3, Qiu and Wittke disclose the method of claim 1; moreover, Qiu discloses that the second device comprises one or more of a set-top box, a digital streaming device, or a user device (Paragraphs [0112] [0122] [0123] figures 4 and 6; discoverable device B, C, D and X, e.g. television, mobile device, computer, etc.)
Regarding claim 5, Qiu and Wittke disclose the method of claim 1; moreover, Qiu discloses that the broadcast message is broadcast via a local area network located at a premises (Paragraphs [0112] [0122] [0123] figures 4 and 6; user triggers device A to simultaneously broadcasts a service query request and discover surrounding devices in a household network; paragraph [0086]).
Regarding claim 6, Qiu and Wittke disclose the method of claim 1; however, it is noted that Qui is silent to explicitly disclose that synchronization information comprises one or more of a byte range, a time stamp, a segment identifier, or a frame identifier indicative of a currently outputted portion of the content item.
Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Wittke discloses that synchronization information comprises one or more of a byte range, a time stamp, a segment identifier, or a frame identifier indicative of a currently outputted portion of the content item (Paragraph [0019]; a progress point may refer to a timestamp indicating the consumption progress of the content).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Qui by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Wittke, for the predictable result of allowing a visitor searching for nearby devices outputting video content and synchronizing the content presentation on both devices (Wittke – paragraph [0039]).
Regarding claims 8-10 and 12-13, Qiu and Wittke discloses all the limitations of claims 8-10 and 12-13; therefore, claims 8-10 and 12-13 are rejected for the same reasons stated in claims 1-3 and 5-6, respectively.
Claims 4, 7, 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu and Wittke in view of Hu et al. (Pub No US 2008/0112315). Hereinafter, referenced as Hu.
Regarding claim 4, Qiu and Wittke disclose the method of claim 1; moreover Qiu discloses the broadcast message (Paragraphs [0112] [0122] [0123] figures 4 and 6; user triggers device A to simultaneously broadcasts a service query request and discover surrounding devices in a household network; paragraph [0086]).
However, it is noted that Qiu and Wittke are silent to explicitly disclose broadcast to a plurality of devices in a neighborhood.
Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Hu discloses broadcast to a plurality of devices in a neighborhood (Paragraph [0040] figure 3; client 108 may search and join existing video sessions by discovering peers within the same video session and form its own neighborhood through P2P).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Qiu and Wittke by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Hu, for the predictable result of requesting video sessions already received by peer devices in a neighborhood, saving network bandwidth and resources.
Regarding claim 7, Qiu and Wittke disclose the method of claim 1; moreover, Qiu discloses the broadcast message (Paragraphs [0112] [0122] [0123] figures 4 and 6; user triggers device A to simultaneously broadcasts a service query request and discover surrounding devices in a household network; paragraph [0086]).
However, it is noted that Qiu and Wittke are silent to explicitly disclose that the broadcast message comprises one or more of a transmission control protocol message, a layer two message, data link layer, or an ethernet message.
Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Hu discloses that the broadcast message comprises one or more of a transmission control protocol message, a layer two message, data link layer, or an ethernet message (Paragraphs [0071] [0131] [0162]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Qiu and Wittke by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Hu, for the predictable result of implementing well-known peer discovering messaging that is reliable and efficient in allowing discovery and communication amongst content peers.
Regarding claims 11 and 14, Qiu, Wittke and Hu disclose all the limitations of claims 11 and 14; therefore, claims 11 and 14 are rejected for the same reasons stated in claims 4 and 7, respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUNIOR O MENDOZA whose telephone number is (571)270-3573. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10am-6pm EST..
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
JUNIOR O. MENDOZA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2424
/JUNIOR O MENDOZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights