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 § 112
Claims 52, 54-62, and 64-73 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent Claims 52 and Claim 62 are rejected under 112(a) for new matter.
Claim 52 and Claim 62 similarly recite:
(1). “receiving data from the second device, wherein the data corresponds to an input received at the second device corresponding to the control option, and wherein the input comprises detecting a motion of the second device”.
This limitation was added in a preliminary amendment on 7/9/2024 for which there is no support in the original claims, specification, or drawings. Specifically, there is no teaching of data from the second device corresponding to an input received at the second device, wherein the input comprises detecting a motion of the second device. Closest teachings from the original specification:
Paragraph 8: a UE (i.e. tv) may detect a mobile devices I/O options (i.e. camera, speaker accelerometer, etc) and access one or more I/O option.
Fig.5: I/O devices of UE 520 can be determined and displayed on 510.
Fig.6-Fig.7: detect proximity of device and determining I/O option of the UE.
Par.80, 81, Par.88: I/O options can be determined based on if a UE is in a predetermined proximity or based on a profile.
At best, the cited sections describe the control circuitry detecting a mobile device’s proximity using several methods:
Requesting location data (local or GPS),
Comparing locations,
Using sensors such as infrared or LIDAR,
Requesting proximity information from a user.
However, none of these methods describe input received at the second device… wherein the input comprises detecting a motion of the second device. The only inputs discussed are related to proximity or location, not motion. Detecting motion is not the same as identifying that something is within a designated zone.
Where in the specification is there clear teaching of data from the second device corresponding to an input received at the second device, wherein the input comprises detecting a motion of the second device?
(2). Claims further recite… “wherein the input comprises detecting a motion of the second device… based on receiving the input from the second device corresponding to the control option, performing an operation at the first device that corresponds to the control option, wherein performing the operation at the first device comprises causing a change/visual change in the user input interface of the first device.”
This limitation was added in an amendment on 11/17/2025 for which there is no support in the original claims, specification, or drawings. Specifically, there is no teaching of based on input from the second device wherein the input comprises detecting a motion of the second device which causes a “visual change in the user input interface of the first device” or “change in the user input interface of the first device”. Closest teachings from the original specification:
Paragraph 50: a user may change settings and it would change be applied to other users in-home devices.
Fig.5: I/O devices of UE 520 can be determined and displayed on 510.
Fig.6-Fig.7: detect proximity of device and determining I/O option of the UE.
Par.80, 81, Par.88: I/O options can be determined based on if a UE is in a predetermined proximity or based on a profile.
The cited paragraph describes the control circuitry detecting a mobile device’s proximity using several methods:
Pinging and measuring response time,
Requesting location data (local or GPS),
Comparing locations,
Using sensors such as infrared or LIDAR,
Requesting proximity information from a user.
However, none of these methods describe or imply “detecting a motion of the second device” as an input, nor do they mention receiving data from the second device that is specifically indicative of the input comprising detecting a motion of the second device. The only inputs discussed are related to proximity or location, not motion. Detecting motion is not the same as identifying that something is within a designated zone. In addition causing a visual change based on an input comprising detecting a motion of the second device is not taught.
Where in the specification is there clear teaching of… based on input from the second device wherein the input comprises detecting a motion of the second device causes a “visual change in the user input interface of the first device” or “change in the user input interface of the first device”? The applicant appears to be taking various teachings from the specification and presenting a new embodiment using those teachings as a basis of what is now newly claimed..
Claim 54 and 64 are rejected as new matter. Where does the specification teach that “the motion is movement of the second device and is detected using an accelerometer or gyroscope of the second device”. The specification, at best, only appears to teach that I/O devices can be an accelerometer/gyroscope. There is no teaching in the specification which teaches that movement of the second device is detected using an accelerometer or gyroscope of the second device to cause a visual change in the user input interface of the first device.
Claim 55 and 65 are rejected as new matter, where does the specification teach that the motion is detected using a camera of the second device. The specification, at best, only appears to teach that I/O devices can be a camera. There is no teaching in the specification which teaches that motion of the second device is detected using the camera to cause a visual change in the user input interface of the first device.
All other dependent claims are rejected under 35USC 112(a) new matter, as they do not remedy the issues identified in the above Independent Claims 52 and 62.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lau (20100333136).
Par.78-84 teaches a device/phone 406 can get data from UE 402/404 (e.g. TV, laptop, pc) and change channels on an interactive display via pressing a button. Bi-directional communications over Bluetooth, infrared, WIFI, etc.
Par.54 device/phone 406 determines which device receives a command based on proximity. Touch screen used to control device such as channel up. Distance determined using, eg. RFID, GPS.
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 WESLEY LEO KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-7867. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30 M-F.
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.
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.
/WESLEY L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2648