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 in response the amendment and remarks filed on 28 April 2026.
Claims 1, 3, 5 - 9, 11 and 13 -17 are presently pending.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant's arguments filed 04/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant, in substance, argues that the applied references are not combinable for teaches sending the first message from the dedicated server to a fourth device which is capable of being associated through a short-range wireless connection with the second device and forwarding the first message from fourth device to the second device when a short-range wireless connection is established between the fourth device and the second device.
In response to applicant’s argument, Burckart teaches a communication architecture in which a remote server communicates with a mobile device that is capable of establishing a short-range wireless connection with a nearby device and relaying information locally (see Burckart, ¶ [0009], [0015] and [0019]). Kudelski teaches improving communication efficiency by having network entities coordinate the delivery of information and manage communication sessions through distributed network functions, rather than requiring direct end-to-end communication in every instance (see Kudelski, ¶ [0065]-[0068]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Burckart in view of the communication management techniques of Kudelski so that a dedicated server transmits a message to an intermediary (fourth) device, which then forwards the message to a nearby second device over a short-range wireless connection. Such a modification would have predictably improved communication reliability when the second device is not directly reachable through the network, reduced network signaling and power consumption by leveraging an already-available nearby device as a relay, and enabled seamless delivery of messages to devices connected only through local short-range communication. The modification merely applies the known technique of intermediary-assisted communication to the known short-range relay architecture, yielding the predictable result of more efficient and reliable message delivery in accordance with established communication system design principles.
Again, it is the Examiner’s position that Applicant has not yet submitted claims drawn to limitations, which define the operation and apparatus of Applicant’s disclosed invention in manner, which distinguishes over the prior art. As it is Applicant’s right to continue to claim as broadly as possible their invention. It is also the Examiner’s right to continue to interpret the claim language as broadly as possible. It is the Examiner’s position that the detailed functionality that allows for Applicant’s invention to overcome the prior art used in the rejection, fails to differentiate in detail how these features are unique. It is advised that, in order to further expedite the prosecution of the application in response to this action, Applicant should amend the base claims to describe in more narrow detail the true distinguishing features of Applicant’s claim invention.
Applicant has had an opportunity to amend the claimed subject matter, and has failed to modify the claim language to distinguish over the prior art of record by clarifying or substantially narrowing the claim language. Thus, Applicant apparently intends that a broad interpretation be given to the claims and the Examiner has adopted such in the present and previous Office action rejections. See In re Prater and Wei, 162 USPQ 541 (CCPA 1969), and MPEP 2111.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1, 3, 5-9, 11 and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burckart et al., U. S. Patent Publication No. 2015/0055551 A1 in view of Kudelski, U. S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0141294 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Burckart discloses a method for message transmission between a first device and a second device (see Burckart, fig. 1; message transmission between mobile wireless devices is disclosed), the method comprising: storing, by a third device, a first message received from the first device through a short-range wireless connection, the first message being intended for the second device (see Burckart, ¶ [0008] and [0019]; messages from first device intended for the second device is stored); and after a positive determination that a connection to internet is established, forwarding the first message from the third device towards a dedicated server through the internet (see Burckart, ¶ [0008] and [0019]; upon determining internet connectivity, the stored message is forwarded to the second device).
Although Burkart discloses the invention substantially as claimed, it does not explicitly disclose sending the first message from the dedicated server to a fourth device which is capable of being associated through a short-range wireless connection with the second device: and forwarding the first message from the fourth device to the second device when a short-range wireless connection is established between the fourth device and the second device.
Kudelski teaches delay tolerant system comprising sending the first message from the dedicated server to a fourth device which is capable of being associated through a short-range wireless connection with the second device: and forwarding the first message from the fourth device to the second device when a short-range wireless connection is established between the fourth device and the second device (see Kudelski, ¶ [0035], [0037] and [0040]). It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Kudelski with that of Burkart in order to efficiently forward messages between devices that lack direct communication among them.
Regarding claim 3, Burckart-Kudelski teaches wherein the method further comprises the following, performed by the first device before the third device receives the first message: detecting at least one device able to forward the first message to the second device and selecting said the third device among the detected at least one device (see Burckart, ¶ [0016] and [0018] and Kudelski, ¶ [0037]).
Regarding claim 5, Burckart-Kudelski teaches wherein a first identification information related to the second device is inserted by the first device in the first message, the first identification information being used when forwarding the first message to the second device (see Burckart, ¶ [0007]).
Regarding claim 7, Burckart-Kudelski teaches further comprising: storing a second message received from the second device through the internet, said the second message being intended for the first device and after a positive determination that a short-range wireless connection can be established with the first device, forwarding the second message to said the first device through the short-range wireless connection (see Burckart, ¶ [0015]).
Regarding claim 8, Burckart-Kudelski teaches wherein a second identification information related to the first device is inserted by the second device in the second message, the second identification information being used by the second device when sending the second message through the internet and/or when forwarding the second message to the first device through a short-range wireless connection (see Burckart, ¶ [0019]-[0020]).
Regarding claim 13, Burckart discloses a device for forwarding messages between devices (see Burckart, fig. 1; item 100), the forwarding device comprising: a module for receiving a first message from a first device through a short- range wireless connection, the first message being intended for a second device (see Burckart, ¶ [0008] and [0015]; module for receiving message intended for second device is disclosed); a module for storing the received first message (see Burckart, ¶ [0016] and [0019]; a memory for storing received messages is provided); and a module for, after a positive determination that said the forwarding device has established a connection to internet, forwarding the first message towards a dedicated server through the internet (see Burkart, ¶ [0018]-[0019]; after determining connectivity, the stored messages are forwarded to the second device).
Although Burckart discloses the invention substantially as claimed, it does not explicitly disclose wherein the dedicated server is configured to send the first message to a fourth device that is capable of being associated through a short-range wireless connection with the second device; and wherein the fourth device is configured to forward the first message to the second device when a short-range wireless connection is established between the fourth device and the second device.
Kudelski teaches delay tolerant system comprising wherein the dedicated server is configured to send the first message to a fourth device that is capable of being associated through a short-range wireless connection with the second device; and wherein the fourth device is configured to forward the first message to the second device when a short-range wireless connection is established between the fourth device and the second device (see Kudelski, ¶ [0035], [0037] and [0040]). It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Kudelski with that of Burkart in order to efficiently forward messages between devices that lack direct communication among them.
Regarding claim 14, Burckart-Kudelski teaches the device further comprising: a module for receiving a second message from the second device through the internet, the second message being intended for the first device a module for storing the second message; and a module for, after a positive determination that the forwarding device can connect with the first device through a short-range wireless connection, forwarding the second message to said the first device through said the short-range wireless connection (see Burckart, ¶ [0008], [0016] and [0018]-[0019]).
Regarding claim 15, Burckart discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform a method for message transmission between a first device and a second device, comprising: storing, by the third device, a first message received from the first device through a short-range wireless connection, the first message being intended for the second device (see Burckart, ¶ [0008] and [0019]; messages from first device intended for the second device is stored); after a positive determination that a connection to internet is established, forwarding the first message from the third device towards a dedicated server through the internet (see Burckart, ¶ [0008] and [0019]; upon determining internet connectivity, the stored message is forwarded to the second device).
Although Burckart discloses the invention substantially as claimed, it does not explicitly disclose sending the first message from the dedicated server to a fourth device which is capable of being associated through a short-range wireless connection with the second device; and forwarding the first message from the fourth device to the second device when a short-range wireless connection is established between the fourth device and the second device.
Kudelski teaches delay tolerant system comprising sending the first message from the dedicated server to a fourth device which is capable of being associated through a short-range wireless connection with the second device and forwarding the first message from the fourth device to the second device when a short-range wireless connection is established between the fourth device and the second device (see Kudelski, ¶ [0035], [0037] and [0040]). It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Kudelski with that of Burkart in order to efficiently forward messages between devices that lack direct communication among them.
5. Claim(s) 6,9, 11 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burckart in view of Kudelski and further in view of Plant, U. S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0047007 A1.
Regarding claim 6, although Burckart-Kudelski discloses further comprising, after the forwarding the first message towards said the second device through the internet (see Burckart, ¶ [0019]), it does not explicitly disclose deleting said the first message.
Plant teaches deleting said the first message (see Plant, ¶ [0019]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Plant with that of Burckart-Kudelski in order to free space for storing and queuing future messages.
Regarding claim 9, Burckart-Kudelski-Pant teaches further comprising deleting the first message stored in a third device after having forwarded said the first message towards the second device through the internet and/or deleting the second message stored in a fourth device after having forwarded said the second message to the first device (see Burckart, ¶ [0021]-[0022] and Plant, ¶ [0019]).
Regarding claim 11, although Burckart-Kudelski discloses the invention substantially as claimed, it does not explicitly disclose wherein the first message is encrypted.
Plant teaches wherein the first message is encrypted (see Plant, ¶ [0072]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Plant with that of Burckart-Kudelski in order ensure privacy, security and confidentiality during transmission.
Regarding claim 16, Burckart-Kudelski-Pant teaches wherein the deleting the first message is automatically triggered upon the transmission, by the third device, of the first message towards the second device (see Plant, ¶ [0019])
Regarding claim 17, Burckart-Kudelski-Pant teaches wherein the deleting the first message is automatically triggered upon reception, by the third device, of a receipt acknowledge message, sent by one of the second device, dedicated server or fourth device upon receiving the first message (see Burckart, ¶ [0015] and Plant, ¶ [0019]).
Prior Art of Record
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Please refer to form PTO-892 (Notice of Reference Cited) for a list of relevant prior art.
Conclusion
7. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MOHAMED IBRAHIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1132. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9:30AM to 6:00PM.
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, John Follansbee can be reached at 571-272-3964. 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.
/MOHAMED IBRAHIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights