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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the applicants’ Amendment filed on 10/16/2025, in which claims 1-5, 7-16, and 18-20 are pending.
Response to Amendment
Applicant has amended claims 1, 8-9, 13, and 18; claims 6, and 17 are cancelled; and claims 1-5, 7-16, and 18-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks, see page 10-11, filed 10/16/2025, with respect to Claim Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Rejection to claims 1-20 as set forth in the previous Office Action has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see pages 11-12, filed 10/16/2025, with respect to Cao have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the Remarks, Applicant argued in substance that
(A) With respect to independent claim 1, applicant states that Cao does not disclose receiving transmission channel indication information from a control server, (recited from page 11 of remarks filed on 10/16/2025).
As to point (A), Examiner respectfully disagrees given the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim limitation, Examiner respectfully submits that Cao does disclose receiving transmission channel indication information from a control server, by teaching wherein a first mobile device establishes a video call with a second mobile device; it is determined that a video mode of the first mobile device is a screen sharing mode; an interface of to-be-selected content is displayed; shared content is determined based on a selection operation on the interface of the to-be-selected content; and the shared content is sent to the second mobile device, so that the second mobile device displays the shared content, during a video call, screen sharing is implemented, and shared content may be determined based on selection of to-be-selected content by a user, so that users' diversified requirements for screen sharing are met [215]; additionally teaches wherein the first mobile device may simultaneously establish a video call with one or more second mobile devices. The video call may be initiated by the first mobile device or the second mobile device based on an operation performed by a user [219-221, 386-388]; Cao does disclose receiving an indication with transmission/communication/connection information from a server/host/remote computer in order the facilitate the video call or establish the desktop/screen sharing mode. Additionally receiving a transmission channel indication information does not establish details for a standard transmission channel information, thus it is interpreted under the BRI that reliable transmission channel information is not received from a control server as argued.
(B) With respect to independent claim 1, applicant states that Cao does not disclose the transmission channel indication information indicates to transmit the desktop video stream through the video call media transmission channel, (recited from page 11 of remarks filed on 10/16/2025).
As to point (B), Examiner respectfully disagrees given the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim limitation, Examiner respectfully submits that Cao does disclose receiving indication to transmit/send/shar the desktop/screen video stream via the video call/media transmission/sharing channel/session [215219-221, 386-388], see above (A).
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 8-9, 11, 13-14, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao et al. (US 20220350564 A1) hereinafter “Cao”.
As to claim 1, Cao discloses a desktop sharing method for a call terminal (Cao, Abstract [215]), the method comprising:
establishing a video call media transmission channel (Cao, Abstract [89-90], discloses mobile device establishes a video call with a second mobile device), the video call media transmission channel being used to transmit a call video stream to at least one peer call terminal in a video call service, the call video stream comprising video content captured by the call terminal (Cao, [215-221], discloses wherein mobile device establishes a video call with a second mobile device, for screen sharing with a second device);
receiving transmission channel indication information from a control server, the transmission channel indication information indicating to transmit the desktop video stream through the video call media transmission channel (Cao [215-221, 386-388], discloses receiving an indication with transmission/communication/connection information from a server/host/remote computer in order the facilitate the video call or establish the desktop/screen sharing mode, and teaches wherein the first mobile device may simultaneously establish a video call with one or more second mobile devices. The video call may be initiated by the first mobile device or the second mobile device based on an operation); and
transmitting a desktop video stream to the at least one peer call terminal through the video call media transmission channel (Cao, Abstract [89-90, 215, 219-225], discloses establishing a video call for transmitting a desktop/captured video stream to a second/peer device/terminal), the desktop video stream comprising the video content captured by the call terminal from desktop display content (Cao, Abstract [219-225, 286-288, 370-372], discloses establishing a video call for transmitting/sharing video content captured via the mobile device for screen sharing). However, Cao doesn’t explicitly read media transmission channel.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine that Cao inherently incorporates the feature for performing the functions of screen/desktop content sharing/transmitting over the network in a manner that saves bandwidth, efficiency and a speed of sending shared content is improved, and a delay of screen/desktop sharing can be reduced, as described by Cao to be capable of transmitting video stream through a particular media transmission channel in order the perform and execute the operation of screen sharing is implemented with high efficiency and a fast speed across the network with one or more network devices, the motivation would be to share/transmit content/video over the network to one or more device (Cao [45-47, 215, 219-226]).
As to claim 2, Cao discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein before the transmitting the desktop video stream to the at least one peer call terminal through the video call media transmission channel, the method further comprises: stopping transmitting the call video stream to the at least one peer call terminal through the video call media transmission channel (Cao [215-219, 226], discloses during a video call, screen sharing is implemented, and shared content may be determined based on selection of to-be-selected content by a user, so that users' diversified requirements for screen sharing are met).
As to claim 5, Cao discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein before the transmitting the desktop video stream to the at least one peer call terminal through the video call media transmission channel, the method further comprises: determining that the call terminal has a desktop sharing capability (Cao [219-226], discloses wherein establishing a video call, it is determined that the first mobile device includes a screen/desktop sharing mode and a conventional video mode capability for communicating with one or more second devices).
As to claim 8, Cao discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein: the desktop video stream further comprises the video content shot by the call terminal (Cao [219-226, 286-289], discloses wherein a video image shot by the second mobile device, and the first mobile device sends a video image shot by the first mobile device to the second mobile device, so that the second mobile device displays the video image).
Claims 9, 11, 13-14, and 18 are corresponding apparatus and method claims that recite similar limitations as of claims 1-2, 5, and 8 and do not contain any additional features with respect to novelty and/or inventive steps; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4, 7, 10, 12, 15-16, and 19-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The rejections are based upon the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims. Applicant is advised that the specified citations of the relied upon prior art, in the above rejections, are only representative of the teachings of the prior art, and that any other supportive sections within the entirety of the reference (including any figures, incorporation by references, claims and/or priority documents) is implied as being applied to teach the scope of the claims.
Applicant may not introduce any new matter to the claims or to the specification. For any subsequent response that contains new/amended claims, Applicant is required to cite its corresponding support in the specification. (See MPEP chapter 2163.03 section (I.) and chapter 2163.04 section (I.) and chapter 2163.06)
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection; accordingly, 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 extension fee 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 Razu A Miah whose telephone number is (571)270-5433. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5 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, Wing Chan can be reached at 27493. 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.
/RAZU A MIAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2441
Prosecution Insights