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 is a Final Office action in response to communications received December 05, 2025. No Claims have been amended or canceled. Claims 21-23 have been added. Therefore, claims 1-23 are pending and addressed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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 1-2, 5-11, 14-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Simotas et al. (US2019/0182300 1, publish date 06/13/2019) (on applicant’s IDS filed 11/08/2024).
Claims 1, 10, 19:
With respect to claims 1, 10, 19, Simotas et al. discloses a method/computing system (media casting management, Figures 2 and 3A), comprising:
one or more processors (550, Figure 5); and
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer-executable instructions that (non-transitory computer program having instructions, Claim 16), when executed with one or more processors of a user device (303), causes the one or more processors to:
receiving, by a computing system (305) and from a user device (303), an identifier of an accessory device (308) of a plurality of accessory devices (0068, Figure 1) and a request to connect with the accessory device ({0125] - "The source device may then request to pair 360 with an available target - device ... by sending a unicast message 363 to the local proxy server 305..."),
the request received by the computing system via a first network ({0071], [0072] - "... A mobile (source) device 210 is connected to the first wireless network 220 via a first Service Set Identifier (SSID1) which SSID1 is mapped to first Local Area Network (LAN1). LAN1 may be a first physical LAN or a first Virtual LAN (VLAN1221) dedicated to connecting source devices owned by hotel guests..."), connectivity between the user device and the plurality of accessory devices via the first network being restricted by a security mechanism ({0128] - "... a firewall 376 running at the _ local proxy server 305...") of a second network ({0072], [0073] -"... A first target device 230 is connected to a second wireless network 220 with a second SSID2 which is mapped to a second Local Area Network (LAN2222), LAN2 may be a second physical LAN or a second Virtual LAN (VLAN2222) dedicated to connecting target devices installed at hotel rooms");
transmitting, by the computing system, a message to a management system (306) of the second network to configure the security mechanism to permit connectivity between the user device and the accessory device based at least in part on the request and the identity of the accessory device ({0125] -"... The local proxy server 305 may then notify the control server 306 of the a successful association between the source and target devices 366...");
receiving, by the computing system, a message from the management system indicating that the management system has changed a configuration of the security mechanism to permit connectivity between the user device and the accessory device ([0125] - ""... The control server 306 may then update its databases 369 and send database changes 370 to the local proxy server 305. Upon reception of the database changes 373, the local proxy server 305 constructs or updates network filtering rules 376 for control and sessions protocols used in content casting sessions” and [0128] - "Upon the successful new pairing of a guest device with MAC X and IP address Y for Room N, a rule allowing traffic from IP Y to all target devices in Room N on port e.g. 8009 is inserted in a firewall 376 running at the local proxy server 305..."); and
transmitting, by the computing system and to the user device and the accessory device, connectivity information (To facilitate pairing of source and target devices, the control server (or in an alternative exemplary embodiment, the local proxy server) 240 may also store an authorization code table: [0109] Room #, pairing code, 0108) for establishing a connection between the user device and the identified accessory device ([0126] - "... The construction or updating of the network filtering rules 376 may be followed by the local proxy server unicasting association acknowledgements 379 to the source device 303" (0177-0178, a target device 230 to be discoverable by the source device 210 by allowing the local proxy server 240 to relay the multicast response message 420 from VLAN2 to VLAN1. For instance, the target device 230 can be discoverable by the source device 210 only if the target device 230 is associated with room 101 and the source device is also associated (after its registration) with room 101, thereby ensuring that a guest can only discover and pair his source device with target devices in his guest room. … is not allowed (i.e. is associated with a different guest room).
Claims 2, 11, 20:
With respect to claims 2, 11, 20, Simotas et al. discloses wherein the method further includes validating the user device in response to receiving the request, wherein transmitting the message to the management system is based at least in part on the validation (0089 - manages the authorization process to allow a source device to gain access to media playback devices in a guest room, receive requests (via the proxy server 305) from source devices requesting permission to access the media playback devices in a guest room and using an appropriate registration/validation mechanism allow the control server to decide which source devices can access the media playback devices).
Claims 5, 14:
With respect to claims 5, 14, Simotas et al. discloses wherein the computing system is connected to the user device via a first network separate from the second network (0071-0073 - system 200 is shown only with a single source device connected to a first network and two target devices, connected to a second and a third network) (0128 - is inserted in a firewall 376 running at the local proxy server 305).
Claims 6, 15:
With respect to claims 6, 15, Simotas et al. discloses wherein the security mechanism comprises a firewall configured to restrict connectivity via the first network between the user device and the identified accessory device (0071-0073 - system 200 is shown only with a single source device connected to a first network and two target devices, connected to a second and a third network) (0128 - is inserted in a firewall 376 running at the local proxy server 305).
Claims 7, 16:
With respect to claims 7, 16, Simotas et al. discloses wherein the identified accessory device is a first accessory device arranged in a defined space, wherein a second accessory device of the plurality of accessory devices is arranged in the defined space, and wherein the management system changes management system has further changed the configuration of the security mechanism to permit connectivity between the user device and the second accessory device (0105 - maintain an association of the target devices to hotel room numbers (or in the alternative exemplary embodiment, the local proxy server may also maintain an association of the target devices to hotel room numbers) (0119 - where it is checked against the target device-room mapping table by reading a hotel administration database 346).
Claims 8, 17:
With respect to claims 8, 17, Simotas et al. discloses wherein the defined space is a room or a set of rooms in a building (0105 - maintain an association of the target devices to hotel room numbers (or in the alternative exemplary embodiment, the local proxy server may also maintain an association of the target devices to hotel room numbers) (0119 - where it is checked against the target device-room mapping table by reading a hotel administration database 346).
Claims 9, 18:
With respect to claims 9, 18, Simotas et al. discloses wherein an access point is arranged in the defined space, and wherein the user device communicates with the computing system via the access point (0005 - where the user is expected to connect his networked device to the media playback device(s) located in his room) (0016 - Once paired, the user can cast content from his devices to the media playback device in his room) (0078 - Routers 260, 270 are connected to the Internet 280 for providing access to remote servers, to the cloud and to remote content and control resources).
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 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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 3, 4, 12, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Simotas et al. (US2019/0182300 1, publish date 06/13/2019) in view of Straitiff et al. (US10686856 B1, patent date 06/16/2020). (on applicant’s IDS filed 11/08/2024).
Claims 3, 12:
With respect to claims 3, 12, Simotas et al. discloses wherein the request comprises private key information for establishing a secure connection between the user device and the computing system (0112 - be accessible using the Hyper Text Transfer Protocol Secure (HTTPS) protocol only at standard port 443) (0130 - Content casting is typically done using closed and potentially encrypted protocols proprietary of the target device).
Straitiff et al. teaches Media streaming (Figure 3), Communications between the PMS 314, the proxy server 312, and the media streaming device 318 may be encrypted (e.g., transport layer security secured protocols) (Column 10, lines 53-56)
Simotas et al. and Straitiff et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of media streaming/casting.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Straitiff et al. in Simotas et al. for wherein the request comprises private key information for establishing a secure connection between the user device and the computing system as claimed for purposes of media streaming devices may be securely accessed via an interface that unauthorized people cannot access. (see Straitiff et al. Column 7, lines 44-46)
Claims 4, 13:
With respect to claims 4, 13, Simotas et al. discloses wherein the private key information comprises a transport layer security (TLS) key and a transport layer security (TLS) key identity (0112 - be accessible using the Hyper Text Transfer Protocol Secure (HTTPS) protocol only at standard port 443) (0130 - Content casting is typically done using closed and potentially encrypted protocols proprietary of the target device).
Straitiff et al. teaches Media streaming (Figure 3), Communications between the PMS 314, the proxy server 312, and the media streaming device 318 may be encrypted (e.g., transport layer security secured protocols) (Column 10, lines 53-56)
Simotas et al. and Straitiff et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of media streaming/casting.
The motivation for combining Simotas et al. and Straitiff et al. is recited in claims 3, 12.
Claim 21:
With respect to claim 21, Simotas et al. discloses further comprising: after receiving the identifier of the accessory device of the plurality of accessory devices (0068, The target device 130 is discoverable by the source device 110, Figure 1) and the request to connect with the accessory device ({0125] - "The source device may then request to pair 360 with an available target - device ... by sending a unicast message 363 to the local proxy server 305..."), validating, (1) by the computing system and (2) based on the request to connect with the accessory device, the user device, wherein the message is transmitted to the management system of the second network based at least in part on validating the user device (0089 - manages the authorization process to allow a source device to gain access to media playback devices in a guest room, receive requests (via the proxy server 305) from source devices requesting permission to access the media playback devices in a guest room and using an appropriate registration/validation mechanism allow the control server to decide which source devices can access the media playback devices).
Claim 22:
With respect to claim 22, Simotas et al. discloses further comprising: after receiving the identifier of the accessory device of the plurality of accessory devices (0068, The target device 130 is discoverable by the source device 110, Figure 1) and the request to connect with the accessory device ({0125] - "The source device may then request to pair 360 with an available target - device ... by sending a unicast message 363 to the local proxy server 305..."), validating, (1) by the computing system and (2) based on the request to connect with the accessory device, the accessory device, wherein the message is transmitted to the management system of the second network based at least in part on validating the accessory device (0089 - manages the authorization process to allow a source device to gain access to media playback devices in a guest room, receive requests (via the proxy server 305) from source devices requesting permission to access the media playback devices in a guest room and using an appropriate registration/validation mechanism allow the control server to decide which source devices can access the media playback devices).
Claim 23:
With respect to claim 23, Simotas et al. discloses wherein the connectivity information includes a pairing code (The association may contain (e.g. for a Google Chromecast device): [0106] Room #, Chromecast Host Name, Friendly Name, Network Interface, Pairing code, Status, 0105)(To facilitate pairing of source and target devices, the control server (or in an alternative exemplary embodiment, the local proxy server) 240 may also store an authorization code table: [0109] Room #, pairing code, 0108).
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on December 05, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In the remarks, Applicant argues that:
Claims 1, 10, 19:
(1)Simotas fails to disclose "transmitting, by the computing system and to the user device and the accessory device, connectivity information for establishing a connection between the user device and the accessory device," as recited in claim 1.
the Applicant would like to highlight that the connectivity information is (1) sent to "the user device and the accessory device" and (2) "for establishing a connection between the user device and the accessory device."
The Applicant is unable to identify any part of Simotas that defines the association acknowledgements 379, much less defines that such disclose "connectivity information for establishing a connection between the user device and the accessory device," as recited in claim 1.
Simotas, including paragraph [0177] fails to disclose "connectivity information" as recited in claim 1 for at least two reasons.
Paragraph [0177] does not mention association acknowledgements.
Second, even assuming paragraph [0177] describes association acknowledgments 379 and that an example of an association acknowledgement is an identification of a room (which the Applicant does not agree is disclosed in Simotas), Simotas does not disclose that the identification of the room is sent to two different devices for "establishing a connection between the user device and the accessory device," as recited in claim 1.
paragraph [0122] describes two types of associations. One type of association is sent to other devices for display by those devices (e.g., not used for "establishing a connection between the user device and the accessory device"). The other type of association is stored by the local proxy server 240 (e.g., and not "transmit[ed] to the user device and the accessory device").
In response to remark/arguments (1), Examiner respectfully disagrees. Simotas et al. discloses “To facilitate pairing of source and target devices, the control server (or in an alternative exemplary embodiment, the local proxy server) 240 may also store an authorization code table: [0109] Room #, pairing code” (0108), local proxy server unicasting association acknowledgements 379 to the source device 303 … source device 303 may then start content casting 380” (0126), “a target device 230 to be discoverable by the source device 210 by allowing the local proxy server 240 to relay the multicast response message 420 from VLAN2 to VLAN1. For instance, the target device 230 can be discoverable by the source device 210 only if the target device 230 is associated with room 101 and the source device is also associated (after its registration) with room 101, thereby ensuring that a guest can only discover and pair his source device with target devices in his guest room. … is not allowed (i.e. is associated with a different guest room) (0177-0178). Examiner holds that Simotas discloses "transmitting, by the computing system and to the user device and the accessory device, connectivity information for establishing a connection between the user device and the accessory device," as recited in claim 1. Therefore, Examiner maintains that combination of Simotas et al. does teach and suggest this limitation.
Conclusion
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 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Helai Salehi whose telephone number is 571-270-7468. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 9 am to 5 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Jeff Pwu, can be reached on 571-272-6798. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 http://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).
/HELAI SALEHI/
Examiner, Art Unit 2433
/JEFFREY C PWU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2433