CTNF 18/703,260 CTNF 101801 DETAILED ACTION This communication is in response to the application filed on 04/19/2024 in which claims 1-32 are pending in the application. Claims 4, 6, 8, 12, 14, 16-18, 20, 24, 27-31 were amended by Preliminary Amendment. Claims 33-34 have been canceled by Applicant. Claims 1, 10, and 21 are independent form. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Step 1: Claims 1-11 are directed to a method (series of steps) and therefore is a process which is one the statutory categories of inventions. Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 1 recited the limitation “generating a notification related to an application running on a first endpoint device.” This limitation is method (series of step) that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, cover the performance of the limitation in the mind, but for the recitation of generic computers components. In within the claim “generating a notification related to an application running on a first endpoint device.” Encompasses a user mentally, based on observation, evaluation, judgement or opinion. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then its falls within the "Mental Process" grouping of abstract ideas the concepts performed in the minds including an observations, evaluation, judgement, and opinion. Step 2B, Prong 2: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims recite the additional elements “receiving, from a second endpoint device, a signal representing an interaction with the notification;” This limitation is considered data gathering which the court have identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional. (See MPEP 2106.05(d). “initiating an application stream based on the interaction with the notification;” This limitation does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because they merely recite the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f) “transmitting, by the first endpoint device, the application stream to the second endpoint device.” This limitation is considered data transmission which the court have identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional. (See MPEP 2106.05(d) The “first endpoint device” and “second endpoint device” are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, these additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim is directed to an abstract idea. Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to the amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The limitations of “receiving” and “transmitting” are considered mere data gathering/ data transmission which the court have identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional. (See MPEP 2106.05(d). The limitation of “initiating” is mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using generic computer components. (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of the “first endpoint device” and “second endpoint device” are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components to apply the judicial exception which cannot provide an inventive concept. Dependent claim 2 recite the limitation “determining a condition of the application running on the first endpoint device, wherein the notification related to the application is generated based on the condition of the application. “ (This is a mental process and amounts to an abstract idea under the mental processes grouping (observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion). (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)) Dependent claim 3 recite the limitation “wherein the condition comprises an incoming phone call.” (This is a mental process and amounts to an abstract idea under the mental processes grouping (observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion). (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)) Dependent claim 4 recite the limitation “determining an application control based on the interaction with the notification, wherein the application stream is initiated further based on the application control.” (This is a mental process and amounts to an abstract idea under the mental processes grouping (observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion). (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)) Dependent claim 5 recite the limitation “wherein the application control comprises at least one of an application stream initiation, an application quit, an application ignore, or an application command.” (This is a mental process and amounts to an abstract idea under the mental processes grouping (observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion). (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)) Dependent claim 6 recite the limitation “rendering a plurality of application frames based on the application running on the first endpoint device; (This amounts to data transmission which is considered to be insignificant extra solution activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g)) and encoding the plurality of application frames to produce at least a portion of the application stream.” (This additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. (see MPEP 2106.05(f))) Dependent claim 7 recite the limitation “wherein the application stream comprises at least a portion of a video call.” (This additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. (see MPEP 2106.05(f))) Dependent claim 8 recite the limitation “rendering audio data based on the application running on the first endpoint device; (This amounts to data transmission which is considered to be insignificant extra solution activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g)) and encoding the audio data to produce at least a portion of the application stream.” (This additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. (see MPEP 2106.05(f))) Dependent claim 9 recite the limitation “wherein the application stream comprises at least a portion of a phone call.” (This additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they amount to no more than insignificant extra solution activity. (See MPEP 2106.05(g)) Claim 11 recite the limitation “determining a condition of the application running on the first endpoint device; and in response to determining the condition of the application, generating the notification related to the application.” This limitation is method (series of step) that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, cover the performance of the limitation in the mind, but for the recitation of generic computers components. In within the claim “determining a condition of the application running on the first endpoint device; and in response to determining the condition of the application, generating the notification related to the application.” Encompasses a user mentally, based on observation, evaluation, judgement or opinion. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then its falls within the "Mental Process" grouping of abstract ideas the concepts performed in the minds including an observations, evaluation, judgement, and opinion. Step 2A, Prong 2: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, claim 11 does not recite additional elements. However, because claim 11 inherited from claim 10, claim 10 recite the limitations: A method, comprising: transmitting a notification related to an application running on a first endpoint device to a second endpoint device; (This limitation is considered data transmission which the court have identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional. (See MPEP 2106.05(d)) receiving, from the second endpoint device, data indicating an interaction with the notification ;(This limitation is considered data gathering which the court have identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional. (See MPEP 2106.05(d)) in response to the data indicating the interaction with the notification, generating an application stream representing at least a portion of the application running on the first endpoint device; and (This additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using generic computer components. (see MPEP 2106.05(f))) transmitting the application stream to the second endpoint device. (This limitation is considered data transmission which the court have identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional. (See MPEP 2106.05(d)) The “first endpoint device” and “second endpoint device” are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, these additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim is directed to an abstract idea. Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to the amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The limitations of “receiving” and “transmitting” are considered mere data gathering/ data transmission which the court have identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional. (See MPEP 2106.05(d). The limitation of “generating” is consider no more than mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using generic computer components. (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of the “first endpoint device” and “second endpoint device” are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components to apply the judicial exception which cannot provide an inventive concept. transmitting a notification related to an application running on a first endpoint device to a second endpoint device; (This limitation is considered data transmission which the court have identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional. (See MPEP 2106.05(d)) receiving, from the second endpoint device, data indicating an interaction with the notification ;(This limitation is considered data gathering which the court have identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional. (See MPEP 2106.05(d)) in response to the data indicating the interaction with the notification, generating an application stream representing at least a portion of the application running on the first endpoint device; and (This additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using generic computer components. (see MPEP 2106.05(f))) transmitting the application stream to the second endpoint device. (This limitation is considered data transmission which the court have identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional. (See MPEP 2106.05(d)). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 4,5,10 ,17-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1) and 102(a)(2 ) as being anticipated by Singman et al. (US20160057173 A1) (hereinafter Singman) . As per claim 1 Singman teaches: A method, comprising: [0005] “a method performed by a session management server in a network, the session management server facilitating a real-time communication session between a first endpoint device and a second endpoint device,” generating a notification related to an application running on a first endpoint device; [ 0027] “user A may desire to pause the video … Client application 115 recognizes the signals according to the API and sends a data message to Web RTC server 130 over network 120 informing Web RTC server 130 that the media content stream has been paused by user A.” Under the BRI, a message is generating related to application on the first endpoint device. (See Fig 1) receiving, from a second endpoint device, a signal representing an interaction with the notification; [0059] Moving to block 510, endpoint 180 sends a notification that it has loaded the streaming video indicated by the streaming video information. [0060] “Moving to block 512, endpoint 110 receives the notification that endpoint 180 has loaded the streaming video.” initiating an application stream based on the interaction with the notification [0033] “user A of endpoint 110 uses client 115 to choose a streaming video tile to play from media host 106. The video player within client application 115 at endpoint 110 begins streaming the video file from the media host 106……” [0035] “…the Web RTC server 130 then passes a message to client application 185 at endpoint 180 over network 120 informing client application 185 of the media playback selection. Similarly, the message from Web RTC server 130 to client 185 may include the API signals and/or another appropriate indication of the media playback selection and may include an address or other identification of the particular media streaming file. [0038] “Playback commands include pause, play, rewind, fast forward, mute, scrubbing, etc. In other words, when any one of the endpoints 110, 180 pauses, plays, rewinds, fast forwards, mutes, scrubs, etc. the other endpoint 180, 110 will automatically perform the same action to maintain synchronization.” transmitting, by the first endpoint device, the application stream to the second endpoint device. [0055] “Moving to block 504, endpoint 110 sends streaming video information.” [0064] “In those embodiments, the action of block 518 corresponds to a portion of block 202 of FIG. 2, specifically, the media host server 106 begins a stream including the requested media.” [0065] “…the client application 185 at endpoint 180 causes the media host 106 to begin streaming the selected media file to the client application 185. At this point, the media players of both endpoints 110, 180 are streaming the same media file from media host 106 in synchronization.” As per claim 4 Singman teaches: The method of any of claim 1, further comprising: determining an application control based on the interaction with the notification, wherein the application stream is initiated further based on the application control. [0029] “In such embodiments, applications 115 and 185 may include functionality to observe the streaming sessions between the media players and host server 106 to recognize control signaling to capture playback commands and also apply that control signaling to the players to implement playback commands .” [0033] “The video player within client application 115 at endpoint 110 begins streaming the video file from the media host 106. As noted above, the video selection is implemented via an API. Therefore, when the user selects a video file from the user interface , the media player translates that selection into a predefined set of control signals and causes the endpoint to send those control signals in a message (e.g., via HTTP over the Internet 120) to the media host server 106. The media host server 106 receives those signals and accordingly begins a stream including the requested media. ” As per claim 5 Singman teaches: The method of claim 4, wherein the application control comprises at least one of an application stream initiation, an application quit, an application ignore, or an application command . [0029] “In such embodiments, applications 115 and 185 may include functionality to observe the streaming sessions between the media players and host server 106 to recognize control signaling to capture playback commands and also apply that control signaling to the players to implement playback commands.” As per claim 10 Singman teaches: A method, comprising: transmitting a notification related to an application running on a first endpoint device to a second endpoint device ; [0055] “Moving to block 504, endpoint 110 sends streaming video information. In some embodiments, the action of block 504 corresponds to a portion of block 202 of FIG. 2, and the streaming video information is sent to a media host server 106.” [0056] “Moving to block 506, endpoint 180 receives streaming video information. In some embodiments, endpoint 180 receives the streaming video information from Web RTC server 130 over network 120 as shown in block 206 of FIG. 2” receiving, from the second endpoint device, data indicating an interaction with the notification; [0060] “512, endpoint 110 receives the notification that endpoint 180 has loaded the streaming video. In some embodiments, the client application 115 receives this notification from Web RTC server 130 via network 120. In other embodiments, this notification is received directly from endpoint 180 via network 120.” in response to the data indicating the interaction with the notification, generating an application stream representing at least a portion of the application running on the first endpoint device; and [0061] “endpoint 110 sends a playback command, in this case “play,” to media host 106. the action of block 514 corresponds to block 304 of FIG. 3. In those embodiments, client 115 on endpoint 110 may send the playback command to media host” transmitting the application stream to the second endpoint device . [0064] “In those embodiments, the action of block 518 corresponds to a portion of block 202 of FIG. 2, specifically, the media host server 106 begins a stream including the requested media.” [0065] “…the client application 185 at endpoint 180 causes the media host 106 to begin streaming the selected media file to the client application 185. At this point, the media players of both endpoints 110, 180 are streaming the same media file from media host 106 in synchronization.” As per claim 17 Singmen teaches: The method of claim 10, wherein the notification includes a prompt to activate an input device of the second endpoint device. [0023] “each client 115, 185 has an interface for receiving user commands from the user. Examples include touchscreens with selectable play, pause, and stop buttons” [0035] “Moving to block 206, the Web RTC server 130 then passes a message to client application 185 at endpoint 180 over network 120 informing client application 185 of the media playback selection.” [0038] “streaming video being viewed at each endpoint by mirroring any playback commands input by one endpoint 110 to endpoints 180.” [0055] Moving to block 504, endpoint 110 sends streaming video information. [0056] “Moving to block 506, endpoint 180 receives streaming video information. In some embodiments, endpoint 180 receives the streaming video information from Web RTC server 130 over network 120 as shown in block 206 of FIG. 2. In other embodiments, endpoint 180 receives the streaming video information directly from endpoint 110 over network 120.” Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, within the claim cite above, just reads a notification/message that enable the input device (touchscreen) of the second endpoint device to become operable within the application stream. As per claim 18 Singman teaches: The method of claim 10, further comprising: receiving, at the first endpoint device, data representing an interaction with at least a portion of the application stream from the second endpoint device. [0065] “At block 520, the playback command, in this case “play,” is executed on the media player of endpoint 180. In some embodiments, the media player is running on the client application 185. In those embodiments, the action of block 520 corresponds to a portion of block 208 of FIG. 2, specifically, the client application 185 at endpoint 180 causes the media host 106 to begin streaming the selected media file to the client application 185. At this point, the media players of both endpoints 110, 180 are streaming the same media file from medi a host 106 in synchronization. [0066] “Moving to blocks 522 and 524, either endpoint 110,180 may initiate further playback commands, which are mirrored to the other endpoint 180, 110.” Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, as disclose by Singman “either endpoint 110,180 may initiate further playback commands, which are mirrored to the other endpoint” which then reads on receiving the interaction from the second endpoint device. As per claim 19 Singman teaches modifying the application running on the first endpoint device based on the interaction with at least a portion of the application stream. [0027] “user A may desire to pause the video and ask a question of user B. Accordingly, user A selects a pause button from the video player interface. The selection of the pause button causes the media streaming player at client 115 to send control signals according to established APIs to media host server 106 to cause media host server 106 to pause the stream.” As per claim 20 Singman teaches: The method of any of claim 18, further comprising: generating a modified application stream based on the interaction with at least a portion of the application stream; [0027] user A may desire to pause the video and ask a question of user B. Accordingly, user A selects a pause button from the video player interface. The selection of the pause button causes the media streaming player at client 115 to send control signals according to established APIs to media host server 106 to cause media host server 106 to pause the stream.….” and transmitting the modified application stream to the second endpoint device. [0027] “…. The message from client application 115 to Web RTC server 130 may include a message having the API signals and/or another appropriate indication of the playback command. Web RTC server 130 then passes a message to client 185 informing client 185 of the playback command……” As per claim 21 Singman teaches A method, comprising: outputting a notification related to an application running on a second endpoint device at a first endpoint device; [0059] “endpoint 180 sends a notification that it has loaded the streaming video indicated by the streaming video information. In some embodiments, the client application 185 causes endpoint 180 to send this notification. In some embodiments, this notification is sent to Web RTC server 130 via network 120. In other embodiments, this notification is sent directly to endpoint 110 via network 120.” receiving an interaction with the notification; transmitting data representing the interaction with the notification to the first endpoint device; and [0059] “endpoint 180 sends a notification that it has loaded the streaming video indicated by the streaming video information. In some embodiments, the client application 185 causes endpoint 180 to send this notification. In some embodiments, this notification is sent to Web RTC server 130 via network 120. In other embodiments, this notification is sent directly to endpoint 110 via network 120” [0069] “In the above discussions of blocks 522 and 524, commands could flow the opposite direction, from endpoint 180 to endpoint 110, in the same or similar manner.” receiving an application stream related to the application running on the second endpoint device from the second endpoint device. [0066] “Moving to blocks 522 and 524, either endpoint 110,180 may initiate further playback commands, which are mirrored to the other endpoint 180, 110.” Under the BRI, “receiving an application stream related to the application running on the second endpoint device from the second endpoint device.” reads any update or modification the application stream from the second endpoint device. Since Singman disclose that endpoint 110(first endpoint device) and endpoint 180 (second endpoint device) are in sync. When endpoint 180 issue a playback commands the first endpoint device would receive the update of the application from the second endpoint device. As per claim 22 Singman teaches; The method of claim 21, wherein the notification is output by an output device including at least one of a display or speaker. [0049] “The I/O devices 460 may include a keyboard, a computer mouse, a microphone, and/or a display device for allowing a user to provide input to and receive output from the computer system 400. In one example, the endpoint devices 110, 180 of FIG. 1 may include tablet computers having touchscreen interfaces, although the scope of embodiments is not limited to any particular I/O devices 460.” As per claim 23 Singman teaches: The method of claim 22, further comprising: outputting at least a portion of the application stream by the output device. [0054] “the action of block 502 corresponds to a portion of block 202 of FIG. 2, and the action of block 502 may be performed by a client application 115 at endpoint 110. In those embodiments, loading streaming video information is implemented via an API.” As per claim 24 Singman teaches: The method of claim 21, wherein the interaction is received by an input device including at least one of a touchscreen, mouse, keyboard, remote control, or microphone. [0049] “The I/O devices 460 may include a keyboard, a computer mouse, a microphone, and/or a display device for allowing a user to provide input to and receive output from the computer system 400. In one example, the endpoint devices 110, 180 of FIG. 1 may include tablet computers having touchscreen interfaces, although the scope of embodiments is not limited to any particular I/O devices 460.” As per claim 25 Singman teaches: The method of claim 24, further comprising: receiving an interaction with the application stream by the input device; [0055] “endpoint 110 sends streaming video information.” [0056] “endpoint 180 receives streaming video information.” (see fig and fig 5) and transmitting data representing the interaction with the application stream to the second endpoint device. [0056] “In other embodiments, endpoint 180 receives the streaming video information directly from endpoint 110 over network 120. Continuing with the example, a client application 185 running on endpoint 180 receives the streaming video information.” [0057] “endpoint 180 loads the selected streaming video according to the received streaming video information.” As per claim 26 Singman teaches: The method of claim 25, further comprising: receiving a modified application stream based on the interaction with the application stream from the second endpoint device. [0065] “At block 520, the playback command, in this case “play,” is executed on the media player of endpoint 180. In some embodiments, the media player is running on the client application 185. In those embodiments, the action of block 520 corresponds to a portion of block 208 of FIG. 2, specifically, the client application 185 at endpoint 180 causes the media host 106 to begin streaming the selected media file to the client application 185. At this point, the media players of both endpoints 110, 180 are streaming the same media file from media host 106 in synchronization. [0066] “Moving to blocks 522 and 524, either endpoint 110,180 may initiate further playback commands, which are mirrored to the other endpoint 180, 110.” Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, as disclose by Singman “either endpoint 110,180 may initiate further playback commands, which are mirrored to the other endpoint” which then reads on receiving a modified application stream from the interaction from the second endpoint device . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2, 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singman et al. (US20160057173 A1), in view of Beguin (US 9729649 B1) . As per claim 2 Singman disclose the method of claim 1 detailed above. Singman does not disclose: “determining a condition of the application running on the first endpoint device, wherein the notification related to the application is generated based on the condition of the application.” However, Beguin discloses “determining a condition of the application running on the first endpoint device, wherein the notification related to the application is generated based on the condition of the application.” [col 3 lines 46-49] “The user device 102(1) may include a display screen that may display an interface 104 that includes the communication applications……” [col 5 lines 5- 8] FIG. 2 illustrates a representative embodiment 200 for individually controlling the status of multiple communications applications 106 residing on the user device 102(1) using an individual interface 202. [col 9 lines 45-50] “The ring mode may include playing an audio file that alerts the user to a condition on the user device 102(1). Both Singman and Begin are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in transmission of digital information and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman and with the teachings of Begin to determine the condition of the application running on the first endpoint device, wherein the notification related to the application is generated based on the condition of the application. Motivation to combine would be improve the process of notification that is being generated from the first endpoint device based on the condition of the application by enabling real-time status of the running application so that the notification is relevant rather than unrelated. As per claim 3 Singman and Beguin disclose the method of claim 2 detailed above. Beguin further discloses “wherein the condition comprises an incoming phone call.” [col 9 lines 45-50] “The ring mode may include playing an audio file that alerts the user to a condition on the user device 102(1). In one embodiment, the condition may include an incoming phone call, text message, video call, or any instance in which the user device 102(1) may need an input or response from the user.” As per claim 11 , Singman discloses the method of claim 10 detailed above. Singman does not disclose “determining a condition of the application running on the first endpoint device; and in response to determining the condition of the application, generating the notification related to the application.” However, Beguin discloses “determining a condition of the application running on the first endpoint device; and in response to determining the condition of the application, generating the notification related to the application.” [col 3 lines 46-49] “The user device 102(1) may include a display screen that may display an interface 104 that includes the communication applications……” [col 5 lines 5- 8] FIG. 2 illustrates a representative embodiment 200 for individually controlling the status of multiple communications applications 106 residing on the user device 102(1) using an individual interface 202. [col 9 lines 45-50] “The ring mode may include playing an audio file that alerts the user to a condition on the user device 102(1).” Both Singman and Begin are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in transmission of digital information and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman and with the teachings of Begin to determine a condition of the application running on the first endpoint device; and in response to determining the condition of the application, generating the notification related to the application” Motivation to combine would be improve to the process of notification that is being generated from the first endpoint device based on the condition by enabling real-time status of the running application so when that notification is generated it would be directly tied to relevance of the application . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singman et al. (US20160057173 A1), in view of Kelly et al. (US 20220366523 A1) . As per claim 6 Singman disclose the method of the claim 1 detailed above. Singman does not disclose “rendering a plurality of application frames based on the application running on the first endpoint device. and encoding the plurality of application frames to produce at least a portion of the application stream.” However, Kelly discloses “rendering a frame based on the application running on the first endpoint device;” [0026] “In an embodiment, at block 402, an application in the application system 202a being utilized by the endpoint device 206a may perform (e.g., in response to instructions received from the endpoint device 206a) first application frame rate processing operations that include rendering frames to produce application frames at a first application frame rate. The application in the application system 202a being utilized by the endpoint device ” “encoding the plurality of application frames to produce at least a portion of the application stream.” [0025] “provide for the optimization of a frame rate pipeline to ensure that the frame rate being rendered and encoded for frames provided for display on an endpoint device is maximized for the current capabilities of that endpoint device to optimize the experience at the endpoint device while not wasting resources in the frame rate pipeline….. a frame rate pipeline including an application that produces application frames at a first application frame rate….and an endpoint device that processes the VDI frames to produce endpoint frames at an endpoint frame rate.” Singman and Kelly are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in pictorial communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman and with the teachings of Kelly to render a plurality of application frames based on the application running on the first endpoint device and encoding the plurality of application frames to produce at least a portion of the application stream. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system by having the first endpoint device to render the plurality of frames to while also encoding the plurality of frames produce a seamless, higher quality to be transmitted . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singman et al. (US20160057173 A1), in view of Kelly et al. (US 20220366523 A1), in view of Xue (US 20190158889 A1) As per claim 7 Singman and Kelly disclose the method of claim 6 detailed above. Singman in view of Kelly does not disclose “wherein the application stream comprises at least a portion of a video call.” However, Xue discloses “wherein the application stream comprises at least a portion of a video call.”[ 0004] “Some live streaming applications provide a “microphone link capability connecting an anchor and viewers.” This combines one-way live streaming and two-person video calls, achieving a real sense of “interactive” live streaming. In many applications, because the existing microphone link technology is implemented by modifying a conventional live streaming system,”[0074] “the anchor end is a mobile phone of an anchor 1, the video call participant end is a computer of a video call participant 2, the viewer end is a mobile phone of a viewer 3, and the server is a server 4. When the anchor 1 performs live streaming, the video call participant 2 may perform real-time interaction with the anchor 1. For example, anchor 1 says: Yeah!!!! The video call participant 2 says: Hey everybody, can you hear me? Then, the server 4 may collect audio and avatar live streams of the anchor 1 and the video call participant 2…” (See Fig. 4) Singman, Kelly and Xue are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in pictorial communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman, with the teachings of Kelly and the teachings of Xue to the application stream comprises at least a portion of a video call. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system by having the application stream to include video call which would enhance the user interaction such as communicating with another user with the application stream. Claims 8, 12 and 13 are rejected in view of Singmen (US20160057173 A1), in view of Rathi (US 20150156483 A1), in view of Orr (US 6567127 B1) As per claim 8 Singman disclose the method of claim 1 detailed above. Singman does not disclose “rendering audio data based on the application running on the first endpoint device; and encoding the audio data to produce at least a portion of the application stream.” However, Rathi discloses “rendering audio data based on the application running on the first endpoint device” [0026] “audio data 186 may be configured to be rendered (e.g., through execution of multimedia application 114) on one or more audio endpoint device(s) 192.sub.1-m.” (See figure 1) Both Singman and Rathi are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in pictorial communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman and with the teaching of Rathi to render audio data based on the application running on the first endpoint device. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system by having the first endpoint device to render audio data to producing a richer and completed audio output. Singman in view of Rathi does not explicitly disclose “encoding the audio data to produce at least a portion of the application stream.” However, Orr discloses “encoding the audio data to produce at least a portion of the application stream.” [ col 3 lines 20 -27] “In order to allow the inclusion of audio data and the enhanced video data stream, the circuit of FIG. 1 may also include an audio decoding block 130 and an audio encoding block 140. The audio decoding block 130 receives an audio signal 132 and digitizes the audio signal 132 when it is in an analog format to produce a digital audio signal 134. The audio encoding block 140 encodes the digital audio signal 134 to produce an encoded audio stream …..” Singman, Rathi and Orr are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in pictorial communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman, with the teaching of Rathi with the teaching of Orr to render audio data based on the application running on the first endpoint device and then encode the audio data to produce an encoded audio stream. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system by encoding the application stream to seamlessly compress and transmit the audio data. As per claim 12 Singman disclose the method of claim 10 detailed above. Singman does not disclose “rendering audio data based on the application running on the first endpoint device; and encoding the audio data to produce an encoded audio stream.” However, Rathi discloses “rendering audio data based on the application running on the first endpoint device” [0026] “audio data 186 may be configured to be rendered (e.g., through execution of multimedia application 114) on one or more audio endpoint device(s) 192.sub.1-m.” (See figure 1) Both Singman and Rathi are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in pictorial communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman and with the teaching of Rathi to render audio data based on the application running on the first endpoint device. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system by having the first endpoint device to render audio data to producing a richer and completed audio output. Singman in view of Rathi does not explicitly disclose “encoding the audio data to produce an encoded audio stream” However, Orr discloses “encoding the audio data to produce an encoded audio stream” [col 3 lines 25 -27] “The audio encoding block 140 encodes the digital audio signal 134 to produce an encoded audio stream…” Singman, Rathi and Orr are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in pictorial communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman, with the teaching of Rathi with the teaching of Orr to render audio data based on the application running on the first endpoint device and then encode the audio data to produce an encoded audio stream. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system by encoding the audio data into an audio stream to seamlessly compress and transmit the stream alongside with the application. As per claim 13 Singman, Rathi and Orr disclose the method of claim 12 detailed above. Orr further disclose “wherein the application stream includes the encoded audio stream.” [ col 3 lines 20 -27] “In order to allow the inclusion of audio data and the enhanced video data stream , the circuit of FIG. 1 may also include an audio decoding block 130 and an audio encoding block 140. The audio decoding block 130 receives an audio signal 132 and digitizes the audio signal 132 when it is in an analog format to produce a digital audio signal 134. The audio encoding block 140 encodes the digital audio signal 134 to produce an encoded audio stream….. ” 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 9 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singman et al. (US20160057173 A1), in view of Glazer et al. (US 20130067331 A1) . As per claim 9 Singman disclose a method of claim 8 detailed above. Singman does not explicitly disclose “wherein the application stream includes at least a portion of a phone call.” However, Glazer discloses “wherein the application stream includes at least a portion of a phone call.” [0038] “The user may be able to open a new interactive application by the computerized device (step 226A, 226B), before or during streaming of the screen GUI data of the application. By default, the new interactive application may be displayed on a portion of the target display on top of the video display on the target display (step 228A, 228B). The new interactive application may be displayed on a small portion of the target display or alternatively the video may be displayed on a small portion of the target display. The display portion may be changed according to user's selections or predefined rules based on application events. In case the computerized device is a mobile computerized device, an event may be an incoming phone call (step 232A, 232B).” Both Singman and Glazer are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in session management and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman and the teachings of Glazer to have the application stream includes at least a portion of a phone call. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system by having a real-time communication to be integrated in application stream to including a phone call, which would further enhance the useability of the application. As per claim 30 , it has similar limitation of claim 9 therefore is rejected under the same rationale . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singman et al. (US20160057173 A1), in view of Kelly et al. (US 20220366523 A1), in view of Azar et al. (US 20140092209 A1) . As per claim 14 Singman disclose the method of claim 10 detailed above. Singman does not disclose “rendering a frame based on the application running on the first endpoint device; and encoding the frame to produce an encoded video stream.” However, Kelly discloses “rendering a frame based on the application running on the first endpoint device;” [0005] “includes receiving from an application both a frame of video data to be encoded and content information related to a content of the frame of video data.” [0026] “In an embodiment, at block 402, an application in the application system 202a being utilized by the endpoint device 206a may perform (e.g., in response to instructions received from the endpoint device 206a) first application frame rate processing operations that include rendering frames to produce application frames at a first application frame rate. The application in the application system 202a being utilized by the endpoint device ” Singman and Kelly are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in pictorial communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman and with the teachings of Kelly to render a frame based on the application running on the first endpoint device. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system by having the first endpoint device to render frames to produce a higher quality video for the application on the first endpoint device. Singmen in view of Kelly does not explicitly disclose “encoding the frame to produce an encoded video stream.” However, Azar discloses “encoding the frame to produce an encoded video stream.” [0031] “the encoding engine 302 is configured to receive video frames 308 and further configured to produce from the frames 308 an encoded video stream 312.” Singmen, Kelly and Azar are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are all in pictorial communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman, with the teachings of Kelly and with the teaching of Azar to encode the frame to produce an encoded video stream. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system of the first endpoint device to the encode the frames into a video stream to produce a seamless and higher video quality of the application. As per claim 15 Singman, Kelly and Azar disclose the method of claim 14 detailed above. Azar further discloses “wherein the application stream includes the encoded video stream.” [0005] “includes receiving from an application both a frame of video data to be encoded and content information related to a content of the frame of video data.” [0031] “the encoding engine 302 is configured to receive video frames 308 and further configured to produce from the frames 308 an encoded video stream 312.” 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 16 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singman et al. (US20160057173 A1), in view of Lemberger et al. (US 11153538 A1) . As per claim 16 Singman disclose a method of claim 10 detailed above. Singman does not explicitly disclose “wherein the notification includes a prompt to accept a call.” However, Lemberger discloses “wherein the notification includes a prompt to accept a call.” [col 6 lines 49-51] “At block B212, the user may receive a notification on his or her client device 114 with a prompt to either accept or deny the call.” Both Singman and Lemberger are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in pictorial communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman and the teachings of Lemberger to have a notification includes a prompt to accept a call. Motivation to combine would be to improve intra-communication of the notification by having an interactive prompt to accept or yet to deny an incoming call within the session which would further enable the user to make a real-time decision. As per claim 29 , it has similar limitation as claim 16 therefore is rejected under the same rationale . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 27 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singman et al. (US20160057173 A1), in view of Tsukuba (US 20210297701 A1) . As per claim 27 Singman disclose a method of claim 21 detailed above. Singman does not explicitly disclose “decoding at least a portion of the application stream to produce a decoded video stream.” However, Tsukuba discloses “decoding at least a portion of the application stream to produce a decoded video stream.” [0515]” The decoder 904 decodes the video stream and the audio stream which are inputted thereto from the demultiplexer 903. Then, the decoder 904 outputs the video data produced through the decoding processing to the video signal processing portion 905. In addition, the decoder 904 outputs the audio data produced through the decoding processing to the audio signal processing portion 907.” Both Singman and Tsukuba are in the similar field of endeavor, as they are both in pictorial communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman and the teachings of Tsukuba to decoding at least a portion of the application stream to produce a decoded video stream. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system by decoding the application stream to produce a higher quality and compatibility output. As per claim 28 Singman disclose a method of claim 21 detailed above. Tsukuba further discloses “decoding at least a portion of the application stream to produce a decoded audio stream.” [0515] “The decoder 904 decodes the video stream and the audio stream which are inputted thereto from the demultiplexer 903. Then, the decoder 904 outputs the video data produced through the decoding processing to the video signal processing portion 905. In addition, the decoder 904 outputs the audio data produced through the decoding processing to the audio signal processing portion 907.” 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 31 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singman et al. (US20160057173 A1), in view of Kumar et al. (US 20220086169 A1) . As per claim 31 Singman disclose a method of claim 21 detailed above. Singman does not explicitly disclose “wherein the first endpoint device has a first operating system, and the second endpoint device has a second, different operating system.” However, Kumar discloses “wherein the first endpoint device has a first operating system, and the second endpoint device has a second, different operating system.” [0036] “For instance, a first mobile device 106A may have a first operating system and a second mobile device 106B may have a second operating system.” Both Singman and Kumar are in the similar fields of endeavor as they are both in network communication and, therefore, are combinable/modifiable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Singman and the teachings of Kumar to have first endpoint device has a first operating system, and the second endpoint device has a second, different operating system. Motivation to combine would be to improve the system of the endpoint devices by have a separate operating system which would further enhance the inter-communication process between devices, as it further introduces a cross-platform compatibility. As per claim 32 Singman and Kumar disclose the method of claim 31 detailed above. Kumar further discloses “wherein the second, different operating system has at least one different interface, language, memory management technique, communication protocol, encryption, or network stack from the first operating system.” [0036] “The launch information enables enrollment of both mobile devices 106 using the same optical code by connecting the mobile device 106 to different computing interfaces based on the operating system and/or applications” Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tsao; Michael H. et al. (US20230034475 A1) disclose sharing of one or more system services between one or more endpoint devices. Felice-Steele; Michelle et al (US 20200076813 A1) disclose transmitting user interface data to the user computing device, the user interface data configured to depict a user interface including one or more interactive elements. Perez; Gabriel O (US 11539817 B1) disclose communications via a network may be received from a set of devices. Breaux; Joseph E et al. (US 20190213063 A1) disclose a mobile device having an operating system (OS) that includes an event API installed therein that is configured for two-way communication with an external control device. DESHMUKH; Shailesh (US 20210204016 A1) disclose a synchronized streaming of video content to a plurality of video player devices. MAMAN; Eran et al (US 20100061443 A1) disclose encoding video data of the graphical output. Schroeder, JR.; Brian S et al (US 20120221739 A1) disclose an application that is configured to run on the endpoint device and to send a method call that includes a unique application identifier (AppID) associated with the application and that requests a media connection with another application running on a different endpoint device. Miller; Harold Roy et al (US 20160372112 A1) a method for managing interactions between a user and applications. Young; Valerie J. et al (US 20170034643 A1) disclose a mobile edge computing device is further configured to initiate the automated application exchange negotiation between the application provider computing device. Amithrigala; Chamila et al (US 10182463 B1) disclose sharing data among computing devices. Chu; Xiaolu et al (US 20200387411 A1) disclose a computing device may transmit the notification with the tag to a notification service at the client device. Chen; Ze et al (US 20220043698 A1) disclose a computing system, data indicating that first content accessible by an endpoint device includes a reference to second content of a first application hosted on a remote computing device. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHMEED ACHILLE whose telephone number is (571)272-9437. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am -4pm. 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, PIERRE VITAL can be reached at (571)272-4215. 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. /A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 2198 /PIERRE VITAL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2198 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 2 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 3 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 4 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 5 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 6 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 7 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 8 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 9 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 10 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 11 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 12 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 13 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 14 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 15 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 16 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 17 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 19 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 20 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 21 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 22 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 23 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 24 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 26 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 27 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 28 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 29 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 30 Art Unit: 2199 Application/Control Number: 18/703,260 Page 31 Art Unit: 2199
Prosecution Insights