DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This action is in response to amendment filed on 9/22/2025, in which claims 1, 5 – 9, 11 – 13, and 16 – 20 was amended, and 1 – 20 was presented for further examination.
3. Claims 1 – 20 are now pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 – 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
5. Claims 1 – 8 and 13 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sherman et al (US 6,636,897 B1), in view of Shah et al (US 8,301,994 B1), in view of Robbin et al (AU 2011253918 B2).
As per claim 1, Sherman et al (US 6,636,897 B1) discloses,
A method comprising: storing, on a client device, a local tree data structure representing content items in a file system on the client device (col.4 lines 50 - 55; “handheld computer 22 includes a messaging system that receives and stores server-based items, such as the e-mail messages 27. These server-based items are stored in a hierarchy of folders. each top-level folder of the hierarchy is associated with the user account on the server that provides the corresponding server-based items”).
and a remote tree data structure representing a remote set of content items stored at a content management system (col.12 lines 36 – 45; “server list is a list of folders/subfolders currently recognized by the server as being part of the folder hierarchy. The client list is the list of folders/subfolders currently recognized by the client/companion device as being part of the folder hierarchy. The server and client lists correspond to stored records or objects, each potentially including a plurality of fields or properties, one of which is a subfolder identification in the case of folder objects. These objects are stored in an object store (such as a mail store) in each respective computer system”).
in response to the detection, determining an attribute in the remote tree data structure that indicates a synchronization setting disabling local storage of the content item is set (col.10 lines 44 – 46; “determined whether an "expanded flag" associated with the Inbox folder is set. An "expanded flag" is set in a local folder database of the companion device for each folder/subfolder that is to be synchronized” and col.11 lines 5 – 8; “If decision operation 312 determines that none of the sub folders have an expanded flag set, no further subfolders of the Inbox folder will be synchronized”).
wherein the attribute is stored in association with a respective node in the remote tree data structure (col.10 lines 44 – 46; “determined whether an "expanded flag" associated with the Inbox folder is set. An "expanded flag" is set in a local folder database of the companion device for each folder/subfolder that is to be
synchronized”).
whereby the content item is excluded from being stored on the client device as a result of a future synchronization while the attribute remains in the remote tree data structure and in association with the node corresponding to the content item on the remote tree data structure (col.11 lines 5 – 8; “If decision operation 312 determines that none of the sub folders have an expanded flag set, no further subfolders of the Inbox folder will be synchronized”).
and based on the attribute, denying the update to the remote tree data structure (col.11 lines 5 – 8; “If decision operation 312 determines that none of the sub folders have an expanded flag set, no further subfolders of the Inbox folder will be synchronized”).
Sherman does not specifically disclose detecting a remote change to one of the content items by receiving an update to the remote tree data structure from the content management system.
However, Shah et al (US 8,301,994 B1) in an analogous art discloses,
detecting a remote change to one of the content items by receiving an update to the remote tree data structure from the content management system (col.6 lines 26 – 30; “The first leaf node is checked, in step 407, to determine if it has been marked for synchronization. If so, each of the remaining tree structures is traversed, in step 408, to determine if a corresponding leaf 30 node to the first leaf node is found in the same file hierarchy”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah into selective synchronization of the system of Sherman to allow synchronization of each level of data structure by preventing user from traversing the whole data structure, thereby reducing resources for processing the synchronization process.
Although, Sherman discloses setting of flag for preventing synchronization of folders which can be interpreted as disabling of synchronization setting, however to explicitly explain indicates a synchronization setting disabling local storage.
Robbin et al (AU 2011253918 B2) in an analogous art discloses,
indicates a synchronization setting disabling local storage of the content item is set (para.[0003C]; “disable synchronization for one or more of the data types and thus render the one or more data types ineligible so that media assets with the one or more data types being disabled are not copied to the client device” and para.[0066]; “the media information includes media attributes of the media assets which can be compared to determine which media assets are to be transferred”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate selective synchronization of media assets of the system of Robin into synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah to prevent synchronization of unnecessary data in the system of Sherman, thereby improve the quality of data maintained in the database.
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and further Robbin et al (AU 2011253918 B2) discloses,
wherein receiving the synchronization setting comprises: deleting a local copy of the content item from the client device (fig.12A #1210; “PRODUCE A LIST OF MEDIA ASSETS TOBE COPIED” and Fig.12A #1212; “DELETE EXTRA MEDIA ASSETS FROM THE MEDIA DEVICE”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate selective synchronization of media assets of the system of Robin into synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah to prevent synchronization of unnecessary data in the system of Sherman, thereby improve the quality of data maintained in the database.
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and further Robbin et al (AU 2011253918 B2) discloses,
wherein receiving the synchronization setting comprises receiving, via a graphical user interface on the client device, user input identifying the synchronization setting (para.[0003C]; “displaying a graphical user interface on display associated with the host computer, the graphical user interface including a selectable enable-disable control; and (ii) excluding from the copying those one or more media assets of a certain data type associated with the at least one selectable enable-disable control when the selectable enable-disable control signal is set to disable”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate selective synchronization of media assets of the system of Robin into synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah to prevent synchronization of unnecessary data in the system of Sherman, thereby improve the quality of data maintained in the database.
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and further Robbin et al (AU 2011253918 B2) discloses,
further comprising presenting, via a graphical user interface, the content items in the file system on the client device and one or more graphical control elements for selecting respective synchronization settings for the content items in the file system on the client device (para.[0003C]; “displaying a graphical user interface on display associated with the host computer, the graphical user interface including a selectable enable-disable control; and (ii) excluding from the copying those one or more media assets of a certain data type associated with the at least one selectable enable-disable control when the selectable enable-disable control signal is set to disable”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate selective synchronization of media assets of the system of Robin into synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah to prevent synchronization of unnecessary data in the system of Sherman, thereby improve the quality of data maintained in the database.
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and further Sherman et al (US 6,636,897 B1) discloses,
further comprising: in response to the remote change, updating a representation of the content item on the remote data structure to reflect the change, the representation of the content item on the remote data structure being based on a server state associated with the content item (col.2 lines 30 – 31; “selectively synchronized between first and second object stores” and Col.7 lines 12 – 14; “synchronized between two or more computing systems, such as e-mail folders of a folder hierarchy or certain documents in a file directory”).
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and further Sherman et al (US 6,636,897 B1) discloses,
further comprising: detecting one or more changes to at least one of the remote data structure or the local data structure; and based on the one or more changes, synchronizing the remote data structure and the local data structure (col.2 lines 30 – 31; “selectively synchronized between first and second object stores” and Col.7 lines 12 – 14; “synchronized between two or more computing systems, such as e-mail folders of a folder hierarchy or certain documents in a file directory”).
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 6 is incorporated and further Robbin et al (AU 2011253918 B2) discloses,
wherein synchronizing the remote data structure and the local data structure comprises: identifying a representation of the content item on the remote data structure; determining that a hidden attribute is associated with representation of the content item in the remote data structure; and based on the hidden attribute, continue excluding the representation of the content item from the local data structure (para.[0003F]; “exclude from the copying those one or more media assets of a certain data type associated with the at least one selectable enable-disable control when the selectable enable-disable control signal is set to disable the copying of the one or more media assets of the certain data type”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate selective synchronization of media assets of the system of Robin into synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah to prevent synchronization of unnecessary data in the system of Sherman, thereby improve the quality of data maintained in the database.
As per claim 8, the rejection of claim 7 is incorporated and further Robbin et al (AU 2011253918 B2) discloses,
wherein the one or more changes represent a move operation at the content management system, the move operation moving a remote copy of the content item from a first path to a second path, and wherein the one or more changes comprise moving the representation of the content item associated with the content item to a different location within the remote data structure, the different location corresponding to the second path (para.[0003D]; “excluding from the copying those
one or more media assets of a certain data type associated with the at least
one selectable enable-disable control when the selectable enable-disable
control signal is set to disable the copying of the one or more media assets of
the certain data type”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate selective synchronization of media assets of the system of Robin into synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah to prevent synchronization of unnecessary data in the system of Sherman, thereby improve the quality of data maintained in the database.
Claims 13 – 15 and 16 – 18 are non-transitory computer readable medium claim corresponding to method claims 1 – 3 and 5 – 7 respectively, and rejected under the same reason set forth in connection to the rejection of claims 1 – 3 and 5 – 7 respectively above.
Claims 19 and 20 are device claim corresponding to method claims 1 and 6 – 7 respectively, and rejected under the same reason set forth in connection to the rejection of claims 1 and 6 – 7 respectively above.
6. Claims 9 - 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sherman et al (US 6,636,897 B1), in view of Shah et al (US 8,301,994 B1), in view of Robbin et al (AU 2011253918 B2), and further in view of Griffin Dorman (GB 2501008 A).
As per claim 9, the rejection of claim 8 is incorporated, Sherman et al (US 6,636,897 B1), Shah et al (US 8,301,994 B1), and Robbin et al (AU 2011253918 B2) does not disclose wherein moving the representation of the content item to the different location comprises storing the representation of the content item at the different location in the remote data structure and retaining the hidden attribute associated with the representation of the content item.
However, Griffin Dorman (GB 2501008 A) in an analogous art discloses,
wherein moving the representation of the content item to the different location comprises storing the representation of the content item at the different location in the remote data structure and retaining the hidden attribute associated with the representation of the content item (para.[0080]; “in response to the received selection, the client devices 102 synchronize (520) content of the first folder associated with the user based on the first synchronization state regardless of a second synchronization state of a second folder in the workspace”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate selective synchronization of folder of the system of Dorman into synchronization of media assets of the system of Robin and synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah to improve synchronization of shared content for enabling user to select folder and sub-folder to be synchronized in the system of Sherman.
.
As per claim 10, the rejection of claim 7 is incorporated and further Griffin Dorman (GB 2501008 A) discloses,
further comprising: detecting an add operation at the client device, the add operation adding a second content item on the client device, the second content item being stored at a path associated with the representation of the content item and a remote copy of the content item (para.[0086]; “user creating the first folder, if a folder that corresponds to the first folder does not exist in the workspace 302, then the client devices 102 request the host server 110 to create the folder that corresponds to the first folder in the workspace 302 for Synchronization”).
determining that synchronization of the second content item at the client device would create a conflict with the remote copy of the content item based on the path comprising a same path for both the second content item and the remote copy of the content item (para.[0086]; “request the host server 110 to create the folder that corresponds to the first folder in the workspace 302 for synchronization. On the other hand, if the folder that corresponds to the first folder already exists in the workspace 302, then the client requests the host server 110 to create a conflicting folder in the workspace 302 for synchronization”).
in response to determining the conflict, modifying the path of the second content item on the client device to yield a second path; and storing the second content item on the client device at the second path (para.[0059]; “in response to the user's selection, the host server 110 can automatically update the synchronization state of the second folder, of which the first folder is a subfolder”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate selective synchronization of folder of the system of Dorman into synchronization of media assets of the system of Robin and synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah to improve synchronization of shared content for enabling user to select folder and sub-folder to be synchronized in the system of Sherman.
As per claim 11, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated and further Griffin Dorman (GB 2501008 A) discloses,
further comprising: adding a representation of the second content item to the local data structure, the representation of the second content item representing the second content item and associating the second content item with the second path (para.[0086]; “user creating the first folder, if a folder that corresponds to the first folder does not exist in the workspace 302, then the client devices 102 request the host server 110 to create the folder that corresponds to the first folder in the workspace 302 for Synchronization”).
and in response to adding the representation of the second content item to the local data structure, synchronizing the local data structure and the remote data structure (para.[0065]; “In response to the received selection, the client can additionally synchronize content of other folders in the workspace 302 with data stored on the client based on their respective synchronization states”).
wherein synchronizing the local data structure and the remote data structure comprises adding a representation of the second content item to the remote data structure corresponding to a remote copy of the second content item (para.[0067]; “if a folder in the workspace 302 is enabled by the user for synchronization, it is to be added locally”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate selective synchronization of folder of the system of Dorman into synchronization of media assets of the system of Robin and synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah to improve synchronization of shared content for enabling user to select folder and sub-folder to be synchronized in the system of Sherman.
As per claim 12, the rejection of claim 11 is incorporated and further Griffin Dorman (GB 2501008 A) discloses,
The method of claim 11, wherein the representation of the second content item on the remote data structure associates the remote copy of the second content item with the second path (para.[0084]; “perform actions suitable to synchronize, in the workspace 302, the content and the directory structure of the first folder”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate selective synchronization of folder of the system of Dorman into synchronization of media assets of the system of Robin and synchronization of hierarchical data structure of the system of Shah to improve synchronization of shared content for enabling user to select folder and sub-folder to be synchronized in the system of Sherman.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUGUSTINE K. OBISESAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2020. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ajay Bhatia can be reached at (571) 272-3906. 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.
/AUGUSTINE K. OBISESAN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2156
1/17/2026