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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2024-07-09 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries 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 1, 11-16, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, Sheng. (US Patent 10528012 hereinafter known as Wang) in view of Deng, Meng et al. (CN118176751A hereinafter known as Deng).
Consider claim 1. Wang teaches A method for message delivery, the method comprising:
identifying a target electronic device in a vicinity of an electronic device, wherein the target electronic device is in an available state for messaging; (¶009 “receiving, by a transfer device, a communication message and an identifier of a target device that are sent by a wearable device; determining, by the transfer device, the target device according to the identifier; and forwarding, by the transfer device, the communication message to the target device.”), (see Wang, ¶088).
obtaining a message for a user of the target electronic device at the electronic device (¶088 “If the wearable device does not receive the input reply message within the third time period after receiving the communication message, it indicates that at this time the user may not wear a wearable device, or the user may be busy, and it is inconvenient to operate the wearable device. To avoid that a user of a target device waits for a reply message, the wearable device may obtain a predetermined reply message, and send the predetermined reply message to the transfer device, so that the transfer device forwards the predetermined reply message to the target device, and the target device may determine, according to the predetermined reply message, that the user of the transfer device is in a busy status. The predetermined reply message may be “the user is busy, please do not disturb” or the like.”);
sending the message for the user of the target electronic device from the electronic device to the target electronic device, the message being relayed to a user device associated with the user via the target electronic device. (Wang ¶006 “wearable device, an incoming communication message sent by a transfer device, where the incoming communication message is sent to the transfer device by a first target device, and is forwarded to the wearable device by the transfer device when the transfer device meets a predetermined condition”;
PNG
media_image1.png
252
422
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Also see Wang ¶022 “FIG. 1 shows a schematic structural diagram of a communications system according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. The communications system includes a wearable device 120, a transfer device 140, and a target device 160.”)
However, Wang does not expressly teach identification in a vicinity of an electronic device.
Deng does teach identification in a vicinity of an electronic device (p. 9, ¶008 “After the Relay UE obtains the Relay UE information list, the Relay UE sends the Relay UE information list to other UEs in a broadcast mode, and other UEs in a communication range with the Relay UE receive the Relay UE information list sent by the Relay UE.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wang’s message delivery system via smartphone or wearable devices, to incorporate Deng’s nearby relay user equipment detection, discovery, and communication techniques in order to identify target electronic devices within a communication range, and maintain communication availability information during message delivery. Incorporating Deng’s teachings into Wang’s would have predictably improved the ability to, while utilizing known relay communication techniques for their intended purpose.
Consider claim 11 as applied to claim 1. Wang teaches (¶052 “detecting, by the transfer device, whether the transfer device is currently in a lock screen status, and detecting whether a control switch in the transfer device is in a predetermined status, where the predetermined status is used for indicating that the transfer device is allowed to send the communication message to the wearable device”)
Wang fails to teach wherein the available state includes the target electronic device being unattended by the user of the target electronic device.
However, Deng teaches wherein the available state includes the target electronic device being unattended by the user of the target electronic device (p.6, ¶06 “path of the first UE serving as the next-hop UE is modified from the on-line to off-line. In this way, the communication status of the target UE can be updated in real time.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang into the invention of Deng to determine a state of availability of devices to include those which could be considered unattended by the user.
Regarding claims 12 and 18. Wang in view of Deng discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Claims 12 and 18 recite corresponding computer readable medium and system embodiments of claim 1, therefore, the rejection of claim 1 applies as well to the limitations of claims 12 and 18.
Regarding claim 13 and as applied to claim 12. Wang in view of Deng discloses all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above, therefore, the rejection of claim 12 applies as well to the limitations of claim 13.
Regarding claim 14 and as applied to claim 12. Wang in view of Deng discloses all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above, therefore, the rejection of claim 12 applies as well to the limitations of claim 14.
Consider claim 15 and as applied to claim 12. Wang teaches the user device is a smartphone or wearable. (¶023 “The wearable device 120 may be a smart band, a smart watch, smart glasses, a smart belt, a smart ring, or the like”). As well as (¶026 “The target device 160 may be a mobile phone, a tablet computer, an e-book reader, an MP3 player, an MP4 player, a laptop computer, a desktop computer, or the like.”)
Wang does not explicably teach the device to be a smartphone.
However, Deng’s invention teaches the user device is a smartphone; (p5, ¶01) which was stated to require additional development of device-to-device communications.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang into the invention of Deng to specify the user device to be a smartphone.
Regarding claim 16 and as applied to claim 12. Wang in view of Deng discloses all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above, therefore, the rejection of claim 16 applies as well to the limitations of claim 12.
Regarding claim 19 and as applied to claim 18. Wang in view of Deng discloses all the limitations of claim 18 as discussed above, therefore, the rejection of claim 19 applies as well to the limitations of claim 18.
Claims 2-10, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Deng as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hymes; C M. (US PGPUB 20060256959A1) hereinafter known as Hymes.
Consider claim 2. Wang and Deng disclose the claimed invention, but fails to teach where identifying the target electronic device in the vicinity of the electronic device comprises:
detecting one or more electronic devices in the vicinity of the electronic device; and
obtaining a selection of the target electronic device, the target electronic device selected from the one or more electronic devices.
Hymes does teach detecting one or more electronic devices in the vicinity of the electronic device; and
obtaining a selection of the target electronic device, the target electronic device selected from the one or more electronic devices. (¶0378 “The camera generates an image of potential targets from the user's point of view. She views either a still image or a live video image on her device's display.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang and Deng into the invention of Hymes in order for an electronic device to detect and obtain a selection of targeted devices within the same vicinity.
Consider claim 3 and as applied to claim 2. Wang and Deng disclose the claimed invention, but fails to teach scanning the vicinity using a camera of the electronic device, the one or more electronic devices detected in the vicinity using the camera.
Hymes does teach scanning the vicinity using a camera of the electronic device, the one or more electronic devices detected in the vicinity using the camera. (¶0378 “In order to use this method, the user points the camera on her device at the person she would like to communicate with.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang and Deng into the invention of Hymes to scan devices using an electronic device’s camera to detect other devices in the vicinity.
Consider claim 4 and as applied to claim 2. Wang and Deng disclose the claimed invention, but fails to teach transmitting wireless communication signals using a communication system of the electronic device, the one or more electronic devices detected in the vicinity using one or more communications responding to the wireless communication signals.
Hymes does teach transmitting wireless communication signals using a communication system of the electronic device, the one or more electronic devices detected in the vicinity using one or more communications responding to the wireless communication signals. (¶0157 “Devices in the same vicinity can communicate with each other via direct device-to-device transmission. Devices that separate and become out of range of direct contact can communicate via a wireless connection to the internet, mobile telephone network, or some other network.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang and Deng into the invention of Hymes to use wireless communication signals, detecting devices in a vicinity while using one or more communications to respond to the wireless signals.
Consider claim 5 as applied to claim 2. Wang discloses the claim invention, but fails to teach detecting one or more discoverable devices on a wireless network using a communication system of the electronic device, the one or more electronic devices detected from the one or more discoverable devices.
Deng does teach detecting one or more discoverable devices on a wireless network using a communication system of the electronic device, the one or more electronic devices detected from the one or more discoverable devices. (p.33 ¶033 “other UE maintains the relay UE information list and the direct communication UE information list to detect the communication state of the target UE in real time.”)
Additionally, Hymes teaches (¶0641 “the user to specify one target out of many possible targets. Using the terminal, the user must (a) specify one person/vehicle out of many”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang and Deng into the invention of Hymes to detect discoverable devices on a wireless network whereas devices are detected from discoverable devices.
Consider claim 6 and as applied to claim 2. Wang and Deng disclose the claimed invention, but fails to teach wherein the communication system includes at least one antenna of the electronic device, the at least one antenna including a UWB antenna and transmitting the wireless communication signals comprises transmitting ultra-wideband (UWB) positioning signals using the UWB antenna.
Hymes teaches wherein the communication system includes at least one antenna of the electronic device, the at least one antenna including a UWB antenna and transmitting the wireless communication signals comprises transmitting ultra-wideband (UWB) positioning signals using the UWB antenna. (¶0160 “These modes of wireless transmission could include, for example, WiFi (802.11), infrared (IR), Ultra Wide Band (UWB), or any other suitable wireless technology in current use or yet to be invented.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang and Deng into the invention of Hymes to include WiFi, UWB, and other suitable wireless technologies.
Consider claim 7 and as applied to claim 2, Wang and Hymes discloses the claimed invention, but fails to teach wherein the selection of the target electronic device is obtained based on detection of a device messaging condition corresponding to the target electronic device.
Deng does teach wherein the selection of the target electronic device is obtained based on detection of a device messaging condition corresponding to the target electronic device. (p.33 ¶006 ”After receiving the relay UE information list, other UE stores the relay UE information list locally, and other UE maintains the relay UE information list and the direct communication UE information list to detect the communication state of the target UE in real time.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang and Hymes into the invention of Deng to detect and identify nearby target devices, based on varying messaging conditions corresponding to target devices.
Consider claim 8 and as applied to claim 2. Wang wherein a representation of each of the one or more electronic devices is presented using a display, the representation of each of the one or more electronic devices including a corresponding availability state for messaging.
However, Deng does teach the representation of each of the one or more electronic devices including a corresponding availability state for messaging. (p.6, ¶006 “communication status of the second UE”).
Additionally, Hymes teaches wherein a representation of each of the one or more electronic devices is presented using a display (¶0378 “She views either a still image or a live video image on her device's display. Superimposed over the image of each person in the image”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang into the inventions of Deng and Hymes to present other electronic devices on screen, while showing an available state for messaging.
Consider claim 9 and as applied to claim 1. Wang and Deng disclose the claimed invention, but fails to teach receiving a notification from the target electronic device in response to at least one of receipt of a request for message delivery from the electronic device or receipt of the message from the electronic device.
Hymes does teach receiving a notification from the target electronic device in response to at least one of receipt of a request for message delivery from the electronic device or receipt of the message from the electronic device. (¶0233 “When the intended receiver's device receives the message, the receiving device sends a confirmation signal to the sending device which assures the user that the message has been successfully delivered.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang and Deng into the invention of Hymes to receive a notification from the target device, in response to the receipt of a message delivery request.
Consider claim 10 and as applied to claim 1. Wang discloses the claimed invention, but fails to teach wherein the target electronic device is unknown to the electronic device.
However, Deng does teach wherein the target electronic device is unknown to the electronic device. (p.3, ¶001) “each UE can know the communication status of the target UE and the path information of the communication path reaching the target UE in real time”).
Additionally, Hymes teaches (¶0232 “One of the purposes of embodiments of this system is to allow users to communicate electronically with other users in their immediate environment even though no contact information is known about those individuals.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang into the inventions of Deng and Hymes to function with target electronic devices which are unknown to the electronic device.
Consider claim 17 and as applied to claim 12. Wang discloses the claimed invention, but fails to teach wherein the target electronic device is unknown to the electronic device.
However, Deng does teach wherein the target electronic device is unknown to the electronic device. (p.3, ¶001) “each UE can know the communication status of the target UE and the path information of the communication path reaching the target UE in real time”).
Additionally, Hymes teaches (¶0232 “One of the purposes of embodiments of this system is to allow users to communicate electronically with other users in their immediate environment even though no contact information is known about those individuals.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang into the inventions of Deng and Hymes to function with target electronic devices which are unknown to the electronic device.
Consider claim 20 and as applied to claim 18. Wang discloses the claimed invention, but fails to teach wherein the target electronic device is unknown to the electronic device.
However, Deng does teach wherein the target electronic device is unknown to the electronic device. (p.3, ¶001) “each UE can know the communication status of the target UE and the path information of the communication path reaching the target UE in real time”).
Additionally, Hymes teaches (¶0232 “One of the purposes of embodiments of this system is to allow users to communicate electronically with other users in their immediate environment even though no contact information is known about those individuals.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Wang into the inventions of Deng and Hymes to function with target electronic devices which are unknown to the electronic device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J LUBBERS whose telephone number is (571)270-5520. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am to 5pm ET.
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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 571 270 5371. 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.
/ANDREW J LUBBERS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2644
/KATHY W WANG-HURST/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights