DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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.
Claims 1-6, 14-16, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lu (US Patent Publication No. 2023/0385008).
With reference to claims 1, 14, and 15, Lu discloses an electronic device, a non-transitory storage medium comprising computer-executable instructions, wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by a computer processor, cause the computer processor to perform a method for screen projection (see paragraphs 35, 322; Figs. 5A-C), comprising:
detecting (S001) a current network environment of a screen projection-associated device, in a process of screen projection in a first screen projection mode (first wireless projection mode) (see paragraphs 61-62, 70; Figs. 1A, 2, 5A);
switching (S101, 102; Fig. 5B) from the first screen projection mode to a second screen projection mode (online projection mode) (see paragraph 70, 75) in response to detecting that a higher priority of the second screen projection mode (high video performance, and low real-time performance) compared to a lower priority of the first screen projection mode (low video performance, and high real-time performance) meets a screen projection switching condition (based on the projected application) for the current network environment (300) (see paragraphs 73-75) meets a screen projection switching condition (in teaching that the mobile device may automatically or with a trigger switch from wireless projection mode to online projection mode; see paragraphs 65-67, 75-76, 184-185; Figs. 1B, 2); and
performing, based on the higher priority of the second screen projection mode compared to the lower priority of the first screen projection mode meeting the screen projection switching condition, screen projection in the second screen projection mode (see paragraphs 75-76, 197; Fig. 5B).
With reference to claim 2, Lu discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein determining the priority of the second screen projection mode is higher than a priority of the first screen projection mode is based on one or more of a screen projection stability of the second screen projection mode is higher than a screen projection stability of the first screen projection mode, a screen projection cost of the second screen projection mode is lower than a screen projection cost of the first screen projection mode, a screen projection quality of the second screen projection mode is higher than a screen projection quality of the first screen projection mode, or a screen projection speed of the screen projection mode is faster than a screen projection speed of the first screen projection mode (in teaching improved projection efficiency and ensured image quality, therefore providing optimal projection experience at reduced cost; see paragraphs 15, 37).
With reference to claim 3, Lu discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the screen projection switching condition further comprises: the current network environment changing to a network environment that does not support the first screen projection mode (see paragraphs 24, 27, 144, 170).
With reference to claims 4 and 16, Lu discloses the method and electronic device and method of claim 1 or 14, and further discloses wherein the second screen projection mode is a local area network screen projection mode (see paragraphs 65-66; Figs. 1-2); and the screen projection-associated device comprises a screen projection sending terminal (100) and a screen projection receiving terminal (200) (see paragraphs 68, 72-73), and the screen projection switching condition further comprises: the screen projection sending terminal and the screen projection receiving terminal being located within a same local area network (see paragraphs 72-73; Figs. 1-2).
With reference to claim 5, Lu discloses the method of claim 4, and further discloses wherein detecting the current network environment of the screen projection-associated device comprises: searching for the screen projection-associated device based on the local area network (see paragraphs 66-68; Figs. 1-2); and in the case that every screen projection-associated device within the same local area network has been searched for, determining that the current network environment meets a screen projection switching condition for a local area network screen projection mode (see paragraphs 68, 183-187; Figs. 5).
With reference to claim 6, Lu discloses the method of claim 5, and further discloses wherein searching for the screen projection-associated device based on the local area network comprises: sending a search request based on a current local area network (see paragraphs 65-66, 155-156); and receiving device information fed back by a device within the current local area network, and verifying, based on the received device information, whether the device within the current local area network is a screen projection-associated device (see paragraphs 157-158, 161-162; Figs. 6C).
With reference to claim 22, Lu discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the higher priority associated with the second screen projection mode and the lower priority associated with the first screen projection mode are both set by a user associated with the screen projection-associated device (see paragraphs 29, 152).
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.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hashimoto et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2012/0019435; hereinafter Hashimoto).
With reference to claim 7, Lu discloses the method of claim 6, and while disclosing wherein the device information comprises a device identifier (605c, d) and a screen projection meeting identifier (in teaching other forms of identifiers; see paragraphs 161-162; Fig. 6C); and wherein verifying, based on the received device information, whether the device within the current local area network is the screen projection-associated device (see paragraphs 65-66, 155-156), there fails to be disclosure of comparing a meeting identifier as recited.
Hashimoto discloses a wireless network system operable to exchange information between an information terminal apparatus (100) and an information display apparatus (200/400) (see abstract; paragraphs 21, 33; Figs. 1-2) wherein the system capable of: comparing the screen projection meeting identifier in the device information with a screen projection meeting identifier of current device (see S32-236; paragraphs 33, 37-40; Fig. 3), and matching the device identifier in the device information with a device identifier of a screen projection-associated device in the first screen projection mode (see S32-236; paragraphs 33, 37-40, 91; Fig. 3); and determining that the device within the current local area network is a screen projection-associated device, in response to determining that the screen projection meeting identifier in the device information is the same as the screen projection meeting identifier of the current device, and that the device identifier in the device information matches successfully with the device identifier of the screen projection-associated device in the first screen projection mode (see paragraphs 40-44, 91; Fig. 3).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to allow comparing the device identifier of device information similar to that which is taught by Hashimoto to be carried out in a system similar to that which is taught by Lu to thereby assure proper connection to the identified device (see Hashimoto; paragraph 15-16).
With reference to claim 8, Lu discloses the method of claim 5, and further discloses wherein the method further comprises, in the case that every screen projection-associated device within the same local area network has been searched (see paragraphs 66-68; Figs. 1-2) for: connecting the screen projection-associated device to the local area network (see paragraphs 68, 183-187).
While disclosing connection to the local area network, Lu fails to teach determining a failed connection as recited.
Hashimoto discloses an information terminal apparatus (100) and an information display apparatus (200) connected through a LAN (see paragraph 31); and determining that the current network environment does not meet the screen projection condition for the local area network screen projection mode in the case of a failed connection of any screen projection-associated device (see paragraphs 59, 61-63; Fig. 5).
Claims 9-12, 17-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2021/0397390; hereinafter Li).
With reference to claim 9, Lu discloses the method of claim 4, and while teaching switching from the first screen mode to a second screen mode as explained, there fails to be disclosure of a cloud screen projection mode as recited.
Li discloses a method to allow mobile device to share data with nearby devices using wireless communications technology (see abstract; paragraph 140-141), wherein the first screen projection mode is a cloud screen projection mode (in teaching cloud sharing (237); see paragraphs 140-141, 168, 261, 284; Figs. 1A, 2A); and wherein switching from the first screen projection mode to the second screen projection mode comprises: leaving a screen projection room by cloud screen projection (in teaching nearby device option of cloud devices; paragraph 392, 396-397, 400-401), and sending a local area network screen projection instruction to the screen projection-associated device, such that the screen projection-associated device receives the local area network screen projection instruction and leaves the screen projection room by the cloud screen projection (see paragraphs 424-425; Figs. 7).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to allow the usage of a first and second projection modes similar to that which is taught by Li to be carried out in a system similar to that which is taught by Lu to thereby provide a process of sharing with multiple types of communication means using the best available mode of communication (see Li; paragraph 22).
With reference to claims 10, 18, 21, Lu discloses the method and electronic device of claim 1, 14, or 15, and while teaching a first and second screen projection mode, fails to disclose a cloud screen projection mode as recited.
Li further discloses wherein the first screen projection mode is a local area network screen projection mode, and the second screen projection mode is a cloud screen projection mode; and wherein a screen projection switching condition for the cloud screen projection mode comprises: a screen projection-associated device disconnecting from the local area network and supporting Internet access (see paragraphs 22, 246, 677; Figs. 7, 20-21).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to allow the usage of a first and second projection modes similar to that which is taught by Li to be carried out in a system similar to that which is taught by Lu to thereby provide a process of sharing with multiple types of communication means using the best available mode of communication (see Li; paragraph 22).
With reference to claim 11 Lu discloses the method of claim 10, and while teaching a first and second screen projection mode, fails to disclose a cloud screen projection mode as recited
Li further disclose wherein the screen projection-associated device pre-stores a screen projection meeting identifier of the cloud screen projection mode; and wherein the second screen projection mode is determined by: joining a screen projection meeting room in the cloud screen projection mode based on the screen projection meeting identifier (see paragraphs 772-774).
With reference to claim 12, Lu discloses the method of claim 11, and while teaching a first and second screen projection mode, fails to disclose a cloud screen projection mode as recited.
wherein the screen projection meeting identifier is determined by: sending, by any device accessing screen projection, a meeting application to a cloud meeting server, and receiving, by the any device accessing screen projection, a screen projection meeting identifier fed back by the cloud meeting server (see paragraphs 772-774); and displaying, by the any device accessing screen projection, the screen projection meeting identifier, or sending, by the any device accessing screen projection and to other device accessing the screen projection, the screen projection meeting identifier (see paragraphs 326-328; Figs. 4C).
With reference to claims 17 and 19, Lu discloses the electronic device and non-transitory storage medium of claim 14 or 15, and while teaching a first and second screen projection mode, fails to disclose a cloud screen projection mode as recited.
Lu further discloses wherein the first screen projection mode is a cloud screen projection mode; and wherein switching from the first screen projection mode to the second screen projection mode comprises: leaving a screen projection room by cloud screen projection and sending a local area network screen projection instruction to the screen projection-associated device, such that the screen projection-associated device receives the local area network screen projection instruction and leaves the screen projection room by the cloud screen projection (see paragraphs 22, 246, 677; Figs. 7, 20-21).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to allow the usage of a first and second projection modes similar to that which is taught by Lu to be carried out in a system similar to that which is taught by Lu to thereby provide a process of sharing with multiple types of communication means using the best available mode of communication (see Li; paragraph 22).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With respects to claims 1-2 and 14-15, the applicant argues that Lu fails to teach switching from a first screen projection mode to a second screen projection mode in response to detecting that the current network environment meets a screen projection switching condition and performing screen projection in the second screen projection mode; wherein the screen projection switching condition is based on a priority of the second screen projection mode supported by the current network environment being higher than a priority of the first screen projection mode. The applicant argues that Lu discloses a first application, that has certain requirements, may be ran in the foreground of the mobile device, and a second application that may be brought to the foreground having different requirements than that of the first application, wherein the mobile device may determine that a second wireless projection mode is better suited to the second application and a switch from the first wireless projection mode to the second projection mode is performed. Therefore, the mobile device runs a first application performs wireless projection in a first wireless projection mode when it is detected that the first application is a first-type application, and automatically switching the first wireless projection mode to a second projection mode and performing wireless projection in the second projection mode (see applicant’s arguments’; page 10). The applicant further states that the claimed invention is different because the switching occurs based on meeting the screen projection switching condition. The examiner disagrees. The priority of Lu is established by the requirements of the application being projected in the mode best suited for the data of the application. If the current application requires low latency or high visual output, the system will establish the priority of which projection mode the mobile device will operate based on the requirements of the application. Therefore if the current application is a video application, the second screen projection mode will have the higher priority. The applicant also states that there is no recitation of switching from a first application to a second application, and that the detection is made based on the priority of the projection modes in the current network. Lu teaches that the projection modes are switched based on which projection mode has the best display quality for the application being projected. Therefore if the first projection mode has the best quality for the first application than the first projection mode has the higher priority, if the second projection mode has the best quality for the first application than the second projection mode has the higher priority. Arguments regarding claims 3-21 refer back to the arguments of the independent claims. For these reasons the examiner finds that Lu discloses the invention as recited.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
YI et al (US2022/0147228) discloses an electronic device sends a first window to a large-screen device to enable display of a first user interface window via a wireless communication module (see abstract, paragraphs 90-91, 177-236; Figs. 1-6. 15).
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 ALECIA DIANE ENGLISH whose telephone number is (571)270-1595. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 7:00am-3:00am.
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, William Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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.
/ADE/Examiner, Art Unit 2625
/WILLIAM BODDIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Prosecution Insights