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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8 – 10, 12 – 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DeGrazia (2009/0217177).
Regarding claim 1, DeGrazia discloses a processing method for display screen remote sharing [0001], comprising:
in response to a first operation of a user ([0022]: Of local user computer) to select a display screen area, determining a screen sharing area (Figures 3, 4: Comprising 20, 58) corresponding to the first operation ([0017]: Displayed data identified and selected for sharing), wherein the screen sharing area (Comprising 20, 58) is used to describe an area of a display screen (Comprising 18) and shared by a sending end to a remote terminal (Sharing performed [0026] by local user computer, with remote user computers [0022]), and the screen sharing area (Comprising 20) is a subset of the display screen (Comprising 18) of the sending end ([0022]: Comprising local user computer);
collecting a substream corresponding to the screen sharing area according to the screen sharing area, wherein the substream is a screen sharing stream (Data within the borders of [0029] and associated with the tile [0039]);
sending the substream to the remote terminal ([0020]: Comprising remote computer), so that the remote terminal displays the screen sharing area corresponding to the substream according to the substream (Transmitting of data associated with the tile [0039] reproduces screen image within user’s tile for remote users [0034]).
Regarding claim 8, DeGrazia discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 1. DeGrazia discloses the method wherein after the determining the screen sharing area corresponding to the first operation, the method further comprises: in response to a fourth operation of the user to adjust the screen sharing area, adjusting a size of the screen sharing area [0027].
Regarding claim 9, DeGrazia discloses a processing device for display screen remote sharing [0018], comprising:
a processor, a memory, a computer program stored on the memory and executable by the processor [0024], and a data bus for realizing connection and communication between the processor and the memory [0025], wherein when the computer program is executed by the processor [0024], the processor is configured to implement steps of:
in response to a first operation of a user ([0022]: Of local user computer) to select a display screen area, determining a screen sharing area (Figures 3, 4: Comprising 20, 58) corresponding to the first operation ([0017]: Displayed data identified and selected for sharing), wherein the screen sharing area (Comprising 20, 58) is used to describe an area of a display screen (Comprising 18) and shared by a sending end to a remote terminal (Sharing performed [0026] by local user computer, with remote user computers [0022]), and the screen sharing area (Comprising 20) is a subset of the display screen (Comprising 18) of the sending end ([0022]: Comprising local user computer);
collecting a substream corresponding to the screen sharing area according to the screen sharing area, wherein the substream is a screen sharing stream (Data within the borders of [0029] and associated with the tile [0039]);
sending the substream to the remote terminal ([0020]: Comprising remote computer), so that the remote terminal displays the screen sharing area corresponding to the substream according to the substream (Transmitting of data associated with the tile [0039] reproduces screen image within user’s tile for remote users [0034]).
Regarding claim 10, DeGrazia discloses a non-transitory storage medium for computer readable storage, wherein the storage medium stores one or more programs, and the one or more programs are executable by one or more processors [0024] to implement steps of:
in response to a first operation of a user ([0022]: Of local user computer) to select a display screen area, determining a screen sharing area (Figures 3, 4: Comprising 20, 58) corresponding to the first operation ([0017]: Displayed data identified and selected for sharing), wherein the screen sharing area (Comprising 20, 58) is used to describe an area of a display screen (Comprising 18) and shared by a sending end to a remote terminal (Sharing performed [0026] by local user computer, with remote user computers [0022]), and the screen sharing area (Comprising 20) is a subset of the display screen (Comprising 18) of the sending end ([0022]: Comprising local user computer);
collecting a substream corresponding to the screen sharing area according to the screen sharing area, wherein the substream is a screen sharing stream (Data within the borders of [0029] and associated with the tile [0039]);
sending the substream to the remote terminal ([0020]: Comprising remote computer), so that the remote terminal displays the screen sharing area corresponding to the substream according to the substream (Transmitting of data associated with the tile [0039] reproduces screen image within user’s tile for remote users [0034]).
Regarding claim 12, DeGrazia discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 1. DeGrazia discloses the method wherein: the display screen area is selected as the screen sharing area on the display screen by dragging or clicking a mouse, or the display screen area is selected as the screen sharing area by setting screen coordinates of the display screen ([0027]: Mouse used to perform drag of tile; tile vertices specified with pixel values formatted as Cartesian coordinates).
Regarding claim 13, DeGrazia discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 1. DeGrazia discloses the method wherein the collecting the substream corresponding to the screen sharing area according to the screen sharing area further comprises: collecting the substream corresponding to the screen sharing area based on the screen coordinates of the screen sharing area ([0027]: Tile vertices specified with pixel values formatted as Cartesian coordinates).
Regarding claim 14, DeGrazia discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 13. DeGrazia discloses the method wherein the collecting the substream corresponding to the screen sharing area based on screen coordinates of the screen sharing area further comprises: directly collecting a video stream corresponding to the screen coordinates of the screen sharing area to obtain the substream according to the screen coordinates of the screen sharing area (Coordinates of vertices [0027] defining tile borders circumscribing shared data [0029]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
i. Claims 2 – 4, 7, 11, 17 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeGrazia in view of Chawla et al. (2010/0131868; hereinafter Chawla).
Regarding claim 2, DeGrazia discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 1. DeGrazia discloses the method wherein after the determining the screen sharing area corresponding to the first operation, the method further comprises: in response to a second operation of the user, determining a sharing screen controllable area corresponding to the second operation, wherein the sharing screen controllable area is used to describe an area where the remote terminal is capable of operating (Remote computer users [0022] having access to file whose icon was dragged into workspace [0036] by local computer user [0022]); configuring a preset screen control authority for the sharing screen controllable area, wherein the preset screen control authority is used to describe an authority of the sending end to allow the remote terminal ([0044]: Example of, in response to a request to access a communication channel, subsequently authorizing access of requesting user).
DeGrazia does not explicitly disclose the method wherein the second operation of the user is to select a sub-area of the screen sharing area the remote terminal is capable of operating in the screen sharing area the authority of the sending end to allow the remote terminal to operate in the sharing screen controllable area.
In the same field of endeavor, Chawla discloses collaborative computing sessions [0001] wherein the second operation of the user is to select a sub-area of the screen sharing area ([0080]: Areas whose transparency is modified) the remote terminal is capable of operating in the screen sharing area in response to the authority of the sending end to allow the remote terminal to operate in the sharing screen controllable area ([0077]: Control within predefined areas restricted). Sharing may be limited [0015] to exclude that which is unnecessary or undesirable [0003].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the method of DeGrazia to be modified wherein the second operation of the user is to select a sub-area of the screen sharing area the remote terminal is capable of operating in the screen sharing area the authority of the sending end to allow the remote terminal to operate in the sharing screen controllable area, in view of the teaching of Chawla, to prevent undesirable or unnecessary sharing.
Regarding claim 3, DeGrazia in view of Chawla discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 2. DeGrazia discloses the method wherein after the determining the sharing screen controllable area corresponding to the second operation, the method further comprises: marking the sharing screen controllable area by using a preset marking manner (Shading [0026] or shadowing area of tile and/or handle furnish easy identification on display screen [0027]).
Regarding claim 4, DeGrazia in view of Chawla discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 2. DeGrazia discloses the method wherein after the configuring the preset screen control authority for the sharing screen controllable area, the method further comprises: granting a screen control authority of the sharing screen controllable area to the remote terminal ([0044]: User authorization following password entry), and mapping the sharing screen controllable area to the remote terminal ([0034]: Local user tile 20 defines shared tile 60a in workspace 22).
Regarding claim 7, DeGrazia in view of Chawla discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 2. DeGrazia discloses the method wherein after the determining the sharing screen controllable area corresponding to the second operation, the method further comprises: in response to a third operation of the user to adjust the sharing screen controllable area, adjusting a size of the sharing screen controllable area [0027].
Regarding claim 11, DeGrazia in view of Chawla discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 3. DeGrazia discloses the method wherein after the configuring the preset screen control authority for the sharing screen controllable area, the method further comprises: granting a screen control authority of the sharing screen controllable area to the remote terminal ([0044]: User authorization following password entry), and mapping the sharing screen controllable area to the remote terminal ([0034]: Local user tile 20 defines shared tile 60a in workspace 22).
Device claims 17 – 19 are rejected as reciting limitations similar to those recited in method claims 2 – 4, respectively.
ii. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeGrazia in view of Deenadayal et al. (2018/0336373; hereinafter Deenadayal; cited in Applicant’s 30 July 2025 IDS).
Regarding claim 15, DeGrazia discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 13.
DeGrazia does not explicitly disclose the method wherein the collecting the substream corresponding to the screen sharing area based on screen coordinates of the screen sharing area further comprises: collecting a video stream of the display screen in advance, and filtering out a video stream of the screen sharing area from the video stream of the display screen according to positions of the screen coordinates of the screen sharing area in all the screen coordinates of the display screen to obtain the substream.
In the same field of endeavor, Deenadayal discloses selective screen sharing [0012] wherein the collecting the substream corresponding to the screen sharing area based on screen coordinates of the screen sharing area further comprises: collecting a video stream of the display screen in advance, and filtering out a video stream of the screen sharing area from the video stream of the display screen according to positions of the screen coordinates of the screen sharing area in all the screen coordinates of the display screen to obtain the substream (Figure 2: Comprising 218; [0051]). This is among measures implemented to prevent the inadvertent sharing of sensitive data [0003].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the method of DeGrazia to be modified wherein the collecting the substream corresponding to the screen sharing area based on screen coordinates of the screen sharing area further comprises: collecting a video stream of the display screen in advance, and filtering out a video stream of the screen sharing area from the video stream of the display screen according to positions of the screen coordinates of the screen sharing area in all the screen coordinates of the display screen to obtain the substream, in view of the teaching of Deenadayal, to prevent the inadvertent sharing of sensitive data.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6, 16, 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 5, DeGrazia in view of Chawla discloses the processing method for display screen remote sharing according to claim 4.
The cited prior art fails to singularly or collectively disclose the method wherein after the mapping the sharing screen controllable area to the remote terminal, the method further comprises: receiving a remote control instruction from the remote terminal, wherein the remote control instruction is used to describe an instruction for the remote terminal to manipulate a sharing screen controllable area mapped on the remote terminal; converting the remote control instruction into a local simulation control instruction, and performing the simulation control instruction to operate the sharing screen controllable area of the sending end.
Thus, claim 5 is objected to.
Claims 6, 16 depend from and inherit limitations similar to those recited in claim 5.
Thus, claims 6, 16 are objected to.
Regarding claim 20, DeGrazia in view of Chawla discloses the processing device for display screen remote sharing according to claim 191.
The cited prior art fails to singularly or collectively disclose the method wherein the processor is further configured to implement steps of: receiving a remote control instruction from the remote terminal, wherein the remote control instruction is used to describe an instruction for the remote terminal to manipulate a sharing screen controllable area mapped on the remote terminal; converting the remote control instruction into a local simulation control instruction, and performing the simulation control instruction to operate the sharing screen controllable area of the sending end2.
Thus, claim 20 is objected to.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure follows:
Baek et al. (2004/0024890) provides relevant teaching of secure application sharing with remote computers [0003].
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aaron Midkiff whose telephone number is (571)270-5875. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at (571)272-7764. 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.
/AARON MIDKIFF/
Examiner, Art Unit 2621
/AMR A AWAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2621
1 See the rejection of method claim 4, whose limitations are similarly recited in device claim 19.
2 Analogously recited limitation(s) of method claim 5.
Prosecution Insights