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 .
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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 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.
4. Claims 1-3, 12, 13, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al KR 20170035436 (cited by applicant) in view of or Kikkawa et al US 8625489 B2
5. Consider claims 1 and 19. Hwang et al teaches an electronic device (100) and computer readable media comprising: memory (130) storing one or more computer programs; and one or more processors (200) communicatively coupled to the memory (130), wherein the one or more computer programs include computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: search for external electronic devices located near the electronic device (…the connection management module 210 may control the communication interface 170 to scan external electronic devices (e.g., the first external electronic device 102, the second external electronic device 103, etc.) according to specified conditions….), receive user inputs for selecting external electronic devices to which data of the electronic device is to be transmitted from among found external electronic devices (…corresponding to external electronic devices automatically selected according to a user selection or a specified condition on a shared object setting screen….). Hwang et al fails to teach adjusting a data transmission order corresponding to an order in which the selected external electronic devices are selected by the user inputs, based on at least one of communication connection characteristics of the selected external electronic devices and transmit the data to the selected external electronic devices according to the adjusted data transmission order. However, from the same field of endeavor, Kikkawa et al teaches such (see claim 1). It would have been obvious, before the effective date, to adjust the transmission order as taught by Kikkawa et al in Hwang et al in order to more efficiently process the content when user’s connections are not available.
6. Method claim 11 is rejected for the same reasons as device claim 1 since the recited elements would perform the claimed steps.
7. Regarding claims 2, 12 and 20. Kikkawa et al teaches adjusting the data transmission order of external electronic devices using a same wireless connection method among the selected external electronic devices to be in order of adjacency (para 0076…the communication control unit 216 investigates, with respect to the content transmission apparatus 10 having content data whose turn is near in the output list, whether acquisition of content data is possible or not, according to an instruction from the playback control unit 252…)
8. Regarding claims 3 and 13. Kikkawa et al teaches, change a data transmission order of a third external electronic device that uses a same type of wireless connection method as a first wireless connection method, which is used for communication between the electronic device and a first external electronic device currently receiving data from the electronic device, to be earlier than a data transmission order of a second external electronic device that uses a second wireless connection method, which is different from the first wireless connection method (para 77…the position, in the output order, of content data may be moved such that the position is moved one position lower or is moved to the end of the output list…).
9. Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al KR 20170035436 (cited by applicant) in view of Kikkawa et al US 8625489 B2 further in view of Yuichi JP 2014053820 A (see Google translation JP2014053820A - System and electronic apparatus - Google Patents)
10. Regarding claims 5 and 14. The combination of Hwang et al and Kikkawa et al fail to teach changing the data transmission order of the selected external electronic devices, based on the account information, to be in an order of external electronic devices of a same account as an account of the user of the electronic device, external electronic devices of an account of a friend of the user, and external electronic devices of other accounts. However, such sharing of data including same accounts or friends on the account is well known in the art as taught by Yuichi. It would have been obvious, before the effective date, to rearrange the order of transmission based on account information in order to make it more user friendly.
11. Claims 6, 8, 9, 10, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al KR 20170035436 (cited by applicant) in view of Kikkawa et al US 8625489 B2 further in view of Shaw et al WO 2014200730 A1.
12. Regarding claims 8 and 18. The combination of Hwang in view of Kikkawa et al fails to teach changing the data transmission order of the selected external electronic devices in order of high data transmission frequency. However, Shaw et al teaches (0135) prioritizing most frequently contacted user for sharing in his content delivery system. It would have been obvious, before the effective date, to use the most frequently contacted user to rearrange or reset the transmission order to maximize the speed of device sharing.
13. Regarding claims 6 and 16. Shaw et al teaches (0195) change the data transmission order of the selected external electronic devices to be in order of the distance.
14. Regarding claim 9. Shaw et al (fig 5G) teaches wherein the electronic device further comprises: a display module, and wherein the one or more computer programs further include computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: display the found external electronic devices through the display module so that the user selects an external electronic device, and display a communication status (on line/off line) between the electronic device and the selected external electronic devices through the display module.
15. Regarding claim 10. Shaw et al teaches (fig 5O) wherein the one or more computer programs further include computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: display the adjusted data transmission order (when selected) of the selected external electronic devices through the display module.
16. Claims 4, 7, 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al KR 20170035436 (cited by applicant) in view of Kikkawa et al US 8625489 B2 further in view of Ritzenberger JP 2016527635 A (see google translation JP2016527635A - Prioritizing content item synchronization based on sharing - Google Patents)
17. Regarding claims 4 and 15. The combination of Hwang et al and Kikkawa et al fail to teach wherein the adjusting of the data transmission order is performed when a size of data to be transmitted to the selected external electronic devices is less than a set size. However, such is known in the art to prioritize data sharing based on size (…the prioritization module 205 may be configured to sub-prioritize shared content items that are queued based on the size of the content item. For example, shared content items may be prioritized to be uploaded to the content management system from the smallest content item to the largest content item….) as taught by Ritzenberger. It would have been obvious, before the effective date, to adjust the transmission order based on size of the content in order to save memory space.
18. Regarding claims 7 and 17. Ritzenberger teaches wherein the communication connection characteristics comprise: a time elapsed since a last data transmission to the selected external electronic devices, and wherein the one or more computer programs further include computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: change the data transmission order of the selected external electronic devices in order of the elapsed time (…Shared content items may be prioritized based on one or more other factors such as content item size, content item type, current location, network connection, current time and content item source….) Note, current time reads on elapsed time since its elapsed from the start of the sharing process.
19. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Choi et al US 2011/0283334 A1 an electronic device includes a wireless communication unit wirelessly communicating with any of a plurality of external devices which each include a display, a display displaying content including specific content, an input unit receiving an input for selecting the specific content, and a controller. The controller searches for an external device that is available for communication with the electronic device, establishes communication via the wireless communication unit with a selected first external device, which is one of the plurality of external devices identified as a result of the search for an external device, receives content specification information from the first external device to determine the first external device's capability to display the specific content, and causes displaying of the specific content on the display of the first external device upon determining that the first external device is capable of displaying the specific content based on the content specification information.
Shimizu US 2019/0222875 A An information processing device according to the application concerned includes a control unit that generates a plurality of sets of configuration information, each of which contains sets of location information from a plurality of sets of partitioned content and a delivery server 30 performs an operation for changing the transmission order of the sets of location information (S209).
20. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS A KUNTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7499. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th from 530am to 330pm and Fri from 530am to 10am.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew D Anderson, can be reached at telephone number 5712724177. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/CURTIS A KUNTZ/Primary examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights