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 .
Claim Status
This office action is in response to the communication(s) filed on 09/24/2024.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are currently presenting for examination.
Claim(s) 1 and 15 is/are independent claim(s).
Claim(s) 1-4, 10, and 12-18 is/are rejected.
Claim(s) 5-9, and 19 is/are objected to.
This action has been made NON-FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 10, and 12-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US_20200014748_A1_Passeri in view of US_20140256257_A1_Thangella.
Regarding claim 1, Passeri teaches a method, applied to a communication system (Passeri figures 1, 10), the method comprising: sending, by the first terminal device, migration indication information to the first input device (Passeri figure 10, step 1030, paragraph 83, “At step 1030, in response to the edge detection, method 1000 may include the first host computer sending a control signal to an input device…”), wherein the migration indication information indicates the first input device to perform focus device switching (Passeri figure 10, step 1030, paragraph 83, “… to automatically cause the input device to switch wireless pairing from the first host computer (e.g., channel 1) to the second host computer ( e.g., channel 2).…”); and switching, by the first input device, a focus device from the first terminal device to the second terminal device in response to receiving the migration indication information (Passeri figure 5, and paragraph 64, “… a multi-channel switch 535 on an input device 530. Multichannel switch 535 can be switched between three user programmable channels…”, paragraph 65, “…Display 515 shows a cursor 540 come into contact with edge 518, causing software 501 to initiate an edge trigger event and causing multi-channel switch 535 of input device 530 to switch communicative pairing from host 110 to host 120…”), wherein switching, by the first input device, the focus device from the first terminal device to the second terminal device configures the first input device to switch from being configured to input information to the first terminal device to being configured to input information to the second terminal device (Passeri paragraph 83, “… the second host computer may determine where its corresponding cursor (e.g., cursor 950) should originate (e.g., location 949) and how it should travel (e.g., speed, direction, acceleration) until control signals from the input device are received ( e.g., after channel switching and pairing). That is, the second host computer may move its cursor 950 along a calculated artificial trajectory (e.g., calculated by software 902) based on the trajectory of cursor 940 until control signals from input device 930 are received by the second host computer (e.g., at location 952). Cursor control for cursor 950 then continues from location 952 under normal operating conditions (i.e., cursor movement via control signals from the input device) for what appears to the user to be a smooth and uninterrupted movement of a single cursor between host computers (e.g., host 910 to host 920)”).
Passeri does not teach when a first input device of the communication system is in a multi-connection working mode, maintaining, by the first input device, communication connections to both a first terminal device and a second terminal device
Thangella from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: when a first input device of the communication system is in a multi-connection working mode (Thangella paragraph 30, “As illustrated in FIG. 1, the input device 104 may enable simultaneous connections with the multiple electronic devices 102a-b…”), maintaining, by the first input device, communication connections to both a first terminal device and a second terminal device mode (Thangella paragraph 30, “… For example, the input device 104 may simultaneously maintain connections with the first electronic device 102a and the second electronic device 102b”).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Thangella into Passeri, since Passeri suggests a technique for an edge-triggered switch of an input device between a first host computer and a second host computer, and Thangella suggests the beneficial way of the input device may enable simultaneous connections with the multiple electronic devices so that/thus the input device may quickly and dynamically change between transmitting input data between the first electronic device and the second electronic device (Passeri paragraphs 2 and 46) in the analogous art of communication.
Regarding claim 2, Passeri and Thangella teach the method according to claim 1, and Passeri further teaches wherein the first input device is a wireless mouse (Passeri figure 1, paragraph 46, “…Input device 262 (e.g., a computer mouse)… The input devices can be communicatively coupled to their respective host computers via any suitable wireless communication protocol…”), and the method further comprises: sending, by the first terminal device to the first input device, information about a position at which a mouse cursor slides out of a display of the first terminal device (Passeri paragraph 43, “…first host computer 110 sends a control signal to input device 130 to switch communicative pairing from first host computer 110 to second host computer 120…”); and sending, by the first input device to the second terminal device, the information about the position at which the mouse cursor slides out of the display of the first terminal device, so that the second terminal device determines an initial position of the mouse cursor on a display of the second terminal device (Passeri figure 1, paragraph 42, “…First host computer 110 may further send a second control signal to second host computer 120 providing information that may include a location of cursor 140 on display 115, the trajectory of cursor 140 (e.g., speed and direction of cursor 140 prior to reaching edge 118), virtual clipboard data (e.g., alphanumeric data, media data, etc.) for first host computer 110, and/or other corresponding data, such that cursor 150 may be positioned on display 125 by second host computer 120 at corresponding edge 128 to simulate a split-screen movement of a cursor between displays 115, 125…”, paragraph 83, “… the second host computer may determine where its corresponding cursor (e.g., cursor 950) should originate (e.g., location 949) and how it should travel (e.g., speed, direction, acceleration) until control signals from the input device are received…”).
Regarding claim 3, Passeri and Thangella teach the method according to claim 2, and Passeri further teaches wherein sending, by the first terminal device, the migration indication information to the first input device comprises: sending, by the first terminal device, the migration indication information to the first input device in response to detecting that the mouse cursor tends to slide to another terminal device (Passeri figure 1, paragraph 43, “…At time t2 , input device 130 is moving left-to-right causing cursor 140 to reach edge 118 of display 115, which initiates an edge trigger event. In response, first host computer 110 sends a control signal to input device 130 to switch communicative pairing from first host computer 110 to second host computer 120 …”).
Regarding claim 4, Passeri and Thangella teach the method according to claim 3, wherein sending, by the first terminal device, migration indication information to the first input device comprises: sending, by the first terminal device, the migration indication information to the first input device in response to detecting that the mouse cursor tends to slide to the another terminal device (Passeri figure 1, paragraph 43, “…At time t2 , input device 130 is moving left-to-right causing cursor 140 to reach edge 118 of display 115, which initiates an edge trigger event. In response, first host computer 110 sends a control signal to input device 130 to switch communicative pairing from first host computer 110 to second host computer 120 …”) and determining that the another terminal device is the second terminal device (Passeri figure 1, paragraph 43, “…First host computer 110 may further send a second control signal to second host computer 120 providing information that may include a location of cursor 140 on display 115, the trajectory of cursor 140 (e.g., speed and direction of cursor 140 prior to reaching edge 118), virtual clipboard data (e.g., alphanumeric data, media data, etc.) for first host computer 110, and/or other corresponding data, such that cursor 150 may be positioned on display 125 by second host computer 120 at corresponding edge 128 to simulate a split-screen movement of a cursor between displays 115, 125.…”), wherein the migration indication information carries identification information of the second terminal device (Passeri paragraph 60, “…At step 430, in response to first host computer 110 detecting that cursor 140 has moved to edge 118 of display 115 of first host computer 110, method 400 can include sending, by first host computer 110 to input device 130, a first control signal to switch the communicative pairing of input device 130 from first host computer 110 to second host computer 120”, the control signal must include identification of the second host computer 120 in order to indicate the switching correctly. The identification can be host’s name (paragraph 53)).
Regarding claim 10, Passeri and Thangella teach the method according to claim 1, and Passeri further teaches wherein after switching, by the first input device, the focus device from the first terminal device to the second terminal device, the method further comprises: sending, by the first input device, a personalized configuration parameter of the first input device to the second terminal device (Passeri paragraph 54, “…host 360 can send a secure message to host 270. Secure messaging between host computers can be in any suitable format such as JSON, XML, CSV, EDN, etc., as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The secure message can include host 260 software 201 settings associated with input device 262. This may include button/feature configurations, dots-perinch (dpi) settings, edge or location detection settings, display settings…”), wherein the personalized configuration parameter comprises: dots per inch, shortcut key settings, a main key definition, or fingerprint information (Passeri paragraph 54, “…This may include button/feature configurations, dots-perinch ( dpi) settings, edge or location detection settings, display settings…”).
Regarding claim 12, Passeri and Thangella teach the method according to claim 1, and Passeri further teaches wherein the communication system further comprises a second input device (Passeri figure 11, keyboard 1140), and the method further comprises: sending, by the first terminal device, collaborative migration indication information to the second input device (Passeri figure 11, paragraph 89, “…Host 510 may further generate a second control signal causing input device 1140 (e.g., a Bluetooth keyboard) to switch from channel 3 (host 510) to channel 1 (host 520)…”); and switching, by the second input device, the focus device from the first terminal device to the second terminal device in response to the collaborative migration indication information (Passeri figure 11, and paragraph 87, “Multi-channel switch 535 can be switched between three user programmable channels. In some embodiments, channel 1 may cause input device 530 to be paired with host 510, channel 2 may cause input device 530 to be paired with host 520…”), wherein switching, by the second input device, the focus device from the first terminal device to the second terminal device configures the second input device to switch from being configured to input information to the first terminal device to being configured to input information to the second terminal device (Passeri figure 11, paragraph 93, “At step 1240, method 1200 can include sending, by the first host computer to a second input device ( e.g., keyboard 1140), a second control signal to the second input device communicatively paired with the first host computer to switch the communicative pairing of the second input device from the first host computer to the second host computer...”), and Thangella further teaches the second input device is in a multi-connection working mode, and maintains communication connections to both the first terminal device and the second terminal device (Thangella paragraph 30, “As illustrated in FIG. 1, the input device 104 may enable simultaneous connections with the multiple electronic devices 102a-b…”).
Regarding claim 13, Passeri and Thangella teach the method according to claim 12, and Passeri further teaches wherein the second input device is a wireless keyboard (Passeri figure 11, keyboard 1140), and sending, by the first terminal device, the collaborative migration indication information to the second input device comprises: after detecting an operation of enabling a keyboard and mouse collaboration function by a user (Passeri figure 3, step 310), sending, by the first terminal device, the collaborative migration indication information to the second input device (Passeri figure 12, step 1240).
Regarding claim 14, Passeri and Thangella teach the method according to claim 13, and Passeri further teaches wherein the operation of enabling the keyboard and mouse collaboration function by the user is an operation of enabling the keyboard and mouse collaboration function by the user on a user interface, or an operation of turning on a switch by the user on the second input device (Passeri paragraph 52, “At step 310, a user may make a selection using software 201 to enable automatic switching on a user interface operated on host 260 (i.e., "host 0")...”).
Regarding claim 15, Passeri and Thangella teach the limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, Passeri and Thangella teach the limitations as set forth in claim 2.
Regarding claim 17, Passeri and Thangella teach the limitations as set forth in claim 3.
Regarding claim 18, Passeri and Thangella teach the limitations as set forth in claim 4.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-9, and 19 is/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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The reference US_20160110302_A1_Chazot, teaches switching a wireless connection between a plurality of input devices and a first host device to at least a second host device. Embodiments of the invention are directed to systems and methods for switching multiple, independently connected data input devices from a first host computing device to a second host computing device together based on a single command or operation (Chazot figures 1 3-5).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEIBIN HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3695. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30AM - 6:00PM.
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, Sujoy Kundu can be reached at (571)272-8586. 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.
/W.H/Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/SUJOY K KUNDU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
