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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Carr does not teach “determining, based on the request for the content resource, a third computing device to provide access to the content resource and a tuner reservation identifier associated with the third computing device” and “sending, to the second computing device, the tuner reservation identifier”. To this matter the examiner respectfully disagrees. Carr discloses that the demodulator (110-figure 3 part of the home controller, second computer device) receives tuner information and that is tuned to a specific channel (meeting the second limitation argued figure 3, col. 5, lines 49-53). This tuner information is associated with the personal computer (third computing device) since the PC receives all the information that is addressed to the PC (meeting the first limitation argued col. 5, lines 53-63).
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 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 1-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carr et al., US 5,608,446.
Regarding claim 1, Carr discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a first computing device (48 figure 1) from a second computing device (70 figure 1), a request for a content resource (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13);
determining, based on the request for the content resource, a third computing device (74 figure 1) to provide access to the content resource and a tuner reservation identifier associated with the third computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13); and
sending, to the second computing device, the tuner reservation identifier (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 2, Carr discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the request for the content resource indicates a capability of the second computing device and wherein determining the third computing device is further based on the capability of the second computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 3, Carr discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the request for the content resource further comprises an identifier of the second computing device and wherein determining the third computing device comprises authenticating the identifier of the second computing device (col. 3, lines 19-25).
Regarding claim 4, Carr discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the third computing device comprises determining an availability of the third computing device to provide a tuning service associated with the request for the content resource (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 5, Carr discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising sending, to the third computing device, the tuner reservation identifier (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 6, Carr discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising sending, to the second computing device, an identifier of the third computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 7, Carr discloses an apparatus comprising:
one or more processors; and memory storing processor-executable instructions (figure 1) that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to:
receive, from a first computing device (70 figure 1), a request for a content resource (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13);
determine, based on the request for the content resource, a second computing device (74 figure 1) to provide access to the content resource and a tuner reservation identifier associated with the second computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13); and
send, to the first computing device, the tuner reservation identifier (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 8, Carr discloses the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the request for the content resource indicates a capability of the first computing device and wherein the processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to determine the second computing device, further cause the apparatus to determine the second computing device based on the capability of the first computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 9, Carr discloses the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the request for the content resource further comprises an identifier of the second computing device and wherein the processor- executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to determine the second computing device, cause the apparatus to authenticate the identifier of the second computing device (col. 3, lines 19-25).
Regarding claim 10, Carr discloses the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to determine the second computing device, cause the apparatus to determine an availability of the second computing device to provide a tuning service associated with the request for the content resource (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 11, Carr discloses the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to send, to the second computing device, the tuner reservation identifier (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 12, Carr discloses the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to send, to the first computing device, an identifier of the second computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 13, Carr discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing processor-executable instructions that (figure 1), when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:
receive, from a first computing device (70 figure 1), a request for a content resource (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13);
determine, based on the request for the content resource, a second computing device (74 figure 1) to provide access to the content resource and a tuner reservation identifier associated with the second computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13); and
send, to the first computing device, the tuner reservation identifier (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 14, Carr discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 13, wherein the request for the content resource indicates a capability of the first computing device and wherein the processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determine the second computing device, further cause the at least one processor to determine the second computing device based on the capability of the first computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 15, Carr discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 13, wherein the request for the content resource further comprises an identifier of the second computing device and wherein the processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determine the second computing device, cause the at least one processor to authenticate the identifier of the second computing device (col. 3, lines 19-25).
Regarding claim 16, Carr discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 13, wherein the processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determine the second computing device, cause the at least one processor to determine an availability of the second computing device to provide a tuning service associated with the request for the content resource (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 17, Carr discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 13, wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the at least one processor to send, to the second computing device, the tuner reservation identifier (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 18, Carr discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 13, wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the at least one processor to send, to the first computing device, an identifier of the second computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 19, Carr discloses a system comprising:
a first computing device (48 figure 1) configured to:
receive, from a second computing device (70 figure 1), a request for a content resource (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13);
determine, based on the request for the content resource, a third computing device (74 figure 1) to provide access to the content resource and a tuner reservation identifier associated with the third computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13); and
send, to the first computing device, the tuner reservation identifier (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13); and
the second computing device configured to:
send the request for the content resource (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13); and
receive the tuner reservation identifier (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 20, Carr discloses the system of claim 19, wherein the request for the content resource indicates a capability of the second computing device and wherein to determine the third computing device is further based on the capability of the second computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 21, Carr discloses the system of claim 19, wherein the request for the content resource further comprises an identifier of the second computing device and wherein to determine the third computing device, the first computing device is configured to authenticate the identifier of the second computing device (col. 3, lines 19-25).
Regarding claim 22, Carr discloses the system of claim 19, wherein to determine the third computing device, the first computing device is configured to determine an availability of the third computing device to provide a tuning service associated with the request for the content resource (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 23, Carr discloses the system of claim 19, wherein the first computing device is further configured to send, to the third computing device, the tuner reservation identifier (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Regarding claim 24, Carr discloses the system of claim 19, wherein the first computing device is further configured to send, to the second computing device, an identifier of the third computing device (col. 2, line 60 to col. 5 line 13).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSCHTA I MONTOYA whose telephone number is (571)270-1192. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8 am - 5 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nathan Flynn can be reached on 571-272-1915. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
OM
Oschta Montoya
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2421
/OSCHTA I MONTOYA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421