DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-18 are pending.
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 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.
Claims 1-2 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (CN 101645873 A) in view of Lin 2 (TW 201507467 A), and Imai (US 20140351812 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lin teaches a network filter and network connected computing device,
(
Lin discloses, “The invention claims a method for realizing network isolation in environments of computer and virtual machine, wherein the computer comprises a hardware platform; a physical network card; a manager of virtual machine; a first operating system, installed on the manager of virtual machine, connected to said physical network card to realize the mutual transfer of a first network packet with the external network via said physical network card; a network filter driving module, connected to said physical network card to process the network packet passing said network filter driving module; a second operating system, installed on the manager of virtual machine, having a second virtual network card distributed by said manager of virtual machine, and realizing the mutual transfer of a second network packet with the external network via said second virtual network card, network filter driving module and physical network card, wherein said network filter driving module processes said second network packet. The invention ensures the network security of the second operating system,” Abstract, and
“Preferably, said network filter driving module and said physical network card installed in the first operating system, said network filter driving module comprises a filtering module, used for filtering the said second network packet, obtaining the third network packet, and a forwarding module, for forwarding the third network packet,” Page 1.
The claimed “first operating system” is mapped to the disclosed “first operating system”.
The claimed “second operating system” is mapped to the disclosed “second operating system”.
The claimed “peer-to-peer proxy module” is mapped to the disclosed “network filter driving module”, which is installed in the first operating system.
Here, the first operating system uses the network filter driving module to filter and obtain network packets. Also, the second operating system uses a second virtual network card for connecting with an external network.);
wherein the first operating system is connected to the second operating system (
Lin discloses, “the second network comprises a second operating system would be sent to the external network via the second virtual network card is transmitted to the security channel, the security channel under the control of the security protocol to the second network network packets for transmission, namely, the second network comprises a second operating system of the second virtual network card to the safety passage, comprising a safety channel transmitting the second network packet to the network filter drive module in the first operating system by the network filter driving module transmits the network packet sent to an external network through physical network card. when receiving network packet from an external network, the process is opposite, namely through physical network card to collecting network packet, network filtering in the first operation system driving module to filter, then transmitted to the safety channel, by a secure channel to the second virtual network card of the second operation system. Here the security protocol is the trusted platform module specification,” Page 6.).
Lin does not teach a webcam, comprising: a storage circuit; and a processing circuit electrically connected to the storage circuit; wherein the processing circuit accesses the storage circuit to execute a first operating system and a second operating system. Lin also does not teach that the first operating system includes a first virtual network port, the second operating system includes a second virtual network port, and the first virtual network port is connected to the second virtual network port.
However, Lin 2 teaches a webcam, comprising: a storage circuit; and a processing circuit electrically connected to the storage circuit; wherein the processing circuit accesses the storage circuit to execute a first operating system and a second operating system (
Lin 2 discloses, “As described above, each of the above modules is stored in a storage device (not shown) of the network camera 1 in the form of a code or an instruction or is solidified in the operating system of the network camera 1 (not shown in the figure) And executed by the processor 12 of the webcam 1,” Page 3.
Here, a webcam/network camera contains an operating system, a storage device, and a processor that accesses the storage device in order to run the operating system.
After the combination of Lin with Lin 2, Lin 2’s webcam/network camera would be configured to execute multiple operating systems as specified by Lin.).
Lin and Lin 2 are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of computer-based data monitoring. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Lin 2 and provide a webcam, comprising: a storage circuit; and a processing circuit electrically connected to the storage circuit; wherein the processing circuit accesses the storage circuit to execute a first operating system and a second operating system. Doing so would help allow for using the webcam to monitor image-based data and then transmit the monitored image-based data to external sources for analysis.
Lin in view of Lin 2 does not teach wherein the first operating system includes a first virtual network port, the second operating system includes a second virtual network port, and the first virtual network port is connected to the second virtual network port.
However, Imai teaches wherein the first operating system includes a first virtual network port, the second operating system includes a second virtual network port, and the first virtual network port is connected to the second virtual network port (
Imai discloses, “The VM 122 and the VM 162 are connected to each other through a tunnel over the best-effort IP router network 170. For this connection, a virtual NIC 124 is provided in the host OS of the physical server 120, and a virtual NIC 163 is provided in the host OS of the physical server 160,” ¶ 0089.
Here, two virtual machines are connected to each other via their respective virtual NICs (network interface cards) connecting to each other.
After the combination of Lin in view of Lin 2, with Imai, the safety channel connecting Lin’s two operating systems is implemented via a connection with two virtual NICs as specified by Imai, with each virtual NIC corresponding to one of the two operating systems.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of computer network architecture. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2 to incorporate the teachings of Imai and provide wherein the first operating system includes a first virtual network port, the second operating system includes a second virtual network port, and the first virtual network port is connected to the second virtual network port. Doing so would help facilitate communication between the two operating systems, thus improving the performance of transmitting data between the two operating systems.
Claim 11 is a data processing method corresponding to the webcam Claim 1. Therefore, Claim 11 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai teaches the webcam according to claim 1, wherein a type of the first virtual network port is a secure digital input/output port, a universal serial bus, or a serial peripheral port, and a type of the second virtual network port is the same as the type of the first virtual network port (
Imai discloses, “The VM 122 and the VM 162 are connected to each other through a tunnel over the best-effort IP router network 170. For this connection, a virtual NIC 124 is provided in the host OS of the physical server 120, and a virtual NIC 163 is provided in the host OS of the physical server 160,” ¶ 0089.
Here, the two virtual NIC cards that connect the two virtual machines are of the same type.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of computer interfaces. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2 to incorporate the teachings of Imai and provide wherein a type of the first virtual network port is a secure digital input/output port, a universal serial bus, or a serial peripheral port, and a type of the second virtual network port is the same as the type of the first virtual network port. Doing so would help improve operability between both of the virtual network ports in order to facilitate data communication.
Claim 12 is a data processing method corresponding to the webcam Claim 2. Therefore, Claim 12 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 2.
Claims 3-4 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (CN 101645873 A) in view of Lin 2 (TW 201507467 A), Imai (US 20140351812 A1), and Manvel (US 20180350151 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai teaches the webcam according to claim 1. Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai does not teach wherein the processing circuit further accesses the storage circuit to execute an image processing module, and the image processing module operates under the first operating system to perform image processing on the data packets.
However, Manvel teaches wherein the processing circuit further accesses the storage circuit to execute an image processing module, and the image processing module operates under the first operating system to perform image processing on the data packets (
Manvel discloses, “The image signal, which may include a digital video signal comprising data packets, may be received by the image processor module (e.g., via interface 440, shown in FIG. 4) and displayed on the display device (not shown) of the computer 20 (Step 650),” ¶ 0059, and “The received image signal may be processed by the image processor module 510 to adjust and match attributes of the article(s) of wardrobe, accessories, footwear, hairstyle, and the like, of the subject 201, so as to provide a real-world look and fit on the subject, if the article(s), accessories, footwear, hairstyle, or the like, were actually worn by the subject,” ¶ 0060.
Here, Manvel teaches executing an image processor module to perform image processing on an image signal comprising data packets.
After the combination of Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, with Manvel, the processing circuit, from Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, accesses the storage circuit, also from Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, to execute Manvel’s image processor module, which operates under Lin’s first operating system in order to perform image processing on data packets.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, and Manvel are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of computer network interfaces. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai to incorporate the teachings of Manvel and provide wherein the processing circuit further accesses the storage circuit to execute an image processing module, and the image processing module operates under the first operating system to perform image processing on the data packets. Doing so would help allow for performing operations on the images in order to make them more visually pleasing to viewers (“The received image signal may be processed by the image processor module 510 to adjust and match attributes of the article(s) of wardrobe, accessories, footwear, hairstyle, and the like, of the subject 201, so as to provide a real-world look and fit on the subject, if the article(s), accessories, footwear, hairstyle, or the like, were actually worn by the subject,” ¶ 0060.).
Claim 13 is a data processing method corresponding to the webcam Claim 3. Therefore, Claim 13 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 3.
Regarding Claim 4, Lin in view of Lin 2, Imai, and Manvel teaches the webcam according to claim 3, wherein the image processing includes one or any combination of image enhancement, image encoding, image decoding, image wavelet processing, resolution processing, color processing, and object recognition (
Manvel discloses, “The image signal, which may include a digital video signal comprising data packets, may be received by the image processor module (e.g., via interface 440, shown in FIG. 4) and displayed on the display device (not shown) of the computer 20 (Step 650),” ¶ 0059, and “The received image signal may be processed by the image processor module 510 to adjust and match attributes of the article(s) of wardrobe, accessories, footwear, hairstyle, and the like, of the subject 201, so as to provide a real-world look and fit on the subject, if the article(s), accessories, footwear, hairstyle, or the like, were actually worn by the subject,” ¶ 0060.
Here, image enhancement and object recognition is performed on the received image signal.
After the combination of Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, with Manvel, Manvel’s image processor module performs operations such as image enhancement and object recognition on incoming data packets.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, and Manvel are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of computer network interfaces. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai to incorporate the teachings of Manvel and provide wherein the image processing includes one or any combination of image enhancement, image encoding, image decoding, image wavelet processing, resolution processing, color processing, and object recognition. Doing so would help allow for improving image quality in order to make the images more visually pleasing to viewers (“The received image signal may be processed by the image processor module 510 to adjust and match attributes of the article(s) of wardrobe, accessories, footwear, hairstyle, and the like, of the subject 201, so as to provide a real-world look and fit on the subject, if the article(s), accessories, footwear, hairstyle, or the like, were actually worn by the subject,” ¶ 0060.).
Claim 14 is a data processing method corresponding to the webcam Claim 4. Therefore, Claim 14 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 4.
Claims 5-6 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (CN 101645873 A) in view of Lin 2 (TW 201507467 A), Imai (US 20140351812 A1), and Yuan (US 12628214 B1).
Regarding Claim 5, Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai teaches the webcam according to claim 1. Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai does not teach wherein the processing circuit further accesses the storage circuit to execute a voice processing module, and the voice processing module operates under the first operating system to perform voice processing on the data packets.
However, Yuan teaches wherein the processing circuit further accesses the storage circuit to execute a voice processing module, and the voice processing module operates under the first operating system to perform voice processing on the data packets (
Yuan discloses, “The voice interface 414 receives the serialized and decoded digital stream, also referred to as voice data, from the baseband processor 412 and passes the data to the voice memory 416. The voice interface 414 supports a codec to encode and decode the voice data. In an example, the encoding and decoding uses Continuously variable slope delta modulation (CVSD) coded or a Bluetooth modified subband coding (mSBC) codec. The voice data is buffered in the voice memory 416. Voice data in and out of the voice memory 416 are not routed to the I2S module 420 via PCM and I2S interfaces. Instead, the CPU 418 performs memory reads and writes to access the voice data in the voice memory 416. Accordingly, voice data buffered in the voice memory 416 is read by the CPU 418 for processing,” Col 13, Lines 61-67 and Col 14, Lines 1-7.
Here, a voice interface 414 (claimed “voice processing module”) performs processing operations, such as voice decoding, on voice data.
After the combination of Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, with Yuan, Yuan’s voice interface performs operations such as voice decoding on incoming data packets.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, and Yuan are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of digital signal processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai to incorporate the teachings of Yuan and provide wherein the processing circuit further accesses the storage circuit to execute a voice processing module, and the voice processing module operates under the first operating system to perform voice processing on the data packets. Doing so would help allow for performing operations on the voice data in order to improve audio quality for the audio feed associated with the webcam, so that the voice of a user speaking through the webcam’s audio feed can be heard with more clarity from other users.
Claim 15 is a data processing method corresponding to the webcam Claim 5. Therefore, Claim 15 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 5.
Regarding Claim 6, Lin in view of Lin 2, Imai, and Yuan teaches the webcam according to claim 5, wherein the voice processing includes one or any combination of speech quantization, speech encoding, speech decoding, standardization, sound frame selection, endpoint detection, and noise filtering (
Yuan discloses, “The voice interface 414 receives the serialized and decoded digital stream, also referred to as voice data, from the baseband processor 412 and passes the data to the voice memory 416. The voice interface 414 supports a codec to encode and decode the voice data. In an example, the encoding and decoding uses Continuously variable slope delta modulation (CVSD) coded or a Bluetooth modified subband coding (mSBC) codec. The voice data is buffered in the voice memory 416. Voice data in and out of the voice memory 416 are not routed to the I2S module 420 via PCM and I2S interfaces. Instead, the CPU 418 performs memory reads and writes to access the voice data in the voice memory 416. Accordingly, voice data buffered in the voice memory 416 is read by the CPU 418 for processing,” Col 13, Lines 61-67 and Col 14, Lines 1-7.
Here, the voice interface 414 (claimed “voice processing module”) performs processing operations, such as voice decoding (speech decoding), on voice data.
After the combination of Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, with Yuan, Yuan’s voice interface performs operations such as voice decoding on incoming data packets.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, and Yuan are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of digital signal processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai to incorporate the teachings of Yuan and provide wherein the voice processing includes one or any combination of speech quantization, speech encoding, speech decoding, standardization, sound frame selection, endpoint detection, and noise filtering. Doing so would help allow for improving audio quality using the voice processing operations, so that the voice of a user speaking through the webcam’s audio feed can be heard with more clarity from other users.
Claim 16 is a data processing method corresponding to the webcam Claim 6. Therefore, Claim 16 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 6.
Claims 7-8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (CN 101645873 A) in view of Lin 2 (TW 201507467 A), Imai (US 20140351812 A1), and Zelig (US 20040037279 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai teaches the webcam according to claim 1. Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai does not teach wherein the second operating system further includes a virtual bridge node, and the virtual bridge node is configured to determine a destination of each of the data packets according to a port record of the data packet; wherein, when the port record of the data packet indicates that the destination of the data packet is the second operating system, the virtual bridge node transmits the data packet to the second operating system; wherein, when the port record of the data packet indicates that the destination of the data packet is a remote device, the virtual bridge node transmits the data packet to the remote device via the external network.
However, Zelig teaches wherein the second operating system further includes a virtual bridge node, and the virtual bridge node is configured to determine a destination of each of the data packets according to a port record of the data packet (
Zelig discloses, “Alternatively, in some preferred embodiments of the present invention, a special multicast server is coupled to the virtual bridge itself. The virtual bridge passes packets to the multicast server with an indicator identifying the multicast group. The server then determines the destination addresses to which each packet should be sent, and returns the copies of the packet, appropriately addressed, to the virtual bridge for forwarding through its physical and virtual ports. As noted above, the multicast server may be used for any sort of packet flooding, whether because the MAC address is unknown, or because it refers to a broadcast or multicast group,” ¶ 0019, and “Next, forwarding engine 34 checks MAC DA 48 of the incoming packet, to determine whether the output port for this MAC address is known, i.e., whether this MAC address is listed in database 35, at a destination checking step 64. If the address is a unicast address and is listed in the database, the forwarding engine simply outputs the packet through the appropriate port or PW listed in the corresponding database record, at a unicast forwarding step 66,” ¶ 0054.
Here, a virtual bridge is coupled to a multicast server, which determines the destination of a packet based on its MAC address record.);
wherein, when the port record of the data packet indicates that the destination of the data packet is the second operating system, the virtual bridge node transmits the data packet to the second operating system; wherein, when the port record of the data packet indicates that the destination of the data packet is a remote device, the virtual bridge node transmits the data packet to the remote device via the external network (
Zelig discloses, “Responsive to the broadcast indication, the router determines a group of destination addresses to which the packet should be multicast, and creates copies of the packet for transmission over the network to the destination addresses in the group,” Abstract, and “Next, forwarding engine 34 checks MAC DA 48 of the incoming packet, to determine whether the output port for this MAC address is known, i.e., whether this MAC address is listed in database 35, at a destination checking step 64. If the address is a unicast address and is listed in the database, the forwarding engine simply outputs the packet through the appropriate port or PW listed in the corresponding database record, at a unicast forwarding step 66,” ¶ 0054.
Here, the packet’s MAC address record directly determines the destination that the packet is transmitted to by the virtual bridge.
After the combination of Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, with Zelig, if the packet’s MAC address record points to the second operating system from Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, the packet is directly transmitted to the second operating system. If, instead, the packet’s MAC address record points to a remote device, the packet is transmitted to the remote device over a network.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, and Zelig are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of computer network architecture. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai to incorporate the teachings of Zelig and provide wherein the second operating system further includes a virtual bridge node, and the virtual bridge node is configured to determine a destination of each of the data packets according to a port record of the data packet; wherein, when the port record of the data packet indicates that the destination of the data packet is the second operating system, the virtual bridge node transmits the data packet to the second operating system; wherein, when the port record of the data packet indicates that the destination of the data packet is a remote device, the virtual bridge node transmits the data packet to the remote device via the external network. Doing so would help allow for analyzing the port records of the packets to ensure that the data packets do not end up being transmitted to the wrong destination.
Claim 17 is a data processing method corresponding to the webcam Claim 7. Therefore, Claim 17 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 7.
Regarding Claim 8, Lin in view of Lin 2, Imai, and Zelig teaches the webcam according to claim 7, wherein the first operating system and the second operating system respectively correspond to different network addresses (
Zelig discloses, “An IP source address (SA) 104 identifies the sending node, while an IP destination address (DA) 106 identifies the destination node of each packet,” ¶ 0068, and “IP DA 106 of the packet forwarded in this case simply indicates the unique destination address of the packet, which is determined by mapping the MAC DA to the appropriate destination virtual bridge in network 92,” ¶ 0069.
Here, an IP source address of a packet differs from the IP destination address of the packet, because the IP destination address is specified to be unique.
After the combination of Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, with Zelig, the two operating systems from Lin would be explicitly specified to correspond to different IP addresses, as specified by Zelig.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, and Zelig are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of digital signal processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai to incorporate the teachings of Zelig and provide wherein the first operating system and the second operating system respectively correspond to different network addresses. Doing so would help prevent the first operating system from accidentally transmitting the packets to itself instead of the second operating system due to an IP address conflict.
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (CN 101645873 A) in view of Lin 2 (TW 201507467 A), Imai (US 20140351812 A1), Kobayashi (US 20170075844 A1), and Moon (US 20060098614 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai teaches the webcam according to claim 1. Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai does not teach wherein the second operating system is configured to determine whether or not a port number of each of the data packets conforms to an agreed port number; wherein, when the port number of the data packet conforms to the agreed port number, the data packet is transmitted to the second operating system; wherein, when the port number of the data packet does not conform to the agreed port number, the second operating system transmits the data packet to a remote device via the external network.
However, Kobayashi teaches wherein the second operating system is configured to determine whether or not a port number of each of the data packets conforms to an agreed port number; wherein, when the port number of the data packet conforms to the agreed port number, the data packet is transmitted to the second operating system (
Kobayashi discloses, “At this time, when it is apparent that the processing of this packet is performed at a cache proxy processor 122 (such when it can be evaluated at the distribution processor 113 that a destination IP address is not a self-device and a destination port number matches to a predetermined port number or the like), it may pass the packet to the cache proxy processor 122 directly not via the protocol processor 115,” ¶ 0107.
Here, if a port number associated with a packet matches a predetermined port number, it is passed directly to a cache proxy processor. After the combination of Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, with Kobayashi, if a port number associated with a packet matches a predetermined port number, it is passed directly to Lin’s second operating system.);
wherein, when the port number of the data packet does not conform to the agreed port number, the second operating system transmits the data packet to a remote device (
Kobayashi discloses, “When the destination IP address does not match to the IP address of the communication device 101, the distribution processor 113 further checks whether a destination port number matches to a port number predetermined for the cache proxy processing (S13). When the port number does not match, the packet is passed to the bridge processor 114 because the data of this packet is not data targeted by the cache proxy processing (S13),” ¶ 0045.
Here, if a port number associated with a packet does not match a predetermined port number, it is passed to a bridge processor. After the combination of Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, with Kobayashi, if a port number associated with a packet does not a predetermined port number, it is passed directly to a remote device from Lin.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai, and Kobayashi are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of computer network architecture. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2, and Imai to incorporate the teachings of Kobayashi and provide wherein the second operating system is configured to determine whether or not a port number of each of the data packets conforms to an agreed port number; wherein, when the port number of the data packet conforms to the agreed port number, the data packet is transmitted to the second operating system; wherein, when the port number of the data packet does not conform to the agreed port number, the second operating system transmits the data packet to a remote device. Doing so would help ensure that the second operating system only receives packets that conform to the agreed port number, in order to ensure increased security.
Lin in view of Lin 2, Imai, and Kobayashi does not teach transmitting the data packet to a remote device via the external network.
However, Moon teaches transmitting the data packet to a remote device via the external network (
Moon discloses, “the Mobile WiMAX bridge may transmit the flow to an external network through one outdoor network Mobile WiMAX connection without distinction of indoor network access terminals,” ¶ 0074.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, Imai, and Kobayashi, and Moon are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of computer network architecture. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2, Imai, and Kobayashi to incorporate the teachings of Moon and provide transmitting the data packet to a remote device via the external network. Doing so would help allow for improving accessibility of the data packet from the remote device by utilizing the external network.
Claim 18 is a data processing method corresponding to the webcam Claim 9. Therefore, Claim 18 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 9.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (CN 101645873 A) in view of Lin 2 (TW 201507467 A), Imai (US 20140351812 A1), Kobayashi (US 20170075844 A1), Moon (US 20060098614 A1), and Brousseau (US 20120179831 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Lin in view of Lin 2, Imai, Kobayashi, and Moon teaches the webcam according to claim 9. Lin in view of Lin 2, Imai, Kobayashi, and Moon does not teach wherein the first operating system and the second operating system each correspond to a same network address.
However, Brousseau teaches wherein the first operating system and the second operating system each correspond to a same network address (
Brousseau discloses, “Alternatively, a target device may be assigned the same IP address as another device if contained in separate private networks, to alleviate the shortage of unique IP addresses available. Such private IP addresses are similarly non-routable if the private networks are later connected,” ¶ 0005, “To provide access to or between more than one network that may include the problems identified above, a dedicated device or client software may be installed on the local network that functions as a networked device. This dedicated device or software then acts as a host, assigned with a unique IP address, that all traffic to and from the remote network is automatically routed through the dedicated device or client,” ¶ 0007.
Here, a dedicated device is used so that a number of hosts with different IP addresses can exist behind the device, thus reducing the risk of an IP address shortage.).
Lin in view of Lin 2, Imai, Kobayashi, and Moon, and Brousseau are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of computer network architecture. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin in view of Lin 2, Imai, Kobayashi, and Moon to incorporate the teachings of Brousseau and provide wherein the first operating system and the second operating system each correspond to a same network address. Doing so would help address a potential shortage of IP addresses (Brousseau discloses, “Alternatively, a target device may be assigned the same IP address as another device if contained in separate private networks, to alleviate the shortage of unique IP addresses available. Such private IP addresses are similarly non-routable if the private networks are later connected,” ¶ 0005, “To provide access to or between more than one network that may include the problems identified above, a dedicated device or client software may be installed on the local network that functions as a networked device. This dedicated device or software then acts as a host, assigned with a unique IP address, that all traffic to and from the remote network is automatically routed through the dedicated device or client,” ¶ 0007.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Dou (CN 108174008 A): A Storage Method For Voice Packet Communication Voice Transmission System
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW SUN whose telephone number is (571)272-6735. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, Aimee Li can be reached at (571) 272-4169. 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.
/ANDREW NMN SUN/Examiner, Art Unit 2195
/Aimee Li/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2195
Prosecution Insights