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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Campbell (US 2008/0066080).
Regarding claim 1, Campbell discloses a method comprising:
Receiving a text message (Paragraph 6 and claim 1, receiving a command; Figure 1, command processing facility 110 receives input signal 104; Paragraph 83, command processor 110 implement according to server architecture) via an API (Paragraph 115, APIs downloaded to local client 102), the text message comprising program code (Paragraph 6 and claim 1, the command [program code] embedded in a message a text message; Paragraph 39, client 102 may provide an input signal 104 that is embodied as an SMS message; Paragraph 33, input signal 104 may include or be associated with an instruction; Paragraph 310, a single electronic mail may cause multiple actions, either by embedding multiple commands [program code]); and
Compiling and executing the programming code (Figure 1, command processing facility 110 receives input signal 104; Paragraph 83, command processor 110 implement according to server architecture; Paragraph 37, The input converter 302 of the command processor 110 may include a compiler. The compiler may include a lexical analyzer, a parser, and/or another kind of input analysis facility; Paragraph 38, A parser may conduct syntax analysis and semantic parsing on an expression within the input signal 104. The expression may be a logical expression, a textual expression, a binary expression, a hexadecimal expression, an octal expression, or any and all other kinds and/or encodings of expression. The syntax analysis may utilize a context-free grammar and may attempt to match an expression to the grammar, wherein an input signal 104 may include the expression; Paragraph 42, an objective of the input converter may be to determine an appropriate action given an input signal 104).
Regarding claim 2, Campbell discloses providing the contents of the text message to an application server (Paragraph 28, command processor 110 receives input signals 104 and processes the input signals to generate resource actions [contents of text message]; Paragraph 30, The command processor 110 may process an input signal 104 and deliver a resource action 112 to the information resource 118; Paragraph 31, The information resource 118 is a Web server [application server]).
Regarding claim 3, Campbell discloses wherein the providing of the contents of the text message to the application server comprises sending a request using an application layer protocol (Paragraph 36, resource action 112…may be provided according to HTTP…the resource action 112 may include an HTTP POST [request] command).
Regarding claim 4, Campbell discloses receiving a response to the request using the application layer protocol (Paragraph 35, The command processor 110 may transmit resource actions 112 to the information resource 118 via the communication facility 132. The information resource 118 may use a command acknowledgement protocol to signal or otherwise indicate to the command processor 110 that the resource actions 112 have been received, processed, accepted, rejected, and so on).
Regarding claim 7, Campbell discloses wherein the receiving of the text message comprises receiving a Short Message Service (SMS) message (Paragraph 39, client 102 may provide an input signal 104 that is embodied as an SMS message).
Regarding claim 8, Campbell discloses wherein the receiving of the text message comprises receiving a Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) message (Paragraph 67, The signal may be provided as a message or sequence of messages, which may be associated with a one-way or two-way communication between the information resource 118 and the client 102… One example of a sequence of messages may be a series of SMS text messages or MMS multimedia messages).
Regarding claim 9, Campbell discloses wherein the receiving of the text message comprises receiving an email message (Paragraph 44, The input signal 104 may be a text file, an email).
Regarding claim 11, Campbell discloses wherein the receiving of the text message comprises receiving the text message from a cellular phone or a smart phone (Paragraph 44, A command processor 110 may accept input signals 104 from a number of different clients 102. The input signals 104 may be received through a wired network, wireless network, cell network, or other network connection to the command processor 110. The clients 102 may be a cell phone, a smart phone, a personal computer, a handheld computer, a data feed agent, an SMTP agent, a laptop computer, or other device capable of providing an input signal 104 to the command processor 110).
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 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.
Claim(s) 5, 6 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell as applied to claims 3 and 1 above, and further in view of Roosen et al. (Wo 2005/009018, IDS Reference).
Regarding claim 5, Campbell discloses the claimed invention above but does not disclose the following limitations disclosed by Roosen et al.: wherein the request includes an identifier of a sender of the text message (Roosen et al., Page 19 lines 13-24, request from client user to web server 106, the request, for example, being by SMS and the default calling number taken to be the subscriber’s mobile number [identifier of sender of the text message] or the subscriber request specifically including the calling number [identifier of sender]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Campbell with the cited disclosure from Roosen et al. in order establish communication between endpoints (Roosen et al., Abstract).
Regarding claim 6, Roosen et al. disclose wherein the identifier is a phone number (Page 19 lines 13-24, request from client user to web server 106, the request, for example, being by SMS and the default calling number taken to be the subscriber’s mobile number [identifier of sender of the text message] or the subscriber request specifically including the calling number [identifier of sender]).
Regarding claim 10, Campbell discloses the claimed invention above but does not disclose the following limitations disclosed by Roosen et al.: wherein the receiving the text message is performed by a hardware call router system (Roosen et al., Page 18 line 16-Page 19 line 24, SMS user client 128 sends a call request [for a call to be placed, modified or terminated] in the form of a SMS message, which is addressed to a predetermined number, to local SMS service center, which further routes the message to SMS gateway 136 provider, which delivers the message to SMS proxy server 122, which then delivers the message using HTTP to the web server 106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Campbell with the cited disclosure from Roosen et al. in order establish communication between endpoints (Roosen et al., Abstract).
Claim(s) 12-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell in view of Roosen et al.
Regarding claim 12, Campbell discloses a method comprising:
Receiving a text message (Paragraph 6 and claim 1, receiving a command; Figure 1, command processing facility 110 receives input signal 104; Paragraph 83, command processor 110 implement according to server architecture) via an API (Paragraph 115, APIs downloaded to local client 102), the text message comprising program code (Paragraph 6 and claim 1, the command [program code] embedded in a message a text message; Paragraph 39, client 102 may provide an input signal 104 that is embodied as an SMS message; Paragraph 33, input signal 104 may include or be associated with an instruction; Paragraph 310, a single electronic mail may cause multiple actions, either by embedding multiple commands [program code]); and
Compiling and executing the programming code (Figure 1, command processing facility 110 receives input signal 104; Paragraph 83, command processor 110 implement according to server architecture; Paragraph 37, The input converter 302 of the command processor 110 may include a compiler. The compiler may include a lexical analyzer, a parser, and/or another kind of input analysis facility; Paragraph 38, A parser may conduct syntax analysis and semantic parsing on an expression within the input signal 104. The expression may be a logical expression, a textual expression, a binary expression, a hexadecimal expression, an octal expression, or any and all other kinds and/or encodings of expression. The syntax analysis may utilize a context-free grammar and may attempt to match an expression to the grammar, wherein an input signal 104 may include the expression; Paragraph 42, an objective of the input converter may be to determine an appropriate action given an input signal 104).
Campbell does not disclose the following limitations disclosed by Roosen et al.: a hardware call router system constructed to receive the text message and compile and execute the program (Roosen et al., Page 18 line 16-Page 19 line 24, SMS user client 128 sends a call request [for a call to be placed, modified or terminated] in the form of a SMS message, which is addressed to a predetermined number, to local SMS service center, which further routes the message to SMS gateway 136 provider, which delivers the message to SMS proxy server 122, which then delivers the message using HTTP to the web server 106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Campbell with the cited disclosure from Roosen et al. in order establish communication between endpoints (Roosen et al., Abstract).
Regarding claim 13, Campbell in view of Roosen et al. discloses wherein the call router system is further constructed to: provide the contents of the text message to an application server (Campbell, Paragraph 28, command processor 110 receives input signals 104 and processes the input signals to generate resource actions [contents of text message]; Paragraph 30, The command processor 110 may process an input signal 104 and deliver a resource action 112 to the information resource 118; Paragraph 31, The information resource 118 is a Web server [application server]; Roosen et al., Page 18 line 16-Page 19 line 24, SMS user client 128 sends a call request [for a call to be placed, modified or terminated] in the form of a SMS message, which is addressed to a predetermined number, to local SMS service center, which further routes the message to SMS gateway 136 provider, which delivers the message to SMS proxy server 122, which then delivers the message using HTTP to the web server 106 [applicant server]).
Regarding claim 14, Campbell in view of Roosen et al. discloses wherein the providing of the contents of the text message to the application server comprises sending a request using an application layer protocol (Campbell, Paragraph 36, resource action 112…may be provided according to HTTP…the resource action 112 may include an HTTP POST [request] command; Roosen et al., Page 18 line 16-Page 19 line 24, SMS user client 128 sends a call request [for a call to be placed, modified or terminated] in the form of a SMS message, which is addressed to a predetermined number, to local SMS service center, which further routes the message to SMS gateway 136 provider, which delivers the message to SMS proxy server 122, which then delivers the message using HTTP to the web server 106).
Regarding claim 15, Campbell discloses receiving a response to the request using the application layer protocol (Paragraph 35, The command processor 110 may transmit resource actions 112 to the information resource 118 via the communication facility 132. The information resource 118 may use a command acknowledgement protocol to signal or otherwise indicate to the command processor 110 that the resource actions 112 have been received, processed, accepted, rejected, and so on).
Regarding claim 16, Roosen et al. discloses wherein the request includes an identifier of a sender of the text message (Page 19 lines 13-24, request from client user to web server 106, the request, for example, being by SMS and the default calling number taken to be the subscriber’s mobile number [identifier of sender of the text message] or the subscriber request specifically including the calling number [identifier of sender]).
Regarding claim 17, Roosen et al. disclose wherein the identifier is a phone number (Page 19 lines 13-24, request from client user to web server 106, the request, for example, being by SMS and the default calling number taken to be the subscriber’s mobile number [identifier of sender of the text message] or the subscriber request specifically including the calling number [identifier of sender]).
Regarding claim 18, Campbell in view of Roosen et al. discloses wherein the receiving of the text message comprises receiving a Short Message Service (SMS) message (Campbell, Paragraph 39, client 102 may provide an input signal 104 that is embodied as an SMS message; Roosen et al., Page 18 line 16-Page 19 line 24, SMS user client 128 sends a call request [for a call to be placed, modified or terminated] in the form of a SMS message).
Regarding claim 19, Campbell discloses wherein the receiving of the text message comprises receiving a Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) message (Paragraph 67, The signal may be provided as a message or sequence of messages, which may be associated with a one-way or two-way communication between the information resource 118 and the client 102… One example of a sequence of messages may be a series of SMS text messages or MMS multimedia messages).
Regarding claim 20, Campbell in view of Roosen et al. discloses wherein the receiving of the text message comprises receiving an email message (Campbell, Paragraph 44, The input signal 104 may be a text file, an email; Roosen et al., Page 19 lines 20-24, request is by e-mail).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Creamer et al. (US 2003/0016658) discloses an email message having embedded computer code for establishing a voice communications link with the sender and execution of the embedded code to establish the link (Paragraphs 13 and 28).
Martin et al. (US 6,741,855) disclose command encapsulated in an email message from a mobile device, the commands being interpreted and executed by a service (Column 7 lines 26-30).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OTIS L THOMPSON, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1953. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 6:30am - 7:00pm.
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, Chirag G. Shah can be reached at (571)272-3144. 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.
/OTIS L THOMPSON, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
October 9, 2026
