CTNF 19/000,185 CTNF 86013 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. The following is a Non-Final Office Action in response to communications received on December 23, 2024 and March 3, 2025. Claims 1-12 are pending and addressed below. Specification For the record, Examiner acknowledges that the Specification submitted on December 23, 2024 has been accepted. Drawings For the record, Examiner acknowledges that the Drawings submitted on December 23, 2024 have been accepted. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 9-12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 9 recites the limitation “the media stream.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. Dependent claims 10-12 are rejected for containing the same indefinite language as claim 9 without further remedying the indefinite language. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. Claim 9 is directed towards at least one “computer-readable medium” storing instructions. Neither the claims nor the instant specification specifically limit the “computer-readable medium” to only non-transitory, hardware embodiments. The claims “computer-readable medium” may be interpreted as a transitory, signal medium. The claim is not considered to recite any hardware and is therefore, non-statutory. Dependent claims 10-12 are rejected for failing to further define parent claim 9 as statutory. Applicant may overcome this rejection by, for example, adding the phrase “non-transitory” directly before the phrase “computer-readable medium”. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. 08-34 AIA Claim s 1-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,848,753 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is clear that all of the limitations of claims 1-12 are disclosed by claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,848,753 . 08-34 AIA Claim s 1-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 10,103,872 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is clear that all of the limitations of claims 1-12 are disclosed by claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 10,103,872 . 08-34 AIA Claim s 1-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 10,560,256 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is clear that all of the limitations of claims 1-12 are disclosed by claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 10,560,256 . 08-34 AIA Claim s 1-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,228,420 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is clear that all of the limitations of claims 1-12 are disclosed by claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,228,420 . 08-34 AIA Claim s 1-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 9,426,159 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is clear that all of the limitations of claims 1-12 are disclosed by claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 9,426,159 . 08-35 Claim s 1-12 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 21-35 of copending Application No. 18/502,763 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is clear that all of the limitations of claims 1-12 are disclosed by claims 21-35 of copending Application No. 18/502,763 . This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome all of the rejection(s) set forth in this Office action. Claim 1 recites, inter alia , “wherein the first device and the second device are operable to communicate based on a cryptographic key such that the apparatus hosting a mutually trusted module circuitry to facilitate the encrypted communication based on the cryptographic key, and wherein the first device and the second device to have access to the apparatus using the mutually trusted module circuitry, wherein other devices are excluded from accessing the apparatus.” The closest prior art of record are: Jaber et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0007455 and hereinafter referred to as Jaber) which discloses BIOS connected to a processor for providing trusted communication by using a session shared secret (paragraphs [0021], [0028], [0029], [0034], [0036], [0037] and Figs. 1-2) Rajakarunanayake et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0123209 and hereinafter referred to as Rajakarunanayake) which discloses audio data is captured at a microphone and encrypted before transferring to another module (paragraphs [0017], [0018], [0022] and Fig. 1) While the prior art does disclose encrypted communication of recorded data and communication between modules using shared memory space, the prior art was not found to disclose the cited limitation in combination with the other limitations. Therefore, claim 1 is considered to recite allowable subject matter over the prior art. Claims 5 and 9 are considered to recite allowable subject matter over the prior art for similar reasons to claim 1. Dependent claims 2-4, 6-8 and 10-12 are considered to recite allowable subject matter over the prior art based on their dependency. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THADDEUS J PLECHA whose telephone number is (571)270-7506. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30. 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, Taghi Arani can be reached at 571-272-3787. 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. /THADDEUS J PLECHA/Examiner, Art Unit 2438 Application/Control Number: 19/000,185 Page 2 Art Unit: 2438 Application/Control Number: 19/000,185 Page 4 Art Unit: 2438 Application/Control Number: 19/000,185 Page 5 Art Unit: 2438 Application/Control Number: 19/000,185 Page 6 Art Unit: 2438 Application/Control Number: 19/000,185 Page 8 Art Unit: 2438
Prosecution Insights