DETAILED ACTION
1. This Office Action is in response to the application 19/018,350 filed on 07/07/2026.
2. Claims 11-17 have been withdraws. Claims 1-10 and 18-20 have been examined and are pending in this application.
3. The Applicant elects the claims of Group I without traverse. Accordingly, claims 1-10 and 18-20 are pending and Claims 11-17 are withdrawn.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
3. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
4. For the record, the Examiner acknowledges that NO restrictions warranted at applicant’s initial time of filing for patent.
Priority
5. For the record, the Examiner acknowledges that NO foreign priority claimed at applicant’s initial time of filing for patent.
Information Disclosure Statement
6. The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 04/10/2025, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Oath/Declaration
7. For the record, the Examiner acknowledges that the Oath/Declaration submitted on 01/26/2025 has been accepted.
Drawings
8. For the record, the Examiner acknowledges that the drawings filed on 01/13/2025 has been accepted.
Specification
9. For the record, the Examiner acknowledges that the Applicant's specification filed on 01/13/2025 has been accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
10. 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 1-10 and 18-20 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Independent claims 1 and 18 limitation recites “…a module configured to …”, invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written
description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure is devoid of any structure that performs the function in the claim. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
13. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
14. 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.
15. Claims 1-10 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Sitnikov, document I: WO 2023121505 A1.
Referring to claim 1, Sitnikov teaches a method comprising:
locating, by a processing device, a portion of a document model of digital content that lacks coediting serialization support (abstract, collaborative editing of a digital object, para. 0021);
executing, by the processing device, a detector module configured to inspect a named document state of the digital content as associated with the portion of the document model (para. 0013, determine whether the first user is currently editing the digital object or not.);
selecting, by the processing device, a mode from a plurality of modes based on the named document state (abstract, para. 0011, coediting mode); and
controlling, by the processing device, access to a coediting session with at least one other client device based on the selected mode or whether the detector module detects the named document state (paras. 0048-0050, 0056, 0063-0064 and figs. 1-4, coediting control system).
Referring to claim 2, Sitnikov further teaches wherein the selected mode is an enabled support mode indicating the digital content is coediting compatible (paras, 0013, 0035, from incompatible to compatible).
Referring to claim 3, Sitnikov further teaches wherein the selected mode is a disabled support mode indicating coediting of the digital content is not permitted and output of the digital content for viewing is permitted (paras. 0063-0064 and fig. 4; claim 19).
Referring to claim 4, Sitnikov further teaches wherein the selected mode is a no support mode indicating coediting of the digital content is not permitted and output of the digital content for viewing is permitted (paras. 0063-0064 and fig. 4; claim 19).
Referring to claim 5, Sitnikov further teaches wherein the controlling includes exiting the coediting session responsive to detecting a delta and a fingerprint as associated with the named document state (para. 0035, exclusive locking).
Referring to claim 6, Sitnikov further teaches wherein the fingerprint is generated by locating one or more elements of the digital content corresponding to a change in state described by the delta and generating the fingerprint based on a hash of a serialization of the one or more elements of the delta (abstract, collaborative editing of a digital object, para. 0021).
Referring to claim 7, Sitnikov further teaches wherein the delta includes a version identifier as indicating a version associated with a content editing feature (abstract, para. 0051, version control system).
Referring to claim 8, Sitnikov further teaches wherein the version identifier is usable as part of determining compatibility with the change in state (para. 0051).
Referring to claim 9, Sitnikov further teaches wherein the serialization is generated based on an in-memory stream of the one or more elements of the delta (abstract, para. 0021).
Referring to claim 10, Sitnikov further teaches wherein the fingerprint is generated by identifying session-dependent data and controlling whether to omit the session-dependent data from the fingerprint (paras. 0038, 0061, 0063, unique identifier).
Referring to claim 18, This claim is similar in scope to claim 1, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Referring to claim 19, This claim is similar in scope to claims 2,3 and 4, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Referring to claim 20, This claim is similar in scope to claim 5, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
16. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attached PTO-892.
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONAS A BAYOU whose telephone number is (571)272-7610. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-4PM.
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, Philip Chea can be reached at 571-272-3951. 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.
/YONAS A BAYOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2499 08/06/2026
Prosecution Insights