DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
2. Claims 1, 6, 11, 15, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
a. In claim 1, line 7, the phrase “using the determined address STB MAC or IP address…” is suggested to be changed to “using the determined
b. In claim 6, line 6, the phrase “to region mapping table…” is suggested to be changed to “to a region mapping table…”.
c. In claim 11, lines 12-13, the phrase “operate the SMS server to use the determined address STB MAC or IP address…” is suggested to be changed to “operate the SMS server to use the determined
d. In claim 15, line 5, the phrase “to region mapping table…” is suggested to be changed to “to a region mapping table…”.
e. In claim 20, line 9, the phrase “using the determined address STB MAC or IP address…” is suggested to be changed to “using the determined .
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
5. Regarding claims 1-10, Claim 1 recites the limitation "the SMS message" in line 5 of claim 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
6. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the STB message" in line 8 of claim 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
7. Claims 3 and 4 recite the limitation "wherein determining from the retrieved user profile information if set top box (STB) display of SMS messages is enabled for a STB associated with the target phone number includes… " in lines 2-4 of claims 3 and 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
7. Claim 8 recites the limitation "the STB message" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
8. Regarding claims 11-19, Claim 11 recites the limitation "the SMS message" in lines 9-10 of claim 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
9. Claim 11 recites the limitation "the STB message" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
10. Claim 13 recites the limitation "the retrieved user profile" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
11. Claim 14 recites the limitation "the SMS message content" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
12. Claim 17 recites the limitation "the STB message" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
13. Claim 20 recites the limitation "the SMS message" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
14. Claim 20 recites the limitation "the STB message" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
15. Claims 1-20 are allowable over prior art references (with regards to above 112 rejections and objections being overcome).
Conclusion
16. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mistry (U. S. Patent No. 9, 407, 451) discloses displaying SMS messages using an STB.
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS B ODOM whose telephone number is (571)272-3046. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5.
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, Hannah S Wang can be reached at (571)-272-9018. 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.
/CURTIS B ODOM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631 September 2, 2026
Prosecution Insights