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 .
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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is response to the Applicant’s response to the Restriction/Election requirements of 10/21/2025. The Applicant elected claims 1-4 for continued prosecution without traverse.
Claims 1-13 are pending in which claims 1-4 stand rejected and claims 5-13 are non-elected in this Office Action. Claim 1 is independent.
Remarks
Both the instant application and the WIPO application PCT/US2018/015913 filed 01/30/2018) are continuation of the same parent application, U.S. application 15/418954 (filed 01/30/2017, U.S. Patent 12204555 issued 01/21/2025). The Written Opinion on the WIPO application and the rejections made to the parent application were thoroughly reviewed and incorporated in the instant action in which the parent application was examined by the Examiner.
Double Patenting Rejections
The Double Patenting Rejections is hereby held abeyance. The rejections will be presented when allowable subject matter is established and the rejections deems necessary.
The non-statutory 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 non-statutory obviousness-type 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 Omum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and 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 a non-statutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-4 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent 12204555 (15/418954 filed 01/30/2017, issued 01/21/2025)). Although the conflicting are not patentably distinct from each other because since the claims of the U.S. Patent 12204555 contain elements of the claims of the instant application, and as such, anticipate the claims of the instant application.
This is a provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not all in fact been patented.
Patent 12204555 claim 1
Instant Application claims 1-4
1. A display-server system, comprising:
a server processor;
an application unit processed by the server processor;
a server network interface device communicatively connected to the server
processor and the communication network; and
a server memory communicatively connected to the server processor, the server memory includes instruction for causing the server processor to:
send by the server processor an image to a user device over the communication network;
receive by the server processor from the user device in respect of the image a first input from the user device over the communication network;
process by the server processor the application unit for the first input received to obtain a processed result corresponding to a next image; and
deliver to the user device the processed result, together with tags, the processed result is renderable by the user device as the next image and the tags are indicative of the first input received by the processor; and further comprising:
a user device processor;
a transformer processed by the user device processor;
a display communicatively connected to the transformer;
a user device network interface device communicatively connected to the application unit over the communication network;
a user device memory communicatively connected to the user device processor, the user device memory includes instruction for causing the user device processor to:
render the image in the display, the image corresponds to the processed result;
receive a second input to the display in respect of the image;
deliver the second input over the communication network to the application unit;
the server memory includes further instruction for causing the server processor to:
receive the second input by the application unit;
process the second input by the application unit to obtain a next processed result corresponds to a next image for delivery to the display;
send the next processed result, together with second tags, the second tags are indicative of the second input;
the user device memory includes further instruction for causing the user device processor to:
receive the second processed result and second tags from the server processor;
receive a third input to the user device processor prior to receiving the
second processed result and second tags; and
transform by the transformer the second processed result to obtain a third
image displayed in the display, based on comparison by the transformer of the third
input to the second tags.
1. A system, comprising:
a server computer;
an application unit of the server computer;
a user device communicatively connected to the server computer;
a display of the user device;
a transformer of the user device;
wherein the server computer receives input from the user device in respect of an
image displayed at the user device, processes the application unit with the input, and
sends tags and processed data representing a next image to the user device, the tags relate to the input received by the server computer for processing;
wherein the transformer of the user device compares the tags to new input to the
user device in respect of the image, and, responsive to receiving the processed data
representing the next image from the server computer, transforms the processed data
representing the next image, to transformed data representing a transformed image, and
the user device outputs on the display the transformed data as the transformed image.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the user device includes a display for output of
the transformed data.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the user device includes a processor, memory, and
an input device.
4. The system of claim 1, wherein the server computer includes a processor and
memory.
“Omission of element and its function in combination is obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform same functions as before.” See In re Karlson (CCPA) 136 USPQ 184, decide Jan 16, 1963, Appl. No. 6857, U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-4 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by
Mahajan et al.: “ENABLING A GRAPHICAL WINDOW MODIFICATION COMMAND TO BE APPLIED TO A REMOTELY GENERATED GRAPHICAL WINDOW”, (United States Patent Application Publication US 20060288306 A1, DATE PUBLISHED 2006-12-21 and DATE FILED 2005-06-21, hereafter “Mahajan").
As per claim 1, Mahajan discloses a system, comprising:
a server computer (See [0009], "Remote terminal sessions involve a first remote machine acting as a server configured to remote data to a second local machine acting as a client");
an application unit of the server computer (See [0009], “Applications operating on the remote machine can generate server application graphical windows. The remote terminal session is configured to enable output or graphics of the server application graphical window(s) to be forwarded to the local machine.");
a user device communicatively connected to the server computer (See [0009], “Remote terminal sessions involve a first remote machine acting as a server configured to remote data to a second local machine acting as a client");
a transformer of the user device (See [0021], “Local machine 104A includes a client remote application manager 710, and may include one or more client applications 712 operating on a client operating system (OS) 714.", further see [0026], “The client remote application manager is also configured to cause a proxy graphical window 112A to be generated on local machine 104A and to cause the representation of the server application graphical window 11 0A to be painted over the proxy graphical window 112A in the form of a remotely generated application graphical window 116A.");
wherein the server computer receives input from the user device in respect of an image displayed at the user device, processes the application unit with the input, and sends tags and processed data representing a next image to the user device, the tags relate to the input received by the server computer for processing (See [0031], “in this instance. the server remote application manager 702 is configured to determine whether the user command relates to a window/resize operation relative to a graphical window involved in the remote terminal session. Once a determination is made that a move resize command is being initiated, the server remote application manager 702 takes an action based on the user selected graphical window move/resize mode. In this particular implementation, if the move/resize mode is full-image, then server remote application manager 702 handles the command al the server and updates the server application graphical window 110A accordingly.”) and
sends tags and processed data representing a next image to the user device, the tags relate to the input received by the server computer for processing (See [0031], “As the server application graphical window is updated, corresponding representations are sent to the client, and the representations are manifested as an updated remotely generated application graphical window 116A. The size or location of the proxy graphical window 112A is adjusted to correspond to the updated remotely generated opplic0tion graphical window 116A.", Here the representations of the updated server application graphical window reads on the tags);
wherein the transformer of the user device compares the tags to new input to the user device in respect of the image, and, responsive to receiving the processed data representing the next image from the server computer, transforms the processed data representing the next image, to transformed data representing a transformed image, and the user device outputs on the display the transformed data as the transformed image (See [0031]-[0032], “As the server application graphical window is updated, corresponding representations are sent to the client, and the representations are manifested as an updated remotely generated application graphical window 116A.” and “the server remote application manager 702 is configured to send the user commands to the client remote application manager 710. An outline of the proxy graphical window 112Areflecting the user command is generated on client desktop 116A. Upon completion of the client command, positional data relating to the new size and/or location of the proxy graphical window is sent to the remote machine where the server application graphical window is updated to synchronize with the new proxy graphical window.”).
As per claim 2, Mahajan further discloses wherein the user device includes a display for output of the transformed data (See [0015], [0064], “Upon completion of the user's resize command, the proxy graphical window 112 is updated to the size of outline 504. The remote machine then updates application graphical window 110 relative to the updated proxy graphical window size/location. A corresponding updated remotely generated application graphical window 116 is sent to local machine 104 to synchronize the remotely generated application graphical window 116 with the proxy graphical window 112 as can be appreciated from FIG. 6.”).
As per claim 3, Mahajan further discloses wherein the user device includes a processor, memory, an input device and a display for output of the transformed data (See [0058]-[0059] “System 1000 includes a general-purpose computing system in the form of a first machine 1001 and a second machine 1002 … either of the first and second machines can act as a local machine upon which a user operates and the other of the first and second machines can act as the remote or server machine.” “The components of first machine 1001 can include, but are not limited to, one or more processors 1004 ( e.g., any of microprocessors, controllers, and the like),”).
As per claim 4, Mahajan further discloses wherein the server computer includes a processor and memory (See [0058]-[0059] “System 1000 includes a general-purpose computing system in the form of a first machine 1001 and a second machine 1002 … either of the first and second machines can act as a local machine upon which a user operates and the other of the first and second machines can act as the remote or server machine.”, “The components of first machine 1001 can include, but are not limited to, one or more processors 1004 ( e.g., any of microprocessors, controllers, and the like),” and “System 1000 includes a variety of computer readable media which can be any media that is accessible by first machine 1001 and includes both volatile and non-volatile media, removable and non-removable media. The system memory 1006 includes computer-readable media in the form of volatile memory, such as random access memory (RAM) 1010, and/or non-volatile memory, such as read only memory (ROM) 1012”).
Related Prior Arts
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the PTO-892 Notice of Reference Cited.
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. SEE MPEP 2141.02 [R-5] VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984) In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201, 73 USPQ2d 1141, 1146 (Fed. Cir. 2004). >See also MPEP §2123.
In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUEN S LU whose telephone number is (571)272-4114. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8-19, Mid-Flex 2 hours.
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, Mr. Aleksandr Kerzhner can be reached on 5712701760. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
KUEN S LU /Kuen S Lu/
Art Unit 2165
Primary Patent Examiner
March 2, 2026