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 .
Claims 1-19 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an API interface united to configured to receive…; a rendering engine control united configured to control…; a rendering engine control unit configured to process…; a composed media sending unit configured to cause…” in claims 1-10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Double Patenting
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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-6 and 11-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of U.S. Patent No. 12368763 (hereinafter ‘763). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because each of the instant enumerated claims in following table is anticipated by a correspondingly mapped ‘763 claim.
Instant claims
‘763 claims
1. An apparatus for providing a composed media stream for publication to a plurality of presenter(s) and participants that are part of a communication session via interconnected computing devices, comprising:
an API interface unit configured to receive instructions relating to programmatic control over the rendering and publishing of a composed media stream;
a rendering engine control unit configured to control the rendering and publication of the composed media stream based on information received from the API interface unit;
a rendering engine unit configured to process one or more media streams received from the interconnected computing devices of the communication session and supplementary information and configured to generate the composed media stream; and
a composed media sending unit configured to cause the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session.
2. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the rendering engine control unit provides a URL to the rendering engine unit, and wherein the rendering engine unit is configured to use the provided URL to access and run a computer program configured to generate the composed media stream.
3. The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the rendering engine unit is further configured to use the provided URL to obtain one or more media streams that are to be used to generate the composed media stream.
4. The apparatus of claim 3, wherein the rendering engine unit is also configured to use the provided URL to obtain supplementary information that is to be used to generate the composed media stream.
5. The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the rendering engine unit further is configured to output audio and video streams for the composed media stream to a virtual audio device unit and a virtual display server unit, respectively.
6. The apparatus of claim 5 wherein the composed media sending unit reads data from the virtual audio device unit and the virtual display server unit and uses the read data to cause the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session.
11. An apparatus for providing a composed media stream for publication to a plurality of presenter(s) and participants that are part of a communication session via interconnected computing devices, comprising:
an API interface that includes means for receiving instructions relating to programmatic control over the rendering and publishing of a composed media stream;
means for controlling the rendering and publication of the composed media stream based on information received from the API interface unit;
means for processing one or more media streams received from the interconnected computing devices of the communication session and supplementary information and for generating the composed media stream; and
means for causing the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session.
12. A non-transitory computer readable medium containing instructions which, when implemented by one or more processors of a computing device cause the computing device to perform a method comprising:
receiving, via an API interface, instructions relating to programmatic control over the rendering and publishing of a composed media stream;
processing one or more media streams received from the interconnected computing devices of the communication session and supplementary information based on the information received via the API interface to generate the composed media stream; and
causing the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session.
13. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 12, wherein the processing step comprises using a provided URL to access and run a computer program configured to generate the composed media stream.
14. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 13, wherein the processing step further comprises using the provided URL to obtain one or more media streams that are to be used to generate the composed media stream.
15. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the processing step further comprises using the provided URL to obtain supplementary information that is to be used to generate the composed media stream.
16. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 12 wherein the method further comprises: outputting an audio stream for the composed media stream to a virtual audio device unit; and outputting a video stream for the composed media stream to a virtual display server unit.
17. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 16, wherein causing the composed media stream to be published comprises reading data from the virtual audio device unit and the virtual display server unit and using the read data to cause the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session.
1. An apparatus for providing a composed media stream for publication to a plurality of presenter(s) and participants that are part of a communication session via interconnected computing devices, comprising:
an API interface unit configured to receive instructions relating to programmatic control over the rendering and publishing of a composed media stream;
a rendering engine control unit configured to control the rendering and publication of the composed media stream based on information received from the API interface unit;
a rendering engine unit configured to process one or more media streams received from the interconnected computing devices of the communication session and supplementary information and configured to generate the composed media stream; and
a composed media sending unit configured to cause the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session;
wherein the rendering engine control unit provides a URL to the rendering engine unit, and wherein the rendering engine unit is configured to use the provided URL to access and run a computer program configured to generate the composed media stream.
2. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the rendering engine unit is further configured to use the provided URL to obtain one or more media streams that are to be used to generate the composed media stream.
3. The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the rendering engine unit is also configured to use the provided URL to obtain supplementary information that is to be used to generate the composed media stream.
4. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the rendering engine unit further is configured to output audio and video streams for the composed media stream to a virtual audio device unit and a virtual display server unit, respectively.
5. The apparatus of claim 4 wherein the composed media sending unit reads data from the virtual audio device unit and the virtual display server unit and uses the read data to cause the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session.
6. An apparatus for providing a composed media stream for publication to a plurality of presenter(s) and participants that are part of a communication session via interconnected computing devices, comprising:
an API interface that includes means for receiving instructions relating to programmatic control over the rendering and publishing of a composed media stream;
means for controlling the rendering and publication of the composed media stream based on information received from the API interface unit;
means for processing one or more media streams received from the interconnected computing devices of the communication session and supplementary information and for generating the composed media stream; and
means for causing the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session;
wherein the means for controlling the rendering and publication of the composed media stream provides a URL to the means for processing one or more media streams, and wherein the means for processing one or more media streams is configured to use the provided URL to access and run a computer program configured to generate the composed media stream.
7. A non-transitory computer readable medium containing instructions which, when implemented by one or more processors of a computing device cause the computing device to perform a method comprising:
receiving, via an API interface, instructions relating to programmatic control over the rendering and publishing of a composed media stream;
processing one or more media streams received from the interconnected computing devices of the communication session and supplementary information based on the information received via the API interface to generate the composed media stream; and
causing the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session;
wherein processing one or more media streams comprises using a provided URL to access and run a computer program configured to generate the composed media stream.
8. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 7, wherein the processing step further comprises using the provided URL to obtain one or more media streams that are to be used to generate the composed media stream.
9. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8, wherein the processing step further comprises using the provided URL to obtain supplementary information that is to be used to generate the composed media stream.
10. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 7, wherein the method further comprises: outputting an audio stream for the composed media stream to a virtual audio device unit; and outputting a video stream for the composed media stream to a virtual display server unit.
11. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 10, wherein causing the composed media stream to be published comprises reading data from the virtual audio device unit and the virtual display server unit and using the read data to cause the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session.
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.
Claims 1, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant disclosed Kroepfl US 20180131746, in view of Applicant disclosed Gwock US 20180054596.
For claims 1 and 11, Kroepfl discloses:
An apparatus for providing a composed media stream for publication to a plurality of presenter(s) and participants that are part of a communication session via interconnected computing devices, comprising:
a rendering engine control unit configured to control the rendering and publication of the composed media stream based on information received from the API interface unit (par. 0086: “From such information 8a-d, the data rate for each of the compressed outgoing data streams 4a-d is subject to a controlling adjustment by the server unit 1 for transmitting to the respective specified first receiver units 5a-d, preferably through the software-assisted precalculation of the resource load of the respective first receiver units 5a-d on the part of the server unit 1.”);
a rendering engine unit configured to process one or more media streams received from the interconnected computing devices of the communication session and supplementary information (par. 0086: “Through data connections…each of the first receiver units 5a-d transmits information 8a-d regarding its resource load back to the server unit 1, after its calculation with the aid of the corresponding computer program in the respective first receiver unit 5a-d.”) and configured to generate the composed media stream (par. 0085: “In the server unit 1, the incoming data streams 2a-d are combined to form one mosaic image 7, which is subsequently compressed in the server unit 1 into four different outgoing data streams 4a-d with different data rates.”); and
a composed media sending unit configured to cause the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session (par. 0085: “In the server unit 1, the incoming data streams 2a-d are combined to form one mosaic image 7, which is subsequently compressed in the server unit 1 into four different outgoing data streams 4a-d with different data rates. The compressed outgoing data streams 4a, 4b, 4c and 4d are sent to the first receiver units 5a, 5b, 5c and 5d, respectively.”).
While Kroepfl discloses a client providing metrics regarding its capability to a video conferencing server (see, par. 0086: “[t]hrough data connections…each of the first receiver units 5a-d transmits information 8a-d regarding its resource load back to the server unit 1…”, it fails to explicitly disclose:
“an API interface unit configured to receive instructions relating to programmatic control over the rendering and publishing of a composed media stream”.
However, in a related field, Gwock discloses “a process in which the third electronic device 330 participating in the video conference notifies the video conference server 340 of a playable resolution of the third electronic device 330 and the video conference server 340 responds thereto.” (par. 0067)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before effective filing date of claimed invention to have Gwock’s teachings alongside those of Kroepfl. The motivation to combine would have been to reduce server burden by providing video stream quality in accordance with capabilities/desire of requesting client (Gwock, par. 0068 and 0070).
For claim 12, Kroepfl discloses
A non-transitory computer readable medium containing instructions which, when implemented by one or more processors of a computing device cause the computing device to perform a method comprising:
processing one or more media streams received from the interconnected computing devices of the communication session and supplementary information (par. 0086: “Through data connections…each of the first receiver units 5a-d transmits information 8a-d regarding its resource load back to the server unit 1, after its calculation with the aid of the corresponding computer program in the respective first receiver unit 5a-d.”) based on the information received via the API interface to generate the composed media stream (par. 0085: “In the server unit 1, the incoming data streams 2a-d are combined to form one mosaic image 7, which is subsequently compressed in the server unit 1 into four different outgoing data streams 4a-d with different data rates.”); and
causing the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session (par. 0085: “In the server unit 1, the incoming data streams 2a-d are combined to form one mosaic image 7, which is subsequently compressed in the server unit 1 into four different outgoing data streams 4a-d with different data rates. The compressed outgoing data streams 4a, 4b, 4c and 4d are sent to the first receiver units 5a, 5b, 5c and 5d, respectively.”).
While Kroepfl discloses a client providing metrics regarding its capability to a video conferencing server (see, par. 0086: “[t]hrough data connections…each of the first receiver units 5a-d transmits information 8a-d regarding its resource load back to the server unit 1…”, it fails to explicitly disclose:
“receiving, via an API interface, instructions relating to programmatic control over the rendering and publishing of a composed media stream”.
However, in a related field, Gwock discloses “a process in which the third electronic device 330 participating in the video conference notifies the video conference server 340 of a playable resolution of the third electronic device 330 and the video conference server 340 responds thereto.” (par. 0067).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before effective filing date of claimed invention to have Gwock’s teachings alongside those of Kroepfl. The motivation to combine would have been to reduce server burden by providing video stream quality in accordance with capabilities/desire of requesting client (Gwock, par. 0068 and 0070).
Claims 5, 6, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kroepfl US 20180131746, in view of Gwock US 20180054596, in view of Applicant disclosed Dudko US 20180192087.
For claims 5 and 16, Kroepfl-Gwock discloses:
The apparatus of claim 2, but fails to explicitly disclose “wherein the rendering engine unit further is configured to output audio and video streams for the composed media stream to a virtual audio device unit and a virtual display server unit, respectively.”
However, in a related field, Dudko discloses virtual client computers receiving live stream signal from split-streaming server (par. 0090).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before effective filing date of claimed invention to have Dudko’s teachings alongside those of Kroepfl-Gwock. The motivation to combine would have been to lessen burden of a serve redistributing video signal to a plurality of targets and/or devices (Dudko, par. 0114 and 0115).
For claims 6 and 17, Kroepfl-Gwock-Dudko discloses:
The apparatus of claim 5 wherein the composed media sending unit reads data from the virtual audio device unit and the virtual display server unit and uses the read data to cause the composed media stream to be published to participants of the communication session (Dudko, par. 0090: Virtual client simultaneously provides video feed to a plurality of platforms).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-10, 18 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAYTON R WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-3801. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:00pm.
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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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.
/CLAYTON R WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights