UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONERFORPATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313 1450
`www.usptn.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO
`
`FILING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. I CONFIRMATION NO
`
`90/019,277
`
`10/13/2023
`
`8478245
`
`GTS002
`
`5085
`
`07/31/2024
`
`7590
`157722
`Alavi & Anaipakos PLLC
`609 Main Strεεt
`Suitε 3200
`Houston, TX 77002
`
`EXAMINER
`
`REICHLE, KARIN M
`
`ART UNIT
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`3992
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`07/31/2024
`
`PAPER
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Commissioner for Patents
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313 1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`DO NOT USE IN PALM PRINTER
`
`(THIRD PARTY REQUESTER’S c。 RR ESP。NDENCE ADDRESS)
`
`INDRANIL MUKERUJI
`1875 K STREET, NW
`WASHINGTON, D‘ C 20006-1238
`
`EX PARTEREEXAMINATION COMMUNICATION TRANSMITTAL FORM
`
`REEXAMINATION CONTROL NO. 901019,277.
`
`PATENT UNDER REEXAMINATION 8478245.
`
`ART UNIT 3992.
`
`Enclosed is a copy of the latest communication from the United States Patent and Trademark
`Office in the above identified ex parte reexamination proceeding (37 CFR 1.550(f)).
`
`Where this copy is supplied after the reply by requester, 37 CFR 1.535, or the time for filing a
`reply has passed, no submission on behalf of the ex parte reexamination requester will be
`acknowledged or considered (37 CFR 1.550(g)).
`
`PTOL-465 (Rev.07-04)
`
`

`

`Notice of Intent to Issue
`Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate Examiner
`Karin M Reichle
`
`Control No.
`90/019,277
`
`Patent Under Reexamination
`8478245
`
`Art Unit
`3992
`
`I AIA Status
`I No
`
`-- The MA!.니WG DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`
`2.
`
`1. 딘 Prosecution on the merits is (or remains) closed in this ex parte reexamination proceeding. This proceeding is
`subject to reopening at the initiative of the Office or upon petition. Cf. 37 CFR 1.313(a). A Certificate will be
`issued in view of
`(a) 딩 Patent owner’s communication(s) filed: 06 June 2024.
`(b) 口 Patent owner’s failure to file an appropriate timely response to the Office action mailed: _ .
`(c) 口 Patent owner’S failure to timely file an Appeal Brief (37 CFR 41.31 ).
`(d) 口 The decision on appeal by the 口 Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences 口 Court dated _
`(e) 口 Other:_.
`The Reexamination Certificate will indicate the following:
`(a) Change in the Specification: 口 Yes 딩 No
`(b) Change in the Drawing(s): 口 Yes 딘 No
`(c) Status of the Claim(s):
`(1) Patent claim(s) confirmed: 1,4-5 and 16.
`(2) Patent claim(s) amended (including dependent on amended claim(s)): _
`(3) Patent claim(s) canceled: _ .
`(4) Newly presented 이 aim(s) patentable: _ .
`(5) Newly presented canceled claims:_.
`(6) Patent claim(s) 口 previously O currently disclaimed:_
`(7) Patent claim(s) not subject to reexamination: 2-3,6-15 and 17-33.
`3. 口 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on_.
`4. 낌 Note the attached statement of reasons for patentability and/or confirmation. Any comments considered
`necessary by patent owner regarding reasons for patentability and/or confirmation must be submitted promptly
`to avoid processing delays. Such submission(s) should be labeled: ”Comments On Statement of Reasons for
`Patentability and/or Confirmation. ”
`
`5. 口 Note attached NOTICE OF REFERENCES CITED (PT0-892).
`
`6. 낌 Note attached LIST OF REFERENCES CITED (PTO/SB/08 or PTO/SB/08 substitute).
`
`7. 口 The drawing correction request filed on_ is: 口 approved 口disapproved.
`
`8. 口 Acknowledgment is made of the priority claim under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`a) 口 All b) 口 Some*
`c) 口 None of the certified copies have
`口 been received.
`口 not been received.
`口 been filed in Application No. _ .
`口 been filed in reexamination Control No.
`口 been received by the International Bureau in PCT Application No._.
`
`*Certified copies not received:_.
`
`9. 口 Note attached Examiner’s Amendment.
`
`10. 口 Note attached Interview Summary (PT0-474).
`
`11. 口 Other:
`
`All correspondence relating to this reexamination proceeding should be directed to the Central Reexamination
`Unit at the mail, FAX, or hand-carry addresses given at the end of this Office action.
`/Ka 끼 n Reichle/
`I /JALATEE WORJLOH/
`I Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
`
`cc: Requester (if third party requester)
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL 469 (Rev. 08 13)
`Notice of Intent to Issue Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate
`
`Part of Paper No. 20240709
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/019 ,277
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Pagel
`
`Notice of Intent to Issue Reexamination Certificate
`
`Reexamination was requested for claims 1, 4-5 and 16 of United States Patent No.
`
`8,478,245 (hereinafter also referred to as ‘245 or Carion et al ‘245). The ‘245 patent was issued
`
`to Carion et al on July 2, 2013.
`
`References Asserted in Reauest
`
`(1) U.S. Patent Application No. 2006/0179118 to Stirbu (hereinafter also referred to as
`Stirbu or ‘ 118 (Exhibit 10(껴)) filed August 1, 2007 and published July 2, 2013
`
`(2) U.S. Patent Application No. 2006/0136571 to Kloba et al (hereinafter also referred to
`as Kloba or ‘571 (Exhibit 1005)) filed January 11, 2006 and published June 22, 2006).
`
`Other
`
`The Declaration of Joseph C. McAlexander Ill, P.E. (Exhibit 1006), executed October 3,
`
`2023 and filed October 13, 2023, and accompanying Exhibits 1007 and 1008.
`
`June 6. 2024 Resoonse-Ar2uments/Declaration/Exhibits
`
`The June 6, 2024 response (i.e. arguments, Stuart Lipoff declaration, Exhibit A, and
`
`Exhibits B-E) was considered in its' entirety.
`
`Concurrent Proceedin2s
`
`See RXFILJKT accompanying this Notice. Note also TRAN.LET, Information
`
`Disclosure Statement bv Patent Owner, pages 2-3 of the June 6, 2024 response
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/019 ,277
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 3
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`Various IDS were submitted by Patent Owner on June 6, 2024.
`
`Prior art is evaluated in accordance with the policy of MPEP 2256, which states: “ Where
`
`patents, publications, and other such items of information are submitted by a party (patent owner
`
`or requester) in compliance with the requirements of the rules, the requisite degree of
`
`consideration to be given to such information will be normally limited by the degree to which the
`
`party filing the information citation has explained the content and relevance of the information.
`
`The initials of the examiner placed adjacent to the citations on the form PTO/SB/08A and 08B
`
`or its equivalent, without an indication to the contrary in the record, do not signify that the
`
`information has been considered by the examiner any further than to the extent noted above. ”
`
`Claim Interoretation
`
`As set forth in MPEP 2240, in making the determination of whether to order
`
`reexamination, the Office will determine the proper meaning of the patent claims by giving the
`
`claims their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification (see In re
`
`Yαmamoto, 740 F.2d 1569 (Fed. Cir. 1984)), except in the case of an expired patent (in a
`
`reexamination involving claims of an expired patent, claim construction is pursuant to the
`
`principle set forth by the court in Phillψs v. AWH Corp., 415F.3d1303, 1316, 75 USPQ2d
`
`1321, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (words of a claim ” are generally given their ordinary and custom따y
`
`meaning” as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the 따t in question at the time of the
`
`invention, see Ex parte Pα!pst-Motoren, 1USPQ2d1655 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1986)).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/019 ,277
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page4
`
`STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR PATENTABILITY AND/OR CONFIRMATION
`
`Claims 1, 4-5 and 16 are confirmed.
`
`The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for patentability and/or confirmation
`
`of the claims found patentable in this reexamination proceeding:
`
`Independent Claim 1 is drawn to:
`
`A method of rendering content on a wireless device, said method comprising:
`
`receiving an identification oJ a custom configuration of a plurality of rendering blocks oJ
`
`said wireless device, wherein said custom cor.멘cguration is associated with an α!pplication and
`
`conJ꺼!glιres said plurality oJ rendering blocks to render content in a manner customized to said
`
`application;
`
`receiving compiled content generated in part from execution of said application wherein
`
`said compiled content comprises render commands expressed in a syntax that is generic to said
`
`wireless device;
`
`using a graphical user interface comprising said plurality of rendering blocks to generate
`
`renderable content based on said compiled content and said custom configuration; and
`
`rendering said renderable content on said wireless device,
`
`wherein said receiving compiled content comprises:
`
`receiving first compiled content specific to a first page of said application; and
`
`receiving second compiled content specific to a second page of said application,
`
`wherein said custom configuration is applicable to both said first and second compiled
`
`content.
`
`(Emphasis added.)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/019 ,277
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 5
`
`As an initial matter, the 6/6/2024 response addresses the scope of claim 1, specifically
`
`“ custom configuration" and “ customized to said application”. See section IV., B., bridging
`
`pages 4-5 thereof. Accordingly, the following interpretations are adopted.1
`
`Claim term
`
`Construction
`
`“ custom configuration”
`
`“ a configuration that determines the ‘look
`
`“ customized to the application”
`
`“ created or written for a specific application”
`
`and feel' of the application"
`
`Stirbu proposes a server-site method, a client-site method, computer program products, a
`
`client, a server, a module and a system for remoting a user interface of an application between a
`
`server that executes said application and a client on which a representation of said user interface
`
`is to be rendered. Stirbu furthermore sets forth customizing the remoted UI to match the
`
`characteristic display style (the so-called look & feel) of a device platform is of particular
`
`importance. If a device platform provides an own UI framework for controlling and rendering a
`
`local UI for its local application(s), the characteristic display style may for instance be the
`
`characteristic appearance of said local UL See, e.g., abstract and paragraphs [0002] and [0007].
`
`Furthermore, see Section VII., and VII., A., i,. on pages 7-9 of the 6/6/2024 response and
`
`thereby, the Lipoff Declaration, Exhibit A, paragraphs 65-66. Accordingly, Stirbu does not
`
`disclose nor suggest a “ custom configuration” of a plurality of rendering blocks of a wireless
`
`device which is not only associated with an application but also “ configures said plurality of
`
`rendering blocks to render content in a manner customized to said application.” (Emphasis
`
`added.) Kloba also does not teach such feature. 2
`
`1 See Exhibits D and E, Exhibit B <][ 53, and NPL 34, pages 5-15 and 17-23 and NPL 50, pages 42-44 filed 6/6/2024.
`2 See Exhibit AA of the Request, pages 13-15.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/019 ,277
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 6
`
`Continuing, see Section VII. And VII., A., iii., and VII., B., ii., on pages 7, 11-14, and
`
`15-17 of the 6/6/2024 Response. For the reasons set forth in the prior paragraph with regard to
`
`“ custom configuration" and “ said custom configuration ... configures said plurality of rendering
`
`blocks to render content in a manner customized to said application”, the prior art to Stirbu and
`
`Kloba also do not teach or suggest the limitation “ [r]eceiving an identification of a custom
`
`configuration of a plurality of rendering blocks of said wireless device" since the identification
`
`received is identification of the “ custom configuration” .3
`
`See Section VII. And VII., A., ii., and VII., B., i., on pages 7, 10-11, and 14 of the
`
`61612024 Response. For the reasons set forth in the prior paragraph with regard to “ custom
`
`configuration" and “ said custom configuration .. configures said plurality of rendering blocks to
`
`render content in a manner customized to said application”, the prior art to Stirbu and Kloba also
`
`do not teach or suggest the limitation “ wherein said receiving compiled content comprises:
`
`receiving first compiled content specific to a first page of said application; and receiving second
`
`compiled content specific to a second page of said application” since the “ custom configuration”
`
`is applicable to both said first and second compiled content as claimed.4
`
`3 The 6/6/2024 Response asserts “ [r]eceiving an identification of a custom configuration is not the equivalent of
`receiving a custom configuration itsεlf, whεn ‘ [t]hε spεcification and thε claims consistεntly usε thε tεrms.
`to
`dεnotε sεparatε procεSSεS with diffiεrεnt εnd rεsults. ”’ AllVoice Computing PLC v. Nuance Communs., Inc., 504
`F.3d 1236, 1247-48 (Fed. Cir. 2007).” Thε Rεsponsε also assεrts “ Stirbu doεs not rεcεivε an idεntification. at thε
`wireless device. Stirbu is limited to always receiving only the custom configuration itself at thε cliεnt. ” Howεvεr,
`note, for example, also claim 9 which depends from claim 1 (i.e. further recites/limits claim 1) and recites “whεrεin
`further said identifying said custom configuration comprises receiving an identifier that identifies said custom
`configuration. ” Thεrεforε the idεntification rεcεivεd in claim 1 is broader than (i.e. does not only include)
`“rεcεiving an idεntifiεr that idεntifies said custom configuration. ”
`4 Thε 6/6/2024 Rεsponsε assεrts “
`. thε claims that actually dεfinε thε scopε of the invεnhon. rεqmrε rεcεivmg
`two different compiled contents: first compiled content specific to a first page of said application; and second
`compiled content specific to a second pagε of said application. ” (Bold Emphasis added.) The Response also asserts
`“ the ordinal numbering in the limitation-i.e., a ‘first page and second page-makes clear that the pages must be
`different,. ” Thε languagε “diff1εrεnt” doεs not appεar in thε claim languagε “ first compiled content specific to a
`first page of said application; and second compiled content specific to a second page of said application”. The
`tεrminology “ first” and “sεcond” according to BRI is the number/quantity is two, i.e. two complied contents and two
`pages and one compiled content corresponds to a page and one complied content corresponds to a page.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/019 ,277
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 7
`
`Therefore, the invention as claimed in claim 1 is not taught or suggested by Stirbu nor
`
`any combination of Stirbu and Kloba. Claims 4-5 depend from claim 1.
`
`Dependent claim 16 which depends from claim 12 sets forth:
`
`A non-transitory computer usable medium as described in claim 12
`
`[A non-『ansitory computer usable medium comprising instructions therein that when
`
`executed by a processor implement a method of rendering content on a wireless device, said
`
`method comprising:
`
`receiving an identification oJ a custom configuration of a plurality of rendering blocks oJ
`
`said wireless device, wherein said custom configuration is associated with an application and
`
`configures said plurality of rendering blocks to render content in a manner customized to said
`
`application;
`
`receiving compiled content generated in part from execution of said application wherein
`
`said compiled content comprises render commands expressed in a syntax that is generic to said
`
`wireless device;
`
`using a graphical user interface comprising said plurality of rendering blocks to generate
`
`renderable content based on said compiled content and said custom configuration; and
`
`rendering said renderable content on said wireless device,
`
`wherein said receiving compiled content comprises:
`
`receiving first compiled content specific to a first page of said application; and
`
`receiving second compiled content specific to a second page of said application,
`
`wherein said custom configuration is applicable to both said first and second compiled
`
`content. (Emphasis added.)]
`
`wherein the complied content is specific to the rendering capabilities of said wireless
`
`device.
`
`See Section VII., C.-D., on page 17 of the 6/6/2024 Response which assert the reasoning
`
`set forth with regard to claim 1 also applies to claim 16. Accordingly, attention is reinvited to
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/019 ,277
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 8
`
`the preceding discussion of claim 1. Therefore, the invention as claimed in claim 16 is also not
`
`taught or suggested by Stirbu nor any combination of Stirbu and Kloba.
`
`Any comments considered necessary by PATENT OWNER regarding the above
`
`statement must be submitted promptly to avoid processing delays. Such submission by the
`
`patent owner should be labeled: ”Comments on Statement of Reasons for Patentability and/or
`
`Confirmation" and will be placed in the reexamination file.
`
`Conclusion
`
`The patent owner is reminded of the continuing responsibility under 37 CPR l.565(a) to
`
`apprise the Office of any litigation activity, or other prior or concurrent proceeding, involving
`
`Patent No. 5,724,092 throughout the course of this reexamination proceeding. The third p따ty
`
`requester is also reminded of the ability to similarly apprise the Office of any such activity or
`
`proceeding throughout the course of this reexamination proceeding. See MPEP § § 2207, 2282
`
`and 2286.
`
`Any document filed by the Patent Owner must be served on the third party requester (or
`
`requesters in a merged proceeding) in the reexamination proceeding in the manner provided by
`
`37 C.E.R. § 1.248. See 37 C.F.R. § l.550(f) and MPEP § 2266.03.
`
`Corresoondence
`
`All correspondence relating to this ex parte reexamination proceeding should be directed:
`
`By Mail to:
`
`Mail Stop Ex Parte Reexam
`Central Reexamination Unit
`Commissioner for Patents
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/019 ,277
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 9
`
`United States Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`By FAX to:
`
`(571) 273-9900
`Central Reexamination Unit
`
`By hand:
`
`Customer Service Window
`Randolph Building
`401 Dulany Street
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`
`Bv P갔tent Center:
`
`3、0 fil성 and rntm산-- 영ateni .‘생),rni~s‘·§않 rn Pn‘rnl.C앉ik:i\ vid!:
`
`Vb.it
`합$한s://\1.;·.,~·、.V .. US!핵‘;·,--νhxuents/n전ril、;>/합mcnt-c함”’~r for mon:.~ inforrrntion abrmt
`한i‘tent Cen.t-eγ nml
`썼tns://“싸;”않”--짧압‘ m1v/n;썩양셈3,/갱·ζx f샌γ inf on얀afam about filing k양 DOC‘;체 i、얀n엽씨-
`
`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.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to the Central
`
`Reexamination Unit at telephone number 571-272-7705.
`
`Other useful telephone numbers:
`
`Reexamination Practice ( 571) 272-7703
`
`/Karin Reichle/
`Primary Examiner
`Art Unit 3992
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 90/019 ,277
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Conferees:
`/J.W./
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
`
`I ALEXANDER J KOSOWSKI/
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992
`
`Page 10
`
`