DETAILED ACTION
This Non-Final action is responsive to the continuation and IDS filed 7/21/2018.
In the continuation Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 9 and 15 are the independent claims.
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/21/2018 has been entered, and considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following minor grammatical informalities: The claim recites “pre-existinghost” failing to separate the two words “pre-existing” & “host”. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112:
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.
6. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention. The claim describes communicating detected changes to a server connected with a first and second client when a first copy of the slide is changed. When a second copy of the slide is changed on the second client device the claim is unclear because it does not clearly link the 3rd and 4th limitation. Instead the 4th and last limitation describes “replacing the first copy of the slide with the second copy of the slide, if a change was not detected in the first copy of the slide.” This language is vague and makes no sense as to the reason for replacing the first copy with the second copy, what does make sense is replacing the first copy with the second copy when a change is detected to the second copy because it is the updated version. However replacing the first copy because it has not changed does not help to clarify the claim.
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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Jack Busch herein Busch (NPL- Edit Your Documents Anywhere: OffiSync + Mobile Google Docs + Microsoft Word, Published Nov. 2010, gPost, pgs. 1-7 (pdf)).
Regarding Independent claim 1, Busch discloses A computer system having a software plug-in component, configured to be plugged into and integrated with a third-party pre-existing host application program, configured to run on the computer system, to add functionality within the third-party pre-existing host application program, wherein the software plug-in component is configured to run within the host application program and interact with the host application program via a service interface, that when executed on a first client computing device causes the first client computing device to:
present an intergraded user interface configured to provide a set of buttons including a dashboard button, wherein activating the dashboard button causes metadata about a first copy of a document to be collected from local and remote sources and presented in a dashboard area (see pgs. 1-2, discloses OffiSync add-in for Microsoft Word which presents an integrated user interface that provides a set of buttons including a Dashboard button has depicted under step 4. The Dashboard button causes metadata which is file information such as location (local/external), file name, file type information to be retrieved so the user can access a first copy of the document either from the Web with services such as Google Docs, Desktop and phone has shown on pg. 3);
detect changes to the first copy of the document (see pg. 3, showing the listing of files from Google Docs that includes a first copy of the document with information indicating “Last Modified” date thereby detecting when changes to the first copy of the document were made);
periodically check whether a second copy of the document on a second client computing device has been changed (see pg. 4, discloses periodically checking if a second copy of the document at a second client device has changed when someone is editing the document OffiSync notifies you of the changes with a notification);
if the second copy of the document has been changed, update the first copy of the document to include the changes made to the second copy of the document (see pgs.4-5, discloses that when the second document copy from another user device has been changed the first copy of the users document is updated via “merging” the changes by OffiSync).
Regarding Dependent claim 2, with dependency of claim 1, Busch discloses wherein when the software plug-in component is executed on the first client computing device further causes the first client computing device to periodically communicate the changes detected to the first copy of the document to a server (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync).
Regarding Dependent claim 3, with dependency of claim 1, Busch discloses wherein when the software plug-in component is executed on the first client computing device further causes the first client computing device to display comments made on the second computing device in the dashboard area of the first client computing device (see pgs. 3 & 6, discloses real-time co-authoring between document copies thereby supporting display of comments made by each collaborator in the dashboard area of OffiSync and includes sharing such content in real-time).
Regarding Dependent claim 4, with dependency of claim 1, Busch discloses wherein the metadata comprise information associated with the document and include file information, author information, presence information, and information about other related files (see pgs. 1-2, discloses OffiSync add-in for Microsoft Word which presents an integrated user interface that provides a set of buttons including a Dashboard button has depicted under step 4. The Dashboard button causes metadata which is file information such as location (local/external), file name, file type information to be retrieved so the user can access a first copy of the document either from the Web with services such as Google Docs, Desktop and phone has shown on pg. 3).
Regarding Dependent claim 5, with dependency of claim 1, Busch discloses wherein the dashboard area includes a comment display area in which comments from the second client computing device are displayed in substantially real-time (see pgs. 3 & 6, discloses real-time co-authoring between document copies thereby supporting display of comments made by each collaborator in the dashboard area of OffiSync and includes sharing such content in real-time).
Regarding Dependent claim 6, with dependency of claim 1, Busch discloses wherein the metadata are sought and displayed in substantially real time (The Dashboard button causes metadata which is file information such as location (local/external), file name, file type information to be retrieved so the user can access a first copy of the document either from the Web with services such as Google Docs, Desktop and phone has shown on pg. 3).
Regarding Dependent claim 7, with dependency of claim 2, Busch discloses wherein the first client computing device and the second client computing device are coupled with a plurality of servers associated with a corresponding plurality of service providers (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync. The servers including Google Docs for managing documents over the Web).
Regarding Dependent claim 8, with dependency of claim 7, Busch discloses wherein each of the plurality of servers include a master copy of the document automatically and periodically updated to include changes made to the first and the second copies of the document (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync. The servers including Google Docs for managing documents over the Web in real-time).
Regarding Independent claim 9, Busch discloses A method of merging documents, the method comprising:
detecting a change in a first copy of a document on a first client device using a plug-in software component configured to run on a computing device and to be plugged into and integrated with a third-party pre-existing host application program, wherein the software plug-in component is configured to run within the host application program and interact with the host application program via a service interface (see pgs. 1-2, discloses OffiSync add-in for Microsoft Word which presents an integrated user interface that provides a set of buttons including a Dashboard button has depicted under step 4. See pg. 3, showing the listing of files from Google Docs that includes a first copy of the document with information indicating “Last Modified” date thereby detecting when changes to the first copy of the document were made);
communicating the detect change to a server coupled with the first client device and a second client device (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync);
detecting a change made to a second copy of the document on the second client device (see pgs.4-5, discloses that when the second document copy from another user device has been changed the first copy of the users document is updated via “merging” the changes by OffiSync); and
including the change made to the second copy of the document in the first copy of the document (see pgs.4-5, discloses that when the second document copy from another user device has been changed the first copy of the users document is updated via “merging” the changes by OffiSync).
Regarding Dependent claim 10, with dependency of claim 9, Busch discloses recording the detected change in the first copy of the document on the server, wherein the recorded change is accessible to the second client computing device (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync. The servers including Google Docs for managing documents over the Web).
Regarding Dependent claim 11, with dependency of claim 9, Busch discloses wherein the change made to the first copy of the document is automatically cached (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync and are thereby automatically cached for viewing based on accepting the change notifications for display).
Regarding Dependent claim 12, with dependency of claim 9, Busch discloses wherein detecting a change made to the second copy of the document comprises querying the server to find the change made to the second copy of the document (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync).
Regarding Dependent claim 13, with dependency 9, Busch discloses wherein including the change made to the second copy of the document in the first copy of the document comprises copying the change from the server and merging such change with the first copy of the document on the first client device (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync for merging any changes between the document copies from the server).
Regarding Dependent claim 14, with dependency of claim 9, Busch discloses wherein the second copy of the document is updated periodically in substantially real time to stay consistent with the first copy of the document (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync. The servers including Google Docs for managing documents over the Web in real-time).
Regarding Independent claim 15, Busch discloses A method of merging slide presentation documents, the method comprising:
Ascertaining whether a change was made in a first copy of a slide in a slide presentation document on a first client device, using a plug-in software component configured to run on a computing device and to be plugged into and integrated with a third-party pre-existing host application program to add functionality within he third-party pre-existing host application program, wherein the software plug-in component is configured to run within the host application program and interact with the host application program via a service interface (see pgs. 1-2, discloses OffiSync add-in for Microsoft Word which presents an integrated user interface that provides a set of buttons including a Dashboard button has depicted under step 4. OffiSync furthermore supports incorporating documents and presentations into Microsoft Office which includes multiple applications such as PowerPoint etc., thereby supporting “slides” );
communicating the detected change to a server coupled with the first client device and a second client device, if a change was detected to the first copy of the slide (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document/slide copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync between the document/slide copies); number='10'
detecting a change made to a second copy of the slide on the second client device (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document/slide copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync between the document/slide copies); and
replacing the first copy of the slide with the second copy of the slide, if a change was not detected in the first copy of the slide (see pgs.4-5, discloses that when the second document/slide copy from another user device has been changed the first copy of the users document/slide is updated via “merging” the changes by OffiSync).
Regarding Dependent claim 16, with dependency of claim 15, querying the first client computing device to specify whether to replace the first copy of the slide with the second copy of the slide, if a change was detected in the first copy of the slide (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document/slide copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync between the document/slide copies).
Regarding Dependent claim 17, with dependency of claim 15, Busch discloses merging a text portion of the first copy of the slide with a text portion of the second copy of the slide, if a change was detected in the first copy of the slide (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document/slide copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync between the document/slide copies for the purpose of merging updates).
number='11'Regarding Dependent claim 18, with dependency of claim 15, Busch discloses replacing a graphic portion of the first copy of the slide with a graphic portion of the second copy of the slide, if a change was detected in the first copy of the slide (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document/slide copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync between the document/slide copies for the purpose of merging updates).
Regarding Dependent claim 19, with dependency of claim 15, Busch discloses wherein each slide in the slide presentation document is assigned a unique ID (see pgs. 1-2, OffiSync furthermore supports incorporating documents and presentations into Microsoft Office which includes multiple applications such as PowerPoint etc., thereby supporting “slides” which have a unique ID such as a page or slide number).
Regarding Dependent claim 20, with dependency of claim 15, Busch discloses wherein communicating the detected change to the server comprises communicating the detected change to a merge and communicate module running on the server (see pg. 4, discloses communicating any detected changes between the document/slide copies of the first client and second client via a server updates made by “collaborators” which show up as notifications in OffiSync between the document/slide copies for merging the slide copies).
It is noted that any citation [[s]] to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it number='12'would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. [[See, MPEP 2123]]
Conclusion
References Cited
8. The art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Newman et al. (U.S. 8,453,052) discloses “Real-Time Document Sharing And Editing”
Greenspan et al. (U.S. Pub 2012/0110445) discloses “Real-time Synchronized Document Editing By Multiple Users For Blogging”
Michael Arrington, Etherpad Shows Google Docs How It's Done, Published Nov, 2008, TechCrunch, pgs. 1-9 (pdf)
Sarah Perez, OffiSync: Microsoft Office + Google Docs = the Perfect Office App, Published May 2009, readwrite, pgs. 1-5 (pdf)
David Wang et al., Google Wave Operational Transformation, Published Jan 2010, Wayback Machine, pgs. 1-5 (pdf)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANGLESH M PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F from 10:00 am -7:00 pm.
number='13'If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephen Hong can be reached on 571-272-4124. 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).
/Manglesh M Patel/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178
5/24/2019