DETAILED ACTION
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 .
This office action is in response to the amendment and the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 1 December 2025
This office action is made Final.
Claim 12 was added.
The objection of the specification from the previous office action has been withdrawn as neccessited by the amendment.
Claims 1-12 are pending. Claims 1, 10-12 are independent claims.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/1/25 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The amendment to the abstract filed on 12/1/25 has been accepted and entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 10, and 11 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US2016/0182709) further in view of Fenton (US2014/0340319) in further view of Bernstein et al (US20150067563)
As per independent claim 1, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed language, Kim teaches a method comprising:
at an electronic device in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices (figs. 1A-B: an electronic device having a display and an input unit):
displaying, via the display generation component, a messaging user interface that includes a representation of a first message and a representation of a second message wherein the second message includes a plurality of words (fig. 2: presenting a messaging UI including a representation of a first message 202 and a representation of a second message 212; message 212 has a plurality of words);
while displaying the messaging user interface, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a first input that includes a selection input and a first portion and a second portion while the selection input is maintained (fig. 4: receiving a selection input including a first portion 410 and a second portion 420. Furthermore, to bolster his rationale, the Examiner states FIG 4 shows a messaging user interface in which the user provides a selection input of two portions. FIG 4 shows a message comprising a plurality of words being selected. 0136 which explains FIG 4 in detailed discloses the message 410 is selected. Since the message comprises more than one word, at least a second portion was selected. In addition, message 410 can be considered a first portion selected and a user selecting an option from menu 420 can be viewed); and
while receiving and maintaining the selection input and before detecting an end of the first input, wherein the end of the first input comprises a release of the selection input: in response to receiving the first portion of the first input, indicating that a first portion of the first message will be selected when the end of the first input is detected (figs. 4 & 6; 0136,0149: in response to receiving the first portion of the first input 410 or 602, indicating that a first portion of the first message will be selected by detecting the end of the first input. Furthermore, the user selects 410 and 602 with a touch input. A user can also copy and/or share the selected message through the selection input as explained in 0136 and 0149. Selecting one of the options (copying, sharing) after the first portion was selected would have resulted in the/a portion of the first message being selected when the overall selection input ends. In addition, merely selecting portion 410 and 602 would read upon the claimed language as it is written.);
However, Kim does not explicitly disclose receiving, via the one or more input devices, a first input that includes a selection input, and a first portion and a second portion while the selection input is maintained, wherein the first portion and the second portion of the first input include a movement of the selection input; in response to receiving the second portion of the first input, wherein the second portion of the first input includes a movement input to a respective location in the messaging user interface; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second portion of the first message, indicating that the first portion and the second portion of the first message, but not a third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a first word of the plurality of words of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second word of the plurality of words of the second message, different from the first word of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected. However, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed language, Fenton teaches:
receiving, via the one or more input devices, a first input that includes a selection input, and a first portion and a second portion while the selection input is maintained, wherein the first portion and the second portion of the first input include a movement of the selection input; (FIG 6-8; 0040, 0042-0045: Discloses moving movement indicator 206 from a portion of the first message to a first preceding location of the second message (text 204) with the use of a gesture. After the indicator is moved to the preceding location as result of the gesture, Fenton discloses the indicator 206 is moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph (0042,0044) such that the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. (0043,0045))
while receiving and maintaining the selection input and before detecting an end of the selection first input, wherein the end of the first input comprises a release of the selection input; in response to receiving the second portion of the first input, wherein the second portion of the first input includes the movement of the selection input to a respective location in the messaging user interface (0028-0030: including a movement input to a respective location for a second portion of the selection input in the messaging UI; see also 0040, 0042, 0044: discloses performing a gesture/flick to a location of a message/text wherein the combination forms an input; 0031: discloses the first/selection has timed out after performing a gesture/flick or the user has finished the gesture/flick at an end point; (0019) Forms of a release of the input)
in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second portion of the first message, indicating that the first portion and the second portion of the first message, but not a third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected; (figs. 8-10: locating the movement indicator 208 in a second portion of the message and indicating to select the first portion and the second portion of the message, excluding the third portion of the message – that is, “improvements in... are desirable” in fig. 10).
in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a first word of the plurality of words of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the selection input is detected; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second word of the plurality of words of the second message, different from the first word of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected. (FIG 6-8; 0042-0045: Discloses moving movement indicator 206 from a portion of the first message to a first preceding location of the second message (text 204) with the use of a gesture. After the indicator is moved to the preceding location as result of the gesture, Fenton discloses the indicator 206 is moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph (0042,0044) such that the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. (0043,0045) Thus, this results in the selecting the entire second paragraph/message based on a location of indicator in text 204. In summary, Fenton discloses that using a gesture from moving the indicator from text 206 to a preceding location in a separate text above (text 204) (e.g. .FIG 6->8/ FIG 7->8. It is noted that Fenton does not explicitly state that the preceding location is word, but does not state it cannot be any word or location in the text. In other words, Fenton does not limit the preceding location just to be only the first word of the text/paragraph. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the preceding location in Fenton is any location within the text (such as text 204), in particular, a word, any word, in the block of text (such as text 204). This would increase the readability for the user so they can properly focus on the spot that was selected by the user. Therefore, each time the user flicks/gestures to move indicator 206 from the first text/message to a preceding location in text 204 (such as a word in 204). Once the indicator is moved to the preceding location by the gesture, it is automatically moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph (0042,0044) wherein the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph (0043,0045). In a first embodiment, when the indicator is at the first portion (“us”) of the first message/text (“It…keyboard”) and the user performs a flick/gesture to the word “This” in the preceding paragraph (preceding location in the preceding text/message (text 204), the entire second paragraph/message (“This…capabilities”) the first portion of the first message/paragraph (“It ….us”), but not the third portion of the first message (e.g. “ing…keyboard”). Thus, Fenton teaches the subject matter: in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a first word of the plurality of words of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected. Furthermore, it is implicitly known if the cited art is capable of performing the functionality once, then it will perform the functionality again. Thus, in a second embodiment, starting from the location of where the indicator is at the first portion (“us”) of the first message/text (“It…keyboard”), the user can flick/gesture to move the indicator to another preceding location in the preceding text/paragraph (text 204), where in the another preceding location is the word “device” which is a different word than the word “This”. As explained above, ) Once the indicator is moved to the location by the gesture, it is automatically moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph wherein the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. After the indicator is moved to the another preceding location (word “device”) in text 204, the indicator is automatically relocated to the beginning of the text 204 and the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. Therefore, when the indicator is moved from the indicator is at the first portion (“us”) of the first message/text (“It…keyboard”) to the a different word (‘device”) of the second message/paragraph (“This…capabilities”), it results in the second message/paragraph getting selected entirety (as explained in 0042-0043, 0044-0045). In addition, only the first portion of the first message/paragraph (“It ….us”) is also selected, but not the third portion of the first message (e.g. “ing…keyboard”). Thus, when the indicator is moved to word “device” (another preceding location), it results in the entire second paragraph/message (“This…capabilities”) the first portion of the first message/paragraph (“It ….us”), but not the third portion of the first message (e.g. “ing…keyboard”). Thus, Fenton teaches the subject matter: in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second word of the plurality of words of the second message, different from the first word of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system, disclosed in Kim to include: in response to receiving the second portion of the first input, wherein the second portion of the first input includes the movement of the selection input to a respective location in the messaging user interface, for the purpose of selecting context more precisely according to user’s desire so as to offer an efficient way of user selection, as taught in Fenton.
Furthermore, while Fenton discloses input to select first and second portions of text and maintaining the input until release of the selection input, as explained above, the cited art fails to specifically disclose receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection first input that includes a selection input, and a first portion and a second portion while the selection input is maintained, wherein the first portion and the second portion of the first input include a continuous movement of the selection input;… wherein the end of the first input comprises a release of the selection input:
However, Bernstein discloses the ability to do a continuous movement across multiple portions of text to select text. Bernstein discloses the user making contact on a touchpad, with a finger, to place a cursor at a starting point to highlight text. FIG 11F shows the user making contact at the touchpad resulting in cursor being placed to the right of the word “this”. Then while still making contact with the touchpad, the user moves finger up on the touchpad resulting in the text from “this” to “battle-field” being selected/highlight since the cursor was moved up a few lines. Furthermore, Bernstein states while the finger is still on the touchpad (contact on the touch pad), the user moves their finger on the touchpad up more resulting in additional text being highlight. FIG 11J shows the text highlight also includes text up to “are” in first paragraph. Furthermore, Bernstein discloses movement of the contact and tracking the movement across the touch-sensitive surface ceases with a finger-up event. (0079,0081) 0303 discloses that portions of text continue to be selected in response to movement of contact has ceased or low intensity of contact (forms of release of inputs) has occurred in which no other text will be selected.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the cited art with the disclosed features of Bernstein since it provided electronic devices with faster, more efficient methods and interfaces for manipulating user interfaces such that it would reduce the cognitive burden on a user and produce a more efficient human-machine interface (0008)
In conjunction with Bernstein, the combination of the cited art would teach substantially all the subject matter recited in the limitations of claim 1 including and after the “while displaying the message interface” limitation.
As per independent claims 10 and 11, Claims 10 and 11 recite similar limitations as in Claim 1 and are rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 2-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al further in view of Fenton in further view of Bernstein in further in view of Weeldreyer et al. (US2012/0311422)
As per dependent claim 2, the cited art fails to specifically disclose the end of the first input comprises a liftoff event. However, Weeldreyer discloses the end of the first input comprises a liftoff event (0168,0241: detecting lift-off for touch end).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the cited art with the disclosed features of Weeldreyer since it provided more efficient interfaces for navigating and editing an electronic context so as to reduce the cognitive burden on a user and produce a more efficient human-machine interface.
As per dependent claim 3, based on the rejection of Claim 2 and the rationale incorporated, Fenton and Weeldreyer disclose detecting the end of the first input; and in response to detecting the end of the first input: in accordance with the determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to the second portion of the first message, selecting the first portion and the second portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, for further input; in accordance with the determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to the first word of the plurality of words of the second message, selecting the entirety of the second message for further input; and in accordance with the determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to the second word of the plurality of words of the second message, different from the first word of the plurality of words of the second message, selecting the entirety of the second message for further input (Fenton- figs. 8-10: locating the movement indicator in a second portion of the message and indicating to select the first portion and the second portion of the message, excluding the third portion of the message; Weeldreyer- figs. 5O-5S: selecting the entirety of the second message for further input by determining the first and second portion/words of the second message).
As per dependent claim 4, based on the rejection of Claim 2 and the rationale incorporated, Weeldreyer discloses the representation of the second message includes a user interface element that contains a content of the second message, before receiving the first input, the user interface element is displayed with a visual characteristic having a first value, and indicating that the entirety of the second message will be selected when the end of the first input is detected includes displaying the user interface element with the visual characteristic having a second value, different from the first value (figs. 5O-5S: highlighting to indicate the selection of the entirety of the second message).
As per dependent claim 5, based on the rejection of Claim 2 and the rationale incorporated, Fenton and Weeldreyer discloses the representation of the second message includes a user interface element that contains a content of the second message, before receiving the first input, the user interface element is displayed with a visual characteristic having a first value, and the content of the second message is displayed without a selection indicator, wherein the selection indicator is different from the user interface element, and 76 4823-0916-5291, v. 1Docket No.: 106842178300 (P49789US1) indicating that the entirety of the second message will be selected when the end of the first input is detected includes: maintaining display of the user interface element with the visual characteristic having the first value; and displaying the content of the second message with the selection indicator (Fenton – figs. 8-10; Weeldreyer- figs. 5O-5S: indicating the selection of the entirety of the second message having a selection indicator with a visual characteristic).
As per dependent claim 6, based on the rejection of Claim 2 and the rationale incorporated, Fenton and Weeldreyer in response to receiving the second portion of the first input: in accordance with the determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to the first word of the plurality of words of the second message, indicating that the first portion of the first message, but not a fourth portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected; and in accordance with the determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to the second word of the plurality of words of the second message, indicating that the first portion of the first message, but not the fourth portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected (Fenton – figs. 8-10; Weeldreyer- figs. 5O-5S: indicating the selections of the first portion and second portion of the first message, excluding a fourth portion of the first message along with respective lift-off event).
As per dependent claim 7, based on the rejection of Claim 2 and the rationale incorporated, Fenton and Weeldreyer in response to receiving the second portion of the first input: in accordance with the determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to the first word of the plurality of words of the second message, indicating that an entirety, more than the first portion, of the first message will be selected when the end of the first input is detected; and in accordance with the determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to the second word of the plurality of words of the second message, indicating that the entirety of the first message will be selected when the end of the first input is detected (Fenton – figs. 8-10; Weeldreyer- figs. 5O-5S: indicating the selections of the entirety of the second message including the first and second portion of the second message, along with respective lift-off event).
As per dependent claim 8, based on the rejection of Claim 2 and the rationale incorporated, Fenton and Weeldreyer while receiving the first input and before detecting the end of the first input: 77 4823-0916-5291, v. 1Docket No.: 106842178300 (P49789US1) after receiving the first portion and the second portion of the first input, receiving a third portion of the first input, wherein the third portion of the first input includes a movement input to a second respective location in the messaging user interface ; and in response to receiving the third portion of the first input: in accordance with a determination that the second respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a fourth portion of the first message, indicating that the first portion and the fourth portion of the first message, but not a fifth portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected (Fenton – figs. 8-10; Weeldreyer- figs. 5O-5S: indicating the selections of the first, second, third, and fourth portions of the first message, excluding a fifth portion of the first message along with respective lift-off event).
Claims 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al in further in view of Fenton in further view of Alonso Ruiz et al (US 20160274686)(herein as “Ruiz”)
As per independent claim 12, Kim discloses a method comprising:
at an electronic device in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices (figs. 1A-B: an electronic device having a display and an input unit):
displaying, via the display generation component, a messaging user interface that includes a representation of a first message and a representation of a second message, (fig. 2: presenting a messaging UI including a representation of a first message 202 and a representation of a second message 212)
wherein a first portion of the first message is selected; (fig. 4: receiving a selection input including a first portion 410)
However, Kim does not explicitly disclose while displaying the messaging user interface with the first portion of the first message selected, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection input that is associated with a respective location in the messaging user interface, wherein the selection input corresponds to a request to select an additional one or more portions of one or more messages; while receiving and maintaining the selection input and before detecting an end of the selection first input; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second portion of the first message, indicating that the first portion and the second portion of the first message, but not a third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the selection input is detected; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a first portion of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the selection input is detected; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second portion of the second message, different from the first portion of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the selection input is detected. However, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed language, Fenton teaches:
while displaying the messaging user interface with the first portion of the first message selected, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection input that is associated with a respective location in the messaging user interface, wherein the selection input corresponds to a request to select an additional one or more portions of one or more messages; (FIG 6-8; 0040, 0042-0045: After text has already been selected as explained in 0040-0041, discloses moving movement indicator 206 from a portion of the first message to a first preceding location of the second message (text 204) with the use of a gesture. After the indicator is moved to the preceding location as result of the gesture, Fenton discloses the indicator 206 is moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph (0042,0044) such that the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. (0043,0045))
while receiving and maintaining the selection input and before detecting an end of the selection first input(0028-0030: including a movement input to a respective location for a second portion of the selection input in the messaging UI; see also 0040, 0042, 0044: discloses performing a gesture/flick to a location of a message/text wherein the combination forms an input; 0031: discloses the first/selection has timed out after performing a gesture/flick or the user has finished the gesture/flick at an end point; (0019) Forms of a release of the input)
in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second portion of the first message, indicating that the first portion and the second portion of the first message, but not a third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the selection input is detected; (figs. 8-10: locating the movement indicator 208 in a second portion of the message and indicating to select the first portion and the second portion of the message, excluding the third portion of the message – that is, “improvements in... are desirable” in fig. 10).
in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a first portion of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the selection input is detected; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second portion of the second message, different from the first portion of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the selection input is detected. (FIG 6-8; 0042-0045: Discloses moving movement indicator 206 from a portion of the first message to a first preceding location of the second message (text 204) with the use of a gesture. After the indicator is moved to the preceding location as result of the gesture, Fenton discloses the indicator 206 is moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph (0042,0044) such that the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. (0043,0045) Thus, this results in the selecting the entire second paragraph/message based on a location of indicator in text 204. In summary, Fenton discloses that using a gesture from moving the indicator from text 206 to a preceding location in a separate text above (text 204) (e.g .FIG 6->8/ FIG 7->8. It is noted that Fenton does not explicitly state that the preceding location is word, but does not state it cannot be any word or location in the text. In other words, Fenton does not limit the preceding location just to be only the first word of the text/paragraph. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the preceding location in Fenton is any location within the text (such as text 204), in particular, a word, any word, in the block of text (such as text 204). This would increase the readability for the user so they can properly focus on the spot that was selected by the user. Therefore, each time the user flicks/gestures to move indicator 206 from the first text/message to a preceding location in text 204 (such as a word in 204). Once the indicator is moved to the preceding location by the gesture, it is automatically moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph (0042,0044) wherein the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph (0043,0045). In a first embodiment, when the indicator is at the first portion (“us”) of the first message/text (“It…keyboard”) and the user performs a flick/gesture to the word “This” in the preceding paragraph (preceding location in the preceding text/message (text 204), the entire second paragraph/message (“This…capabilities”) the first portion of the first message/paragraph (“It ….us”), but not the third portion of the first message (e.g. “ing…keyboard”). Thus, Fenton teaches the subject matter: in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a first portion of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the selection input is detected. Furthermore, it is implicitly known if the cited art is capable of performing the functionality once, then it will perform the functionality again. Thus, in a second embodiment, starting from the location of where the indicator is at the first portion (“us”) of the first message/text (“It…keyboard”), the user can flick/gesture to move the indicator to another preceding location in the preceding text/paragraph (text 204), where in the another preceding location is the word “device” which is a different word than the word “This”. As explained above, ) Once the indicator is moved to the location by the gesture, it is automatically moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph wherein the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. After the indicator is moved to the another preceding location (word “device”) in text 204, the indicator is automatically relocated to the beginning of the text 204 and the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. Therefore, when the indicator is moved from the indicator is at the first portion (“us”) of the first message/text (“It…keyboard”) to the a different word (‘device”) of the second message/paragraph (“This…capabilities”), it results in the second message/paragraph getting selected entirety (as explained in 0042-0043, 0044-0045). In addition, only the first portion of the first message/paragraph (“It ….us”) is also selected, but not the third portion of the first message (e.g. “ing…keyboard”). Thus, when the indicator is moved to word “device” (another preceding location), it results in the entire second paragraph/message (“This…capabilities”) the first portion of the first message/paragraph (“It ….us”), but not the third portion of the first message (e.g. “ing…keyboard”). Thus, Fenton teaches the subject matter: in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second portion of the second message, different from the first word of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the selection input is detected.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system, disclosed in Kim to include: in response to receiving the second portion of the first input, wherein the second portion of the first input includes the movement of the selection input to a respective location in the messaging user interface, for the purpose of selecting context more precisely according to user’s desire so as to offer an efficient way of user selection, as taught in Fenton.
However, the cited art fails to specifically disclose while displaying the messaging user interface with the first portion of the first message selected, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection input that is associated with a respective location in the messaging user interface, wherein the selection input corresponds to a request to select an additional one or more portions of one or more messages, and the selection input does not include a movement input. In other words, the cited art does not disclose at least an input of the selection input is not a movement input. However, Ruiz discloses a form of tap input is entered over an existing selection, then the existing selection is expanded. In particular, FIG 5Z-5AA discloses the selection is expanded from a word to a line in response to a tap touch input of the finger(s) (selection input). For example, the existing selection of “and” is expanding to include ““any nation so conceived and so” as result of the finger (s) touch input. In addition, the finger(s) touch input is a tap input which is not a movement input. Thus, Ruiz discloses a selection input that corresponds to selecting additional portions of the text/message and does not include a movement input.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the cited art with the disclosed features of Ruiz since it provided , electronic devices with displays, touch-sensitive surfaces are provided with faster, more efficient methods and interfaces for cursor manipulation/content selection, thereby increasing the effectiveness, efficiency, and user satisfaction with such devices (0005, 0152)
In conjunction with Ruiz, the combination of the cited art would teach substantially all the subject matter recited in the limitations of claim 12 including and after the “while displaying the message interface” limitation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 remains 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/1/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 12-14, in regards to the 103 rejection of independent claims 1, 10, and 11, Applicant states that the claims relate to an operation of switching between different modes of selection- partial selection (e.g., words, characters, lines of a message) and entire selection (e.g., whole body of a message)-and doing so as part of a "first input" This first input, as claimed in the independent claims 1, 10, and 11, includes "a selection input, and a first portion and a second portion while the selection input is maintained, wherein the first portion and the second portion of the first input include a continuous movement of the selection input." Moreover, the switching between different modes of selection operation is performed "while receiving and maintaining the selection input and before detecting an end of the first input, wherein the end of the first input comprises a release of the selection input." Furthermore, Applicant argues that Bernstein does not describe switching from type of selection to a different type of selection as claimed. Applicant argues that the Office Action omits that contact intensity establishes the operational mode, and that mode governs whether a same operation (e.g. highlighting) continues or ceases to continue when intensity decreases, not whether a different type of selection is initiated as stated in 0295. Thus, Applicant argues that Bernstein does not identify disclosure for the claimed switching between partial selection and entire selection of messages, and doing so as part of the claimed subject matter. Furthermore, Applicant argues The only reference that discloses switching between types of selection (e.g., word by word, paragraph by paragraph, line by line, etc.) is Fenton, and Fenton expressly requires multiple different inputs to do so. None of the references discloses, nor is able to, switch between types of selection during a given input (e.g., before detecting the end of the input). Therefore, the Applicant requests withdrawal of the rejection(s). However, the Examiner disagrees.
Based on the arguments provided by the Applicant in respect to claimed features in the claim limitation, the Examiner respectfully submits that the Applicant states that Kim, Fenton, and Bernstein do not teach the limitations by merely summarizing certain paragraphs/section of each reference and allegedly concludes that Kim and Felton do not teach the limitation. Applicant does not disclose how the claim language of the claim limitation is different from the teachings of Kim, Fenton, and Bernstein by describing the differences that involve any supporting evidence from the specification stating or describing the limitation, or how Kim, Fenton, and Bernstein are specifically different from Applicant's invention. Applicant argues that sections of Kim, Fenton, and Bernstein do not teach the argued limitations without any explanation or describing how the claim language and invention is performed regarding the claimed subject matter. Thus, Applicant's arguments fail to disclose how the cited art is silent or doesn't teach on the limitation since the Applicant does not fully describe the differences that involve any supporting evidence from Applicant's specification stating or describing the limitations, or how the cited art is specifically different from the invention itself. Therefore, the Applicant did not explicitly state how Applicant's invention, other than Kim, Fenton, and Bernstein, alone, doesn't teach the limitations, is different to prove that the cited art’s functionality does not equivalently teach the limitation.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., switching between different modes of selection- partial selection (e.g., words, characters, lines of a message) and entire selection (e.g., whole body of a message)-and doing so as part of a "first input"; a given input (i.e. not multiple different inputs); switching between types of selection (e.g., word by word, paragraph by paragraph, line by line, etc.)) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
The Examiner respectfully states that the claim language does explicitly state discloses different modes of selection such as a partial selection and entire selection. The language only states receiving a first input that includes a selection input, and first portion and second portion. The language does not discloses switching between modes of different forms of selecting and only states portions are selected. The language is silent on what the first and second portions of the first inputs exactly are. (further explained below) In addition, the language merely discloses inputs are used to select text. Thus, it appears that the claim is discloses multiple forms of inputs, not a single (given) input. In addition, the Examiner respectfully states while the language indication the first input includes a continuous movement of the selection input, the language does not define overall what is considered what the selection input is and what is considered a continuous movement of the selection input. The language does not limit or explain or define what an “selection input” overall and how many inputs make up a “selection input”. In addition, the language does not define or explain how the input(s) of the “selection input” is considered continuous movement. In other words, what is considered “continuous movement” since the language fails to define or limit the term in anyway. Furthermore, as stated, the language does not explain how the first input includes a first portion and second portion. In other words, the claim is silent on how both portions are selected and/or displayed. The language does not state or prevent if each portion is selected one at a time or both at once. In addition, the language is silent on how the selected text is displayed or indicated. Furthermore, the language is silent on what is considered a portion. The language does not link the portions to being part of any message, just a portion in a messaging user interface is selected. In addition, the language does not indicate what is different between a first portion and a second portion. In addition, the claims are silent on how exactly the portions are indicated as being selected after the selection input has occurred. Therefore, the broadest reasonable interpretation is applied. Furthermore, the limitation “while receiving and maintaining the selection input and before detecting an end of the first input, wherein the end of the first input comprises a release of the selection input” is broad. As explained above, the “selection input” is broad since it’s unclear the parameters and boundaries of what a selection input is. In addition, it is unclear what is considered an “release of the selection input”. The language is silent and does not explain or elaborate on this “e release nd of the selection input” In addition, the language does not clarify how the detecting occurs either. In other words, it does not elaborate how the release of selection input. Therefore, the broadest reasonable interpretation is applied. In addition, the Examiner respectfully state that Applicant has not argued the complete limitation as it is claimed. The Examiner states the limitation “while receiving and maintaining the selection input and before detecting an end of the first input, wherein the end of the first input comprises a release of the selection input” is subordinating conjunction associated with a subordinating clause. This part of the limitation begins with “while” and ends with a colon inferring that this limitation is incomplete without its other half. Thus, the argued limitation conjunctions with the other part of the limitation “in response to receiving the first portion of the first input, indicating that a first portion of the first message will be selected when the end of the first input is detected”. The claim language states it indicate the first portion will indicated while being selected until the user is finishing selecting. The claim language does not explain how the first/selection input is received and how it knows when the selection input is ending. Therefore, the broadest reasonable interpretation is applied.
Furthermore, the Examiner refers the Applicant to MPEP 904.01 (b) that states "All subject matter that is the equivalent of the subject matter as defined in the claim, even though specifically different from the definition in the claim, must be considered unless expressly excluded by the claimed subject matter." In other words, while the prior art cited may not explicitly use the same terminology as disclosed in the claim limitations, it doesn't mean the art doesn't teach it and can't be considered to reject Appellant's claimed invention. Thus, examiner submits that what is taught by the references is considered within the broadest reasonable interpretation to that which is claimed discussed below.
Thus, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of language of the limitation, Kim discloses the subject matter of while displaying the messaging user interface, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a first input that includes a selection input and a first portion and a second portion while the selection input is maintained. Fig. 4 of Kim discloses receiving a selection input including a first portion 410 and a second portion 420. Furthermore, to bolster his rationale, the Examiner states FIG 4 shows a messaging user interface in which the user provides a selection input of two portions. FIG 4 shows a message comprising a plurality of words being selected. 0136 which explains FIG 4 in detailed discloses the message 410 is selected. Since the message comprises more than one word, at least a second portion was selected. In addition, message 410 can be considered a first portion selected and a user selecting an option from menu 420 can be viewed. Furthermroe, Kim teaches the subject matter of while receiving and maintaining the selection input and before detecting an end of the first input, wherein the end of the first input comprises a release of the selection input: in response to receiving the first portion of the first input, indicating that a first portion of the first message will be selected when the end of the first input is detected. Figs. 4 & 6; 0136,0149 of Kim discloses in response to receiving the first portion of the first input 410 or 602, indicating that a first portion of the first message will be selected by detecting the end of the first input. Furthermore, the user selects 410 and 602 with a touch input. A user can also copy and/or share the selected message through the selection input as explained in 0136 and 0149. Selecting one of the options (copying, sharing) after the first portion was selected would have resulted in the/a portion of the first message being selected when the overall selection input ends. In addition, merely selecting portion 410 and 602 would read upon the claimed language as it is written.
However, Kim does not explicitly disclose receiving, via the one or more input devices, a first input that includes a selection input, and a first portion and a second portion while the selection input is maintained, wherein the first portion and the second portion of the first input include a movement of the selection input; in response to receiving the second portion of the first input, wherein the second portion of the first input includes a movement input to a respective location in the messaging user interface; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second portion of the first message, indicating that the first portion and the second portion of the first message, but not a third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a first word of the plurality of words of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second word of the plurality of words of the second message, different from the first word of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected. However, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed language, Fenton teaches:
receiving, via the one or more input devices, a first input that includes a selection input, and a first portion and a second portion while the selection input is maintained, wherein the first portion and the second portion of the first input include a movement of the selection input; (FIG 6-8; 0040, 0042-0045: Discloses moving movement indicator 206 from a portion of the first message to a first preceding location of the second message (text 204) with the use of a gesture. After the indicator is moved to the preceding location as result of the gesture, Fenton discloses the indicator 206 is moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph (0042,0044) such that the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. (0043,0045))
while receiving and maintaining the selection input and before detecting an end of the selection first input, wherein the end of the first input comprises a release of the selection input; in response to receiving the second portion of the first input, wherein the second portion of the first input includes the movement of the selection input to a respective location in the messaging user interface (0028-0030: including a movement input to a respective location for a second portion of the selection input in the messaging UI; see also 0040, 0042, 0044: discloses performing a gesture/flick to a location of a message/text wherein the combination forms an input; 0031: discloses the first/selection has timed out after performing a gesture/flick or the user has finished the gesture/flick at an end point; (0019) Forms of a release of the input)
in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second portion of the first message, indicating that the first portion and the second portion of the first message, but not a third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected; (figs. 8-10: locating the movement indicator 208 in a second portion of the message and indicating to select the first portion and the second portion of the message, excluding the third portion of the message – that is, “improvements in... are desirable” in fig. 10).
in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a first word of the plurality of words of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the selection input is detected; in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second word of the plurality of words of the second message, different from the first word of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected. (FIG 6-8; 0042-0045: Discloses moving movement indicator 206 from a portion of the first message to a first preceding location of the second message (text 204) with the use of a gesture. After the indicator is moved to the preceding location as result of the gesture, Fenton discloses the indicator 206 is moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph (0042,0044) such that the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. (0043,0045) Thus, this results in the selecting the entire second paragraph/message based on a location of indicator in text 204. In summary, Fenton discloses that using a gesture from moving the indicator from text 206 to a preceding location in a separate text above (text 204) (e.g .FIG 6->8/ FIG 7->8. It is noted that Fenton does not explicitly state that the preceding location is word, but does not state it cannot be any word or location in the text. In other words, Fenton does not limit the preceding location just to be only the first word of the text/paragraph. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the preceding location in Fenton is any location within the text (such as text 204), in particular, a word, any word, in the block of text (such as text 204). This would increase the readability for the user so they can properly focus on the spot that was selected by the user. Therefore, each time the user flicks/gestures to move indicator 206 from the first text/message to a preceding location in text 204 (such as a word in 204). Once the indicator is moved to the preceding location by the gesture, it is automatically moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph (0042,0044) wherein the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph (0043,0045). In a first embodiment, when the indicator is at the first portion (“us”) of the first message/text (“It…keyboard”) and the user performs a flick/gesture to the word “This” in the preceding paragraph (preceding location in the preceding text/message (text 204), the entire second paragraph/message (“This…capabilities”) the first portion of the first message/paragraph (“It ….us”), but not the third portion of the first message (e.g. “ing…keyboard”). Thus, Fenton teaches the subject matter: in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a first word of the plurality of words of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected. Furthermore, it is implicitly known if the cited art is capable of performing the functionality once, then it will perform the functionality again. Thus, in a second embodiment, starting from the location of where the indicator is at the first portion (“us”) of the first message/text (“It…keyboard”), the user can flick/gesture to move the indicator to another preceding location in the preceding text/paragraph (text 204), where in the another preceding location is the word “device” which is a different word than the word “This”. As explained above, ) Once the indicator is moved to the location by the gesture, it is automatically moved to the beginning of the preceding paragraph wherein the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. After the indicator is moved to the another preceding location (word “device”) in text 204, the indicator is automatically relocated to the beginning of the text 204 and the amount or part of the text 204 that is selected is increased to include the entire preceding paragraph. Therefore, when the indicator is moved from the indicator is at the first portion (“us”) of the first message/text (“It…keyboard”) to the a different word (‘device”) of the second message/paragraph (“This…capabilities”), it results in the second message/paragraph getting selected entirety (as explained in 0042-0043, 0044-0045). In addition, only the first portion of the first message/paragraph (“It ….us”) is also selected, but not the third portion of the first message (e.g. “ing…keyboard”). Thus, when the indicator is moved to word “device” (another preceding location), it results in the entire second paragraph/message (“This…capabilities”) the first portion of the first message/paragraph (“It ….us”), but not the third portion of the first message (e.g. “ing…keyboard”). Thus, Fenton teaches the subject matter: in accordance with a determination that the respective location in the messaging user interface corresponds to a second word of the plurality of words of the second message, different from the first word of the second message, indicating that an entirety of the second message, the first portion of the first message, but not the third portion of the first message, will be selected when the end of the first input is detected.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system, disclosed in Kim to include: in response to receiving the second portion of the first input, wherein the second portion of the first input includes the movement of the selection input to a respective location in the messaging user interface, for the purpose of selecting context more precisely according to user’s desire so as to offer an efficient way of user selection, as taught in Fenton.
Furthermore, while Fenton discloses input to select first and second portions of text and maintaining the input until release of the selection input, as explained above, the cited art fails to specifically disclose receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection first input that includes a selection input, and a first portion and a second portion while the selection input is maintained, wherein the first portion and the second portion of the first input include a continuous movement of the selection input;… wherein the end of the first input comprises a release of the selection input:
However, Bernstein discloses the ability to do a continuous movement across multiple portions of text to select text. Bernstein discloses the user making contact on a touchpad, with a finger, to place a cursor at a starting point to highlight text. FIG 11F shows the user making contact at the touchpad resulting in cursor being placed to the right of the word “this”. Then while still making contact with the touchpad, the user moves finger up on the touchpad resulting in the text from “this” to “battle-field” being selected/highlight since the cursor was moved up a few lines. To bolster his rationale, the Examiner states that FIG 11F-11H shows the finger on the touchpad moving to to expand the selection of the text. Furthermore, Bernstein states while the finger is still on the touchpad (contact on the touch pad), the user moves their finger on the touchpad up more resulting in additional text being highlight. FIG 11J shows the text highlight also includes text up to “are” in first paragraph. To bolster his rationale, the Examiner states that 0276 clearly states that “while contact 18610 continues to be detected on touch-sensitive surface 451 the device”. This indicates that the same selection input is still occurring and continues. Also, 0276 also states “Thus, when contact 18610 continues to move 18618 to location 18610-c (FIG. 11J), the selection of text continues in accordance with the movement of contact 18610” which clearly indicates that the same selection input was still occurring and moving to select more text. Furthermore, Bernstein discloses movement of the contact and tracking the movement across the touch-sensitive surface ceases with a finger-up event. (0079,0081) 0303 discloses that portions of text continue to be selected in response to movement of contact has ceased or low intensity of contact (forms of release of inputs) has occurred in which no other text will be selected. Furthermore, to bolster his rationale, the Examiner additional states that 0303 clearly states “in FIGS. 11I-11J, portions of text 18608 continue to be selected in response to movement of contact 18610 despite the intensity of contact 18610 decreasing below the operation-cancellation intensity threshold in the first mode of operation (e.g., "IT.sub.1"). In either of these examples, changing the intensity of the contact, other than lift the contact off touch-sensitive surface 451, does not affect the operation.” Thus, 0303 clearly states text will be continue to selected by the same input until contact is lifted off the touchpad surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the cited art with the disclosed features of Bernstein since it provided electronic devices with faster, more efficient methods and interfaces for manipulating user interfaces such that it would reduce the cognitive burden on a user and produce a more efficient human-machine interface (0008)
In conjunction with Bernstein, the combination of the cited art would teach substantially all the subject matter recited in the limitations of claim 1 including and after the “while displaying the message interface” limitation.
On pages 14-16, Applicant argues that one of ordinary skill in the art would have not been motivated to combine Kim, Fenton, and, Bernstein because the combination fails to account for differences between the references and indicates improper hindsight. Furthermore, Applicant argues the combination involving Fenton would rendering Fenton inoperable for intended purpose. Furthermore, Applicant argues that the combination with Bernstein and motivation of Bernstein does not explain why it would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in to so. However, the Examiner disagrees.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). Furthermore, all references are combinable since they share a similar field of endeavor and/or features. Kim discloses a UI that contains displayed text in the form of messages/sentences/paragraphs wherein words of a message are selected by the user an input. Fenton discloses a UI that contains displayed text in the form of messages/sentences/paragraphs wherein words of at least one message is selected by the user via an input. Bernstein discloses a UI that contains displayed text in the form of messages/sentences/paragraphs wherein words of at least one message is selected by the user via an input. Thus, as explained by the Examiner, the cited references share similar functionalities and a shared common field of endeavor resulting in the cited art being combinable., In addition, the Examiner respectfully states "the teachings relied upon were repeated in a number of references further strengthens the conclusion of obviousness." Kansas Jack, Inc. v. Kuhn, 719 F.2d 1144, 1150 (Fed. Cir. 1983). In addition, the motivation used for the combination of Bernstein with Kim and Fenton was found Bernstein itself and meets the requirements of 35 USC 103 and established case law as stated above. Thus, the Examiner has provided rational underpinning to support the conclusion of obviousness as required under KSR.
Furthermore, the Examiner respectfully states that Applicant made a general statement/assertion that Fenton is not combinable with Kim and Bernstein because the teachings of each are in opposition and would result in Fenton not rendering its intended result/purpose. Applicant provided no evidence why the combination of Fenton with Kim and Bernstein would result in Fenton unable to perform Fenton’s intended purpose/result. Instead, Applicant argued that Fenton does not perform the same functionality as unclaimed features from Applicant’s specification of Applicant’s invention. The Examiner respectfully states that Applicant’s remarks provides no reasoning on why combining Kim and Bernstein with Fenton would alter Fenton intend purpose/result. Therefore, the Examiner states how can combining Kim and Bernstein with Fenton result in Fenton not rendering its intended result and work for its intended purpose if Applicant does state why and how the combining Kim and Bernstein would change the render of Fenton intended result and purpose. Merely comparing the Fenton reference to an unclaimed feature does not show how Kim and Bernstein would change Fenton’s intended result and purpose. Therefore, Applicant’s argument is merely a general statement/assertion without specifically pointing out how Kim and Bernstein explicitly affect’s Fenton’s intended result and purpose. Thus, Applicant’s argument is not persuasiveness. Therefore, Kim, Fenton, and Bernstein are properly combinable for this reason also.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to new claim 12 have been considered but are moot because the new claim has not been examined before which requires a new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
If the Applicant chooses to amend the claims in future filings, the Examiner kindly states any new limitation(s) added to the claims must be described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art in order to meet the written description requirement of 35 USC 112, first paragraph. To help expedite prosecution, promote compact prosecution and prevent a possible 112(a)/first paragraph rejection, the Examiner respectfully requests for each new limitation added to the claims in a future filing by the Applicant that the Applicant would cite the location within the specification showing support for that new limitation within the remarks. In addition, MPEP 2163.04(I)(B) states that a prima facie under 112(a)/first paragraph may be established if a claim has been added or amended, the support for the added limitation is not apparent, and applicant has not pointed out where added the limitation is supported.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID FABER whose telephone number is (571)272-2751. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday.
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. Please refer to MPEP 713.09 for scheduling interviews after the mailing of this office action.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Adam Queler can be reached at 5712724140. 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.
/ADAM M QUELER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2172
/D.F/ Examiner, Art Unit 2172