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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/27/2026 have been fully considered. However, the arguments directed to the prior reliance on Hsied are moot because the rejection has been modified. The prior rejection relying principally on Hsied is withdrawn and replaced with a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 based on Pieper as the primary reference in view of Hsied.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9-13, 19-21, 23, and 66-68 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pieper et al. (US Patent 11,336,704 B1, hereinafter “Pieper”) in view of Hsieh et al. (US Pub. 2024/0370086 A1, hereinafter ‘“Hsieh”).
Claim 1: Pieper teaches An apparatus (“Pieper”, Fig. 1, a system 100) comprising:
machine-readable instructions; and at least one processor circuit to be programmed by the machine-readable instructions to (“Pieper”, Fig. 1, column 2, lines 26-50):
receive a determination, based on first user interaction, of a first region of a user attention on a first display presenting a plurality of applications; identify a first set of the microservices presented in the first region of user attention on the first display; cause presentation of the first set of the microservices on the first display with a first quality level, the first quality level presenting media of the first set in focus on the first display (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5, column 3, lines 11-42; column 4, lines 25-32a composite window collection share among collaborators and displayed across client devices, under BRI the claimed “microservices” read on Pieper’s shared application windows. Users may interact with windows and the system tracks whether windows in focus or being viewed, the quality level can be increased);
identify a second set of the microservices presented outside of the first region of user attention on the first display; determine, based on second user interaction with a second display, if the second set of the microservices are in a region of user attention on a second display; cause presentation of the second set of the microservices on the first display with a second quality level when the second set of the microservices is outside the region of user attention on the second display, the second quality level lower than the first quality level, the second quality level presenting media of the second set out of focus on the first display (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5; column 4, lines 1-32, determine whether windows are visible, in focus, not in focus or not viewed, the quality level can be decreased);
receive a determination of a change of the user attention from the first region of user attention on the first display to a second region of user attention on the first display; perform a confirmation of the change from the first region of user attention on the first display to the second region of user attention on the first display (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5; column 4, lines 1-32, considering whether a window was “recently visible”, “recently in focus” which suggests a temporal confirmation or hysteresis before changing quality);
determine, based on second user interaction with the second display, if the first set of the microservices are in the region of user attention on the second display (“Hsieh”, Figs. 1 and 2, [0014]-[0015], [0017]-[0021], determine regions user attention based on eye gaze);
cause a change, after the confirmation, in a first presentation on the first display of at least one application in the first set of the applications from the first quality level to the second quality level when the first set of the microservices is outside the region of user attention on the second display; and cause a change, after the confirmation, in a second presentation on the first display of at least one application in the second set of the applications from the second quality level to the first quality level (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5; column 4, lines 1-32; column 5, lines 6-27).
However, Pieper teaches the multi-display collaboration workspace, shared windows. Pieper does not explicitly teach determining specific regions of user attention based on eye gaze and selectively changing display characteristics of attended and non-attended display regions.
Hsieh explicitly teaches a display panel that display application content in different areas but receive a determination of a change of the user attention from the first region of user attention on the first display to a second region of user attention on the first display; perform a confirmation of the change from the first region of user attention on the first display to the second region of user attention on the first display after a threshold amount of time display (“Hsieh”, Figs. 1 and 2, [0014]-[0015], [0017]-[0021], modifying the presentation characteristics of displayed information depending on whether the information is within or outside a region of user attention).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant's subject matter to apply Hsieh’s gaze-based region of attention determination to Pieper’s multi-display collaborative window sharing system so that content attended by a user is presented at a high quality level and content not attended by the user is presented at a lower quality level. The combination would conserve processing, network, and display resources while improving user focus and presentation efficiency.
Claim 2: Pieper and Hsieh teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first set of the microservices includes at least one microservice (“Pieper”, Fig. 3, Fig. 4., col. 4, line 46-col. 5, line 5, a display presenting a plurality of windows: 3D game and separate structured content for text editor (equivalent to the claim language reciting microservices).
Claim 4: Pieper and Hsieh teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to cause application of a first refresh rate to the first region of user attention on the first display and a second refresh rate to the second region of user attention on the first display, the second refresh rate less frequent than the first refresh rate (“Hsieh”, Figs. 1 and 2, [0017]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant's subject matter to apply Hsieh’s gaze-based region of attention determination to Pieper’s multi-display collaborative window sharing system so that content attended by a user is presented at a high quality level and content not attended by the user is presented at a lower quality level. The combination would conserve processing, network, and display resources while improving user focus and presentation efficiency.
Claim 5: Pieper and Hsieh teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to cause application of a first audible volume to the first region of user attention and mute the content in the second region of user attention (“Pieper”, Fig. 3, col. 5, line 1-3).
Claim 6: Pieper and Hsieh teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to cause application of a first brightness level to the first region of user attention on the first display and a second brightness level to the second region of user attention on the first display, the second brightness level less than the first brightness level (“Hsieh”, Figs. 1 and 2, [0014]-[0015], [0017]-[0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant's subject matter to apply Hsieh’s gaze-based region of attention determination to Pieper’s multi-display collaborative window sharing system so that content attended by a user is presented at a high quality level and content not attended by the user is presented at a lower quality level. The combination would conserve processing, network, and display resources while improving user focus and presentation efficiency.
Claim 9: Pieper and Hsieh teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the user interaction is one or more of a presence of a user, a position of a head, or an eye gaze (“Pieper”, Fig. 3, col. 5, line 6-25; column 9, lines 49-52).
Claim 10: Pieper and Hsieh teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the user interaction is one or more of typing, a movement of a mouse, a hover of a cursor, a touch, a verbal command, a voice stream, a zooming, or a click (“Pieper”, Fig. 7, col. 3, line 12-31; col. 4, line 25-32).
Claim 11: Pieper and Hsieh teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor circuit includes one or more of:
at least one of a central processing unit, a graphic processing unit, or a digital signal processor, the at least one of the central processing unit, the graphic processing unit, or the digital signal processor having control circuitry to control data movement within the processor circuitry, arithmetic and logic circuitry to perform one or more first operations corresponding to the instructions, and one or more registers to store a result of the one or more first operations; a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), the FPGA including logic gate circuitry, a plurality of configurable interconnections, and storage circuitry, the logic gate circuitry and interconnections to perform one or more second operations, the storage circuitry to store a result of the one or more second operations; or Application Specific Integrate Circuitry (ASIC) including logic gate circuitry to perform one or more third operations (“Pieper”, Fig. 1, col. 2, line 45-50, the processors 110 and 130 includes a central processing unit; col. 10, line 31-54, e.g., ASIC).
Claim 12: Pieper teaches A system (“Pieper”, Fig. 1, a system 100) comprising:
Machine-readable instructions; and at least one processor circuit be programmed by the machine-readable instructions to (“Pieper”, Fig. 1, column 2, lines 26-50):
generate workspace image data corresponding to a workspace image to be displayed on multiple displays; cause display of the workspace image on the multiple displays (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5, column 3, lines 11-42; column 4, lines 25-32a composite window collection share among collaborators and displayed across client devices, under BRI the claimed “workspace image” read on Pieper’s shared application windows);
obtain notification of respective regions of user attention on respective ones of the multiple displays; set a first quality level of first content of the workspace image on the multiple displays when the first content is in the region of user attention on at least one of the multiple displays, the first quality level presenting the first content of the workspace image in focus on the multiple displays (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5, column 3, lines 11-42; column 4, lines 25-32. Users may interact with windows and the system tracks whether windows in focus or being viewed, the quality level can be increased); and
set a second quality level of second content of the workspace image on the multiple displays when the second content is outside of the region of user attention across the multiple displays, the second quality level lower than the first quality level, the second quality level presenting the second content of the workspace image out of focus on the one or more displays (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5; column 4, lines 1-32, determine whether windows are visible, in focus, not in focus or not viewed, the quality level can be decreased).
However, Pieper teaches the multi-display collaboration workspace, shared windows. Pieper does not explicitly teach determining specific regions of user attention based on eye gaze and selectively changing display characteristics of attended and non-attended display regions.
Hsieh explicitly teaches determining specific regions of user attention based on eye gaze and selectively changing display characteristics of attended and non-attended display regions (“Hsieh”, Figs. 1 and 2, [0014]-[0015], [0017]-[0021], modifying the presentation characteristics of displayed information depending on whether the information is within or outside a region of user attention).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant's subject matter to apply Hsieh’s gaze-based region of attention determination to Pieper’s multi-display collaborative window sharing system so that content attended by a user is presented at a high quality level and content not attended by the user is presented at a lower quality level. The combination would conserve processing, network, and display resources while improving user focus and presentation efficiency.
Claim 13: Pieper and Hsieh teach the system of claim 12, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: cause transmission of a first amount of data to cause display of the workspace image; and cause transmission of a second amount of data to cause display of the adjusted workspace image, the second amount less than the first amount (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5; column 4, lines 1-32; column 5, lines 6-27).
Claim 20: Pieper and Hsieh teach the system of claim 12, wherein the at least one processor circuit is to apply a first volume level in the first region of user attention and a second volume level in the second region of user attention, the second volume level lower than the first volume level (“Pieper”, Fig. 3, col. 5, line 1-3).
Claim 18: Claim 18 is directed to the system of claim 12 for implementing the method steps of claim 3. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 19: Claim 19 is directed to the system of claim 12 for implementing the method steps of claim 4. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 21: Claim 21 is directed to the system of claim 12 for implementing the method steps of claim 6. Therefore, claim 21 is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 23: Claim 23 is directed to the system of claim 12 for implementing the method steps of claim 11. Therefore, claim 23 is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 66: Pieper and Hsieh teach the system of claim 12, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to:
generate an adjusted workspace image data with the first quality level and the second quality level based on a time of day; and cause display of an adjusted workspace image based on the adjusted workspace image data by the first one of the multiple displays (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5; column 4, lines 1-32; column 5, lines 6-27).
Claim 67: Pieper and Hsieh teach the system of claim 12, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to pause a face modification program in the second content (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5; column 3, lines 32-42).
Claim 68: Pieper and Hsieh teach the system of claim 12, wherein the first content is in the region of user attention on a first display of the multiple displays, and the one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to set the first quality level of third content of the workspace image on the multiple displays when the third content is in the region of user attention on a second display of the multiple displays, the second display different than the first display (“Pieper”, Figs. 2-5; column 4, lines 1-32; column 5, lines 6-27).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Pub 2022/0398691 (WEI et al.) — Discloses content display with focused area.
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.
Examiner has cited particular columns and line and/or paragraph numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
The examiner requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line no(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application.
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
Point of Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONG H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1300. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-4:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Bashore can be reached at 571-272-4088. 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.
/PHUONG H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights