DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communication filed on 05 September 2025. Claims 1, 3-5, 8, 13-14 and 17-19 are amended. Claims 2 and 6-7 have been canceled. No new claim has been added. Claims 1, 3-5 and 8-19 are pending in the application and have been considered below.
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 Amendment
Based on applicant's amendment, the rejection of claims 1-19 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that ["From at least such disclosure, it is clear that Narayanamurthi does not disclose or suggest two different versions of the same page of the document being superimposed onto each other so that both versions are visible and thus a difference between these versions is visually identifiable. Furthermore, in the claim, "the display mode of each of the superimposed images" which for example, controls how much opacity or transparency is to be applied to each preview image while it cannot be 0% or 100% as each image must be visible after superimposition-is determined "in accordance with the second operation performed on the operation image" (e.g., operating image B 1 in Fig. 8 of present application). In Narayanamurthi, however, the transparency of the versions arranged in the timeline is determined based on how old each version is relative to other versions in the stack. Varying the display mode, such as transparency, of each of the superimposed images in accordance with the second input operation performed on the operation image, is simply not disclosed or suggested in Narayanamurthi" (Pages 13-14)].
The argument described above has been considered, and are persuasive. Therefore, rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further search and consideration, a new ground of rejection is made, citing the new references HICKS (US20160210732A1) and ZHANG (CN112988003A) (see claim 1 rejection below).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-5, 8, 13-14 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHAVER (US20140033088A1) in view of SU et al. (US20220350470A1) and further view of HICKS (US20160210732A1) and further view of ZHANG (CN112988003A).
As to claim 1, SHAVER teaches an information processing system (see Abstract, apparatus, systems, and methods may operate to transmit and receive information, such as between a client and a server, that enables the display of a plurality of version indicators corresponding to a plurality of versions of electronic content; as taught by SHAVER);
perform control including enlarging and displaying an image of a predetermined page included in one or more pages constituting the electronic document (see par. 0023, Fig. 1, wherein GUI 108, viewport 112 window that may be displayed by a reviewing application to review the electronic document; par. 0024, figs. 2-4, wherein viewport 112 showing all of one page 116 (page 4) of an electronic document 124 [''page 4" of the electronic document is considered to correspond to the ''predetermined page" defined in claim 1, because when launching the reviewing application, a predetermined page, typically page 1 or the last page edited of the electronic document, is initially shown]; as taught by SHAVER)
and an operation unit on the display such that the image of the predetermined page and the operation unit are displayed larger in size than the thumbnail image (see par. 0043, wherein FIG. 2 illustrates the display of a file revision history 100 along a time line 104 along with additional tracked changes as part of a GUI 108, according to various embodiments. As is shown in FIG. 1, versions along the time line 104 can be indicated using version indicators. Here in FIG. 2, the version indicators comprise a dot version indicator 276, indicating one of several versions on the time line 104, and a circle version indicator 278, to indicate a version on the time line 104 that has been selected by the system and/or a user. Other graphic figures can be used as version indicators; see also par. 0044 [in fig. 2, the thumbnails are in the pain 132 and the page 4 associated with the thumbnail is shown in larger size in GUI 108]; as taught by SHAVER),
the operation unit at least including an operation image for receiving a second input operation for displaying images of the predetermined page for different versions of the electronic document (see par. 0025, wherein the history icon 140, as well as the time line 104, may form a part of the GUI 108 display associated with a document processing program, and can be located anywhere in the GUI 108, as desired. The history icon 140 and time line 104 are located in the lower left or lower right corner of a display screen 150; as taught by SHAVER).
SHAVER does not expressly teach comprising: a processor configured to: receive a first input operation, performed by a user, selecting a thumbnail image of an electronic document displayed on a display; receive the second input operation performed by the user on the operation image; and perform control including superimposing a preview image of the predetermined page of a first version and a preview image of the predetermined page of a second version on each other and enlarging and displaying the superimposed preview images on the display in a mode in which a difference between the first and second versions is identifiable by varying a display mode for each of the preview images that are superimposed in accordance with the second input operation performed on the operation image.
In similar field of endeavor, SU teaches comprising: a processor configured to: receive a first input operation, performed by a user, selecting a thumbnail image of an electronic document displayed on a display (see figs. 2A-2B, par. 0082, wherein an electronic device may detect a user operation performed on the thumbnail, and in response to the user operation, the electronic device displays the original picture corresponding to the thumbnail; as taught by SU).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the SHAVER apparatus to include the teachings of SU to receive a first input operation performed by a user on a thumbnail image of an electronic document displayed on a display. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as having the thumbnails help the user quickly browse the photos and advantageously select one and click on the thumbnail to expand the image, for improves usability of the system (see also SU, par. 0004).
SHAVER and SU do not expressly teach receive the second input operation performed by the user on the operation image; and perform control including superimposing a preview image of the predetermined page of a first version and a preview image of the predetermined page of a second version on each other and enlarging and displaying the superimposed preview images on the display in a mode in which a difference between the first and second versions is identifiable by varying a display mode for each of the preview images that are superimposed in accordance with the second input operation performed on the operation image.
In similar field of endeavor, HICKS teaches receive the second input operation performed by the user on the operation image (see fig. 8, par. 0055, wherein the machine readable instructions 710 of FIG. 8 begin execution at block 805 at which the reference selector 405 of the scene positioner 225 selects a reference image from the reference storage 240. For example, the reference selector 405 can select a reference image corresponding to a scene (e.g., inventory display) being audited based on user input received via the user interface 245 of the auditing device 105; as taught by HICKS);
and perform control including superimposing a preview image of the predetermined page of a first version and a preview image of the predetermined page of a second version on each other and enlarging and displaying the superimposed preview images on the display (see figs. 2-8, par. 0037, wherein to overlay the reference image on a current image to be displayed on the device display 220, the image overlayer 410 determines a semi-transparent, or ghost, version of the reference image. For example, the image overlayer 410 can modify one or more image characteristics of the reference image, such as the reference image's average luminance and/or chrominance, the image's average brightness, the image's color map, etc., to generate the ghost version of the reference image. Additionally or alternatively, the image overlayer 410 can generate an outline version of the reference image using, for example, one or more edge detection techniques. The outline version of the reference image can be overlaid on the current image instead of, or in addition to, the ghost version of the reference image. The image overlayer 410 then combines (e.g., adds) the ghost and/or outline version(s) of the reference image with the current image to determine a combined image to be displayed on the device display 220; as taught by HICKS).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the SHAVER and SU apparatus to include the teachings of HICKS to receive the second input operation performed by the user on the operation image; and perform control including superimposing a preview image of the predetermined page of a first version and a preview image of the predetermined page of a second version on each other and enlarging and displaying the superimposed preview images on the display. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as it is beneficial to be able to look at the changes made overlayed on the previous version as it may be difficult for users to recall the various revisions, comments, and/or changes included in each of the stored document versions (see also HICKS, par. 0003).
SHAVER, SU and HICKS do not expressly teach in a mode in which a difference between the first and second versions is identifiable by varying a display mode for each of the preview images that are superimposed in accordance with the second input operation performed on the operation image.
In similar field of endeavor, ZHANG teaches in a mode in which a difference between the first and second versions is identifiable by varying a display mode (see page 15, ll. 5-17, wherein at least one type of farming work will be performed on a farming plot, because different farming types are represented by different colors, and all farming layers of the same plot are superimposed and displayed on the farming map. There is no way to observe and read the data when all the agricultural layers of the block are superimposed. Therefore, it is necessary to set the transparency of the agricultural layers. When the farming layer is set to transparency, even if the farming layer has colors and different shades, the farming layer is superimposed on the map with different colors, and the specific information of the farming type can also be seen intuitively. Specifically, the transparency setting can be adjusted through the transparency selection control, which can be a control similar to the above-mentioned timeline, by dragging the indicator on the transparency selection control to change the transparency of the agricultural layer, and setting the content Will be applied to all plots on the farm map; as taught by ZHANG)
for each of the preview images that are superimposed in accordance with the second input operation performed on the operation image (see page 16, ll. 9-22, wherein on the map interface, check the farm type layers that need to be compared. After selection, the selected farm type layers will be superimposed on the map in turn, and each farm type layer contains Timeline controller and color shade setting controls, such as loading the rice leaf age layer and fertilization layer at the same time, find the poorly growing plots based on the plot leaf age value of the leaf age map, then open the fertilization layer to view the The number of times of fertilization of the plot and whether the amount of fertilizer is up to standard. The abnormal plot can be quickly located through the color depth and the value of agricultural operations, and the effect of superimposing the two layers can be achieved by controlling the color depth of the layer. Through the above steps: display a farming map for displaying farming information, where the farming map has multiple farming layers, and each farming layer is used to display the farming type corresponding to each farming layer; as taught by ZHANG).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the SHAVER, SU and HICKS apparatus to include the teachings of ZHANG in a mode in which a difference between the first and second versions is identifiable by varying a display mode for each of the preview images that are superimposed in accordance with the second input operation performed on the operation image. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as different farming types are represented by different colors, and all farming layers of the same plot are superimposed and displayed on the farming map. There is no way to observe and read the data when all the agricultural layers of the block are superimposed. Therefore, it is necessary and beneficial to the user to be able to set the transparency of the agricultural layers on the map(see also ZHANG, page 15, ll. 6-9).
As to claim 3, SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG teach the limitations of claim 1. SHAVER further teaches wherein the processor is configured to receive an operation for superimposing a cursor on the thumbnail image as the first input operation for selecting the thumbnail image, the cursor moving in the display in conjunction with an input operation performed by the user (see figs. 2 and 7, par. 0061, wherein Further activity at block 333 may include dynamically displaying the information associated with a selected one of the plurality of versions as cursor hover activity (e.g., as the result of a mouse over operation) proximate to the selected one of the plurality of versions is detected. Thus, as the cursor hovers over versions along the time line, the identity/save time information display may follow the cursor location, and the information may change to reflect the version on the time line nearest to the cursor location; see also par. 0105, wherein Using selection activity in conjunction with the cursor 152 location (e.g., mouse-over actions combined with a click command), each version 158, 160 can be dynamically selected, one at a time. The specific versions of the document ultimately selected for tracking are shown via the circle version indicators 278; see also pars. 0106-0107; as taught by SHAVER).
As to claim 4, SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG teach the limitations of claim 1. SHAVER further teaches wherein the processor is configured to perform control including enlarging and displaying the operation image on the display if a version of the electronic document opened in accordance with an input operation performed by the user is different from a version corresponding to previous enlarged display on the display (see par. 0044, wherein if a particular version was saved by a user no longer present on the document sharing list, the version indicator 276, 278 may have a gray color. If a version is selected by virtue of an action on the part of the user (e.g., the mouse controlling the pointer 152 is clicked), then the version selected may be used to replace the current version of the document 124 displayed in the GUI 108 [i.e. if the version is the same, there will be no change]; as taught by SHAVER).
As to claim 5, SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG teach the limitations of claim 1. SHAVER further teaches wherein the processor is configured to perform control including not displaying the operation image on the display if a version of the electronic document enlarged and displayed on the display in accordance with an input operation performed by the user is identical to a version corresponding to previous enlarged display on the display or if the electronic document has never been enlarged and displayed on the display in accordance with the input operation (see figs. 2 and 7, pars. 0025 and 0104-0107, e.g. par. 0025, wherein the user can access various versions of the document 124 (with the exception of the working version) by clicking on a history icon 140. The history icon 140, as well as the time line 104, may form a part of the GUI 108 display associated with a document processing program [i.e. if there is a history of versions, they will be depicted in the history timeline in the form of circled indicators, and no circles if there is no history]; as taught by SHAVER).
As to claim 8, SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG teach the limitations of claim 1. ZHANG further teaches receive the second input operation performed on any position in a region formed between a first text character or symbol and a second text character or symbol that are displayed in the operation image, the first text character or symbol indicating the predetermined page of the first version, the second text character or symbol indicating the predetermined page of the second version; and vary the display mode in accordance with the position on which the second input operation is performed (see page 15, ln. 25 – page 16, ln. 7, wherein before displaying the agricultural map for displaying agricultural information, the method further includes: selecting the agricultural map corresponding to the target area from a preset database; The operation time interval carried in the input instruction determines the preset operation time interval. Specifically, the preset database is a collection of farming maps of all farming areas, each farming area contains multiple farming work plots, and the input instructions refer to manual click operations on the time axis or drag instructions on the time axis The instructions generated after identification. When you need to display specific information in the agricultural layer at a specific time point or time interval, click the corresponding position on the time axis, and the indicator will generate a corresponding movement track with the click action; as taught by ZHANG).
As to claim 13, SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG teach the limitations of claim 1. ZHANG further teaches wherein the processor is configured to perform control including superimposing the preview image of the page of a current version and the preview image of the page of a version previously opened in accordance with an input operation performed by the user on each other and enlarging and displaying the superimposed preview image on the display, the preview image of the page of the current version serving as the preview image of the predetermined page of the first version, the preview image of the page of the version previously opened in accordance with the input operation performed by the user serving as the preview image of the predetermined page of the second version (see par. 0034, wherein example operations of the auditing device 105 to perform image overlaying and comparison for inventory display auditing in an example retail store 300 is illustrated in FIGS. 3A-B. FIG. 3A depicts operation of the auditing device 105 during an initial audit of an example inventory display 305 in the retail store 300. During the initial audit, the auditing device 105 is used to capture a reference image representing the detail display, as shown. FIG. 3B depicts operation of the auditing device 105 during a subsequent audit of the inventory display 305 in the retail store 300. During the subsequent audit, the auditing device 105 overlays a semi-transparent, or ghost, version of the reference image obtained during the initial audit over the current image(s) (e.g., live video) being displayed on the auditing device 105. As described above, the auditing device 105 also determines and indicates (e.g., via highlighting in a different color, shade, etc.) a difference region corresponding to respective regions in the current and reference images that differ. The auditor's attention is drawn to the indicated difference region, prompting the user to focus auditing on the corresponding portion of the inventory display 305; as taught by ZHANG).
As to claim 14, SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG teach the limitations of claim 13. HICKS further teaches wherein the processor is configured to perform control including superimposing the preview image of the page of the version previously opened in accordance with the input operation performed by the user as the preview image of the predetermined page of the second version and enlarging and displaying the superimposed preview image on the display when a third input operation is performed by the user (see par. 0035, wherein the reference storage 240 stores reference images obtained from prior (e.g., initial) audits of one or more inventory displays. In the illustrated example, the reference selector 405 selects a particular reference image from the reference storage 240 based on user input (e.g., obtained via the user interface 245); as taught by HICKS).
As to claim 17, SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG teach the limitations of claim 1. SHAVER further teaches wherein the processor is configured to perform control including arranging the preview image of the predetermined page of the first version and the preview image of the predetermined page of the second version side-by-side and enlarging and displaying the preview images on the display in accordance with a fourth input operation performed by the user (see fig. 2, par. 0073, wherein if an explicit selection has been made and/or detected for both versions, then the method 411 may continue on to block 433 to transmitting information to the receiving entity to enable displaying the changes between versions. Otherwise, the method 411 may include, at block 429, transmitting information to the receiving entity to enable displaying a dynamically-selectable first selection indicator on one side of the time line to indicate selection of the first version and a dynamically-selectable second selection indicator on another side of the time line to indicate selection of the second version. In this case, the selection indicators may each be dynamically-selectable, with the newer version and the older version on opposite sides of the time line; as taught by SHAVER).
Claim 18 amounts to the non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program executed by the computer system of claim 1. Accordingly, claims 18 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 1 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claim 19 amounts to the method performed by the computer system of claim 1. Accordingly, claims 19 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 1 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claims 9-12 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHAVER (US20140033088A1) in view of SU et al. (US20220350470A1) and further view of HICKS (US20160210732A1) and further view of ZHANG (CN112988003A) and further view of HAYDEN et al. (US9092405B1).
As to claim 9, SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG teach the limitations of claim 8. SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG do not expressly teach make the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the first version clear and the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the second version unclear as the position on which the second input operation is performed approaches the first text character or symbol; and make the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the second version clear and the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the first version unclear as the position on which the second input operation is performed approaches the second text character or symbol.
In similar field of endeavor, HAYDEN teaches make the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the first version clear and the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the second version unclear as the position on which the second input operation is performed approaches the first text character or symbol; and make the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the second version clear and the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the first version unclear as the position on which the second input operation is performed approaches the second text character or symbol (see col. 40, ln. 57 – col. 41, ln. 9, wherein as illustrated in FIG. 16C, a user may provide an input, such as a touch screen gesture 1608, to slide the slider control 1606 to a different position on the timeline 1604. This can result in the display illustrated in FIG. 16D in which a different version is presented as the topmost layer of the stack, corresponding to the changed position of the slider control 1606 on the timeline 1604. In some embodiments, the transition to different versions of a web page may be animated. Additionally, in other embodiments, at least some portion of an illustrated version may dynamically incorporate transparency attributes to facilitate transitions. In some embodiments, the slider control 1606 may be configured to automatically transition across the timeline 1604, providing the user with a view of changes in the versions over time without requiring further input from the user. For example, when the interface 1600 is loaded and rendered, the stack can be sorted with the oldest version on top. Versions of the web page can be animated off of the stack or may become increasingly transparent and disappear at a constant rate or variable rate; as taught by HAYDEN).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG apparatus to include the teachings of HAYDEN to make the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the first version clear and the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the second version unclear as the position on which the second input operation is performed approaches the first text character or symbol; and make the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the second version clear and the display mode for the preview image of the predetermined page of the first version unclear as the position on which the second input operation is performed approaches the second text character or symbol. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as it is beneficial for the user to be able to focus on the document version that is going to be in focus as opposed to the one that the user is moving away from.
As to claim 10, SHAVER, SU, HICKS, ZHANG and HAYDEN teach the limitations of claim 9. HAYDEN further teaches wherein the processor is configured to make the mode clear by reducing display transparency of each of the preview image of the predetermined page of the first version and the preview image of the predetermined page of the second version and make the display mode unclear by increasing the display transparency (see col. 41, ll. 46-51, wherein the representations of the pages can be partially transparent, either by a measurement of the transparency of the representation or by which portion of the representation is transparent. Such transparency can allow the user to view the representations of versions below the representation at the top of the stack, and therefore to see differences in the versions; as taught by HAYDEN).
As to claim 11, SHAVER, SU, HICKS, ZHANG and HAYDEN teach the limitations of claim 9. HAYDEN further teaches wherein a linear symbol disposed between the first text character or symbol and the second text character or symbol is displayed in the region, and the second input operation is performed on any position of the linear symbol (see col. 40, ll. 54-63, wherein FIGS. 16A and 16B, a user may interact with a slider control 1606 presented on a timeline control 1604 to modify which version is displayed. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 16C, a user may provide an input, such as a touch screen gesture 1608, to slide the slider control 1606 to a different position on the timeline 1604. This can result in the display illustrated in FIG. 16D in which a different version is presented as the topmost layer of the stack, corresponding to the changed position of the slider control 1606 on the timeline 1604; as taught by HAYDEN).
As to claim 12, SHAVER, SU, HICKS, ZHANG and HAYDEN teach the limitations of claim 11. HAYDEN further teaches wherein the linear symbol displays a symbol indicating the position in a movable manner along the linear symbol, and an operation for moving the symbol indicating the position is performed as the second input operation (see figs. 16A-16D, col. 40, ll. 54-63, wherein as also illustrated in FIGS. 16A and 16B, a user may interact with a slider control 1606 presented on a timeline control 1604 to modify which version is displayed. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 16C, a user may provide an input, such as a touch screen gesture 1608, to slide the slider control 1606 to a different position on the timeline 1604. This can result in the display illustrated in FIG. 16D in which a different version is presented as the topmost layer of the stack, corresponding to the changed position of the slider control 1606 on the timeline 1604; as taught by HAYDEN).
As to claim 15, SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG teach the limitations of claim 8. SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG do not expressly teach wherein the operation image displays an n-th text character or symbol in addition to the second text character or symbol indicating the predetermined page of the second version, the n-th text character or symbol indicating the predetermined page of an n-th version, n being an integer larger than or equal to 3, and wherein a display position of each of the first text character or symbol, the second text character or symbol, and the n-th text character or symbol is set based on a length of time interval among a timing at which the first version is added, a timing at which the second version is added, and a timing at which the n-th version is added.
In similar field of endeavor, HAYDEN teaches wherein the operation image displays an n-th text character or symbol in addition to the second text character or symbol indicating the predetermined page of the second version, the n-th text character or symbol indicating the predetermined page of an n-th version, n being an integer larger than or equal to 3, and wherein a display position of each of the first text character or symbol, the second text character or symbol, and the n-th text character or symbol is set based on a length of time interval among a timing at which the first version is added, a timing at which the second version is added, and a timing at which the n-th version is added (see figs. 16A-16D, col. 40, ll. 54-63, wherein as also illustrated in FIGS. 16A and 16B, a user may interact with a slider control 1606 presented on a timeline control 1604 to modify which version is displayed. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 16C, a user may provide an input, such as a touch screen gesture 1608, to slide the slider control 1606 to a different position on the timeline 1604. This can result in the display illustrated in FIG. 16D in which a different version is presented as the topmost layer of the stack, corresponding to the changed position of the slider control 1606 on the timeline 1604 [also on the timeline, there are dividers that show partition of timeline for the user to adjust the desired time line with the leftmost indicating the start date]; as taught by HAYDEN).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the SHAVER, SU, HICKS and ZHANG apparatus to include the teachings of HAYDEN wherein the operation image displays an n-th text character or symbol in addition to the second text character or symbol indicating the predetermined page of the second version, the n-th text character or symbol indicating the predetermined page of an n-th version, n being an integer larger than or equal to 3, and wherein a display position of each of the first text character or symbol, the second text character or symbol, and the n-th text character or symbol is set based on a length of time interval among a timing at which the first version is added, a timing at which the second version is added, and a timing at which the n-th version is added. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as it is beneficial for the user to be able to measure the timeline slices to go back and for the for the desired versions.
As to claim 16, SHAVER, SU, HICKS, ZHANG and HAYDEN teach the limitations of claim 15. HAYDEN further teaches wherein a type, a display position, and a size of each of the first text character or symbol, the second text character or symbol, and the n-th text character or symbol are set based on at least one piece of information including the length of the time interval, a value of n, and an area of the operation image (see figs. 16A-16D, on the timeline slider, there are dividers that show partition of timeline in equal parts for the user to adjust the desired time line with the leftmost indicating the start date; as taught by HAYDEN).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Publication Number
Filing Date
Title
US20180335924A1
2018-07-31
Application Inspector
US9824474B2
2013-07-11
Method of capturing information about a rack and equipment installed therein
US20080175484A1
2007-01-24
Method for emphasizing differences in graphical appearance between an original document and a modified document with annotations
US6496206B1
1998-06-29
Displaying thumbnail images of document pages in an electronic folder
US20090289955A1
2008-05-22
Reality overlay device
Non-Patent Literature
Title
INEIGHT DOCUMENT ESSENTIALS - DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT USER GUIDE 2020 (chapter 4, section 4.3, pages 40-41) (https://web.archive.org/web/20240417223910/https://learn.ineight.com/Document/Content/Resources/PDFUserGuides/Document_Essentials.pdf)
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KOOROSH NEHCHIRI whose telephone number is (408)918-7643. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 11-7 PST.
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 L. 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.
/KOOROSH NEHCHIRI/Examiner, Art Unit 2174
/WILLIAM L BASHORE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2174