DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20, 26, 34, and 37-40 are cancelled. Claims 21-24, 29-32, and 41-45 are amended. Claims 46-47 are new. Claims 21-25, 27-33, 35-36, and 41-47 are pending in the application.
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 .
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.
Examiner’s Notes
The Examiner cites particular sections in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant(s). Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant(s) fully consider the references in their 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 21-36 in the reply filed on 03/24/2025 is acknowledged.
Response to Amendment
Amendments to claims 21-23, 29-31, 41-43, and 45 are fully considered and are satisfactory to overcome the priority objections presented in the previous Office Action.
Amendments to claims 21-23, 29-31, 41-43, and 45 are fully considered and are satisfactory to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. §112(a) directed to claims 21-25, 27-33, 35-36, and 41-45 in the previous Office Action.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 21-22, 27-30, 35-36, 41-42, and 46-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hou et al. (US 2016/0364272 A1; from IDS filed on 09/08/2022; hereinafter “Hou”) in view of Abramson et al. (US 2007/0286381 A1; hereinafter “Abramson”).
With respect to claim 21, Hou teaches: A method comprising:
detecting, by an electronic device, a wake event (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 72: “when the electronic device has been switched from the second state to the first state”; and paragraph 36: “the first state can be a screen-on state and the second state can be a screen-off state”); and
Note that, switching from screen-off state (i.e. the second state) to screen-on state (i.e. the first state) is a wake event for the screen.
transitioning a display of the electronic device from a low power state to a higher power state (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 72: “when the electronic device has been switched from the second state to the first state”; and paragraph 36: “the first state can be a screen-on state and the second state can be a screen-off state”), the transitioning comprising:
Note that, switching from a screen from off-state (i.e. the second state) to an on-state (i.e. the first state) inherently discloses switching from a lower power consumption for the screen to a higher power consumption.
determining, by the electronic device and in response to the wake event (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 72: “when the electronic device has been switched from the second state to the first state”), if an active session of a first application is executing on the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 72: “when the electronic device has been switched from the second state to the first state, a first application is initiated on basis that the first application has been preloaded in response to receiving a request for initiating the first application. The first application is an application in the priority list that has been preloaded”; paragraph 38: “priorities of all the applications in accordance with the predetermined strategy can include: acquiring current usage behavior information”; and paragraph 39: “current usage behavior information can include at least one or more of: application initiation time, application execution time and application execution progress”);
in response to a determination that the active session of the first application is executing on the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 72: “The first application is an application in the priority list that has been preloaded”; and paragraphs 38-39), displaying or updating a display of a user interface of the first application on the display of the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 72: “a first application is initiated on basis that the first application has been preloaded”; and paragraph 74: “news client application will have a high priority. Hence, from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m., the electronic device will preload the news client application, such that news contents can be presented to the user quickly”); and
That is, when an application is in the priority list and preloaded, that application is initiated and displayed on the screen for the user to view, such as viewing news from a news application with a high priority.
in response to a determination that the active session of the first application (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 60: “A”, “D”) is not executing on the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 60: “user may initiate two applications B and C… the priority list is determined, the result of the sorting can be B>C>A>D”; and paragraph 98: “did not view the stock application in early April”), displaying or updating a display of… the electronic device on the display of the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 4: “releases the resources occupied by applications having low priorities”; paragraph 60: “when the priority list is determined, the result of the sorting can be B>C>A>D” paragraph 72: “a first application is initiated on basis that the first application has been preloaded… The first application is an application in the priority list”; and paragraph 74: “news client application will have a high priority. Hence, from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m., the electronic device will preload the news client application, such that news contents can be presented to the user quickly”).
That is, Hou determines which applications are inactive, assigns lower priorities to such inactive applications, and executes and displays active application with a higher priority on the screen instead of the inactive applications with the lower priorities.
However, even though Hou discloses displaying or updating a user interface of the device (see e.g. Hou, paragraphs 72, 74), Hou does not explicitly disclose a “default user interface of a default application”.
On the other hand, Abramson teaches:
a default user interface of a default application of (see e.g. Abramson, paragraph 14: “Idle Application may be displayed on the display screen of the walk-up telecommunications terminal when an idle time exceeds an idle threshold. The idle time may be, for example, a time that the Phone Application and the Information Application are inactive. In other embodiments, an idle splash screen may be displayed as a default Idle Application”)
Hou and Abramson are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor: managing electronic device display states based on user interactions with applications executing on the electronic device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hou with the teachings of Abramson. The motivation/suggestion would be to improve user experience.
With respect to claim 22, Hou as modified teaches: The method of claim 21, wherein in response to the determination that the active session of the first application is not executing on the electronic device further comprises:
determining if a persistent session of a second application is executing on the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 59: “analyzing the current usage behavior information for all the application with reference to the historical usage behavior information for all the applications; and determining the priorities of all the applications based on a result of the analyzing”; and paragraph 98: “addicted to a game b application… set the priority of the game b application to a high level… user's usage behavior information for each application each time is recorded and analyzed”);
in response to a determination that the persistent session of the second application is executing on the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 59: “analyzing the current usage behavior information for all the application with reference to the historical usage behavior information for all the applications”; and paragraph 98: “addicted to a game b application”), displaying or updating a display of a user interface of the second application on the display of the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 98: “priority of the game b application to a high level”; paragraph 71: “preloading the applications having the highest M priorities”; and paragraph 72: “first application is initiated on basis that the first application has been preloaded”); and
in response to a determination that the persistent session of the second application is not executing on the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 59: “analyzing the current usage behavior information for all the application with reference to the historical usage behavior information for all the applications”; paragraph 60: “user may initiate two applications B and C when the electronic device is in the first state. In this case, when the electronic device is in the second state, the acquired historical priorities can be A>B>C>D. Then, when the priority list is determined, the result of the sorting can be B>C>A>D”; and paragraph 98: “Since the user's usage behavior information for each application each time is recorded and analyzed, it is possible to better determine whether the user's custom has changed or not and better adapt to the change in the user's custom”), displaying or updating the display of… the electronic device one the display of the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 4: “releases the resources occupied by applications having low priorities”; paragraph 60: “when the priority list is determined, the result of the sorting can be B>C>A>D” paragraph 72: “a first application is initiated on basis that the first application has been preloaded… The first application is an application in the priority list”; and paragraph 74: “news client application will have a high priority. Hence, from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m., the electronic device will preload the news client application, such that news contents can be presented to the user quickly”).
On the other hand, Abramson teaches:
the default user interface of the default application of (see e.g. Abramson, paragraph 14: “Idle Application may be displayed on the display screen of the walk-up telecommunications terminal when an idle time exceeds an idle threshold. The idle time may be, for example, a time that the Phone Application and the Information Application are inactive. In other embodiments, an idle splash screen may be displayed as a default Idle Application”)
Hou and Abramson are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor: managing electronic device display states based on user interactions with applications executing on the electronic device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hou with the teachings of Abramson. The motivation/suggestion would be to improve user experience.
With respect to claim 27, Hou as modified teaches: The method of claim 21, wherein the transitioning further comprises:
increasing system resources (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 70: “memory usage”) that are available to the first application (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 69: “selecting one or more applications from the priority list for preloading can include preloading one or more applications in the priority list that has a priority satisfying a second predetermined condition based on a system memory state”; paragraph 70; and paragraph 4: “releases the resources occupied by applications having low priorities”).
With respect to claim 28, Hou as modified teaches: The method of claim 21, wherein the active session corresponds to a user activity external to the electronic device (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 38: “current usage behavior information of the user for all the applications”; paragraph 39: “current usage behavior information can include at least one or more of: application initiation time, application execution time and application execution progress”; and paragraph 50).
With respect to claims 29, 30, and 35-36: Claims 29, 30, and 35-36 are directed to a device comprising a memory and at least one processor configured to implement active functions corresponding to the method disclosed in claims 21, 22, and 27-28, respectively; please see the rejections directed to claims 21, 22, and 27-28 above which also cover the limitations recited in claims 29, 30, and 35-36. Note that, Hou further discloses a device comprising a memory and a processor configured to implement the method disclosed in claims 21, 22, and 27-28 (see e.g. Hou, paragraphs 152-158).
With respect to claims 41 and 42: Claims 41 and 42 are directed to a non-transitory machine-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations corresponding to the method disclosed in claims 21 and 22, respectively; please see the rejections directed to claims 21 and 22 above which also cover the limitations recited in claims 41 and 42. Note that, Hou further discloses a computer readable storage medium comprising program instructions to implement the method disclosed in claims 21 and 22 (see e.g. Hou, paragraphs 157-158).
With respect to claim 46, Hou as modified teaches: The method of claim 21, wherein the first application is executing on the electronic device during the active session of the first application (see e.g. Hou, paragraph 82: “acquiring current usage behavior information of the user for all the applications”; and paragraph 83: “current usage behavior information can include at least one or more of: application initiation time, application execution time and application execution progress”).
With respect to claim 47, Hou as modified teaches: The method of claim 21,
Hou does not but Abramson teaches:
wherein the default user interface of the default application of the electronic device is displayed or updated in response to determining that an idle timeout period associated with a persistent session of a second application has expired (see e.g. Abramson, paragraph 14: “Idle Application may be displayed on the display screen of the walk-up telecommunications terminal when an idle time exceeds an idle threshold. The idle time may be, for example, a time that the Phone Application and the Information Application are inactive. In other embodiments, an idle splash screen may be displayed as a default Idle Application”).
Hou and Abramson are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor: managing electronic device display states based on user interactions with applications executing on the electronic device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hou with the teachings of Abramson. The motivation/suggestion would be to improve user experience.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21, 29, and 41 (Remarks, pages 8-9) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-25, 31-33, and 43-45 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The limitations recited in claims 23, 31, 43, and 45, in their entirety, present novel and non-obvious subject matter.
CONCLUSION
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ledwith et al. (US 2016/0359666 A1) discloses display and power management associated with a companion device when a companion application wakes up (see paragraphs 45-47).
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Umut Onat whose telephone number is (571)270-1735. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:00-7:30.
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, Kevin L Young can be reached at (571) 270-3180. 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.
/UMUT ONAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2194
Prosecution Insights