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 action is responsive to Request for Continued Examination filed 10 February 2026 and the supplemental response/amendment to application filed on 09/23/2022 which is continuation of 16/875,456 (now US Patent 11474688) which is continuation of 14/468,810 (now US Patent 10684771) which claims foreign priority on 08/19/2014 and 08/26/2013.
Claims 1, 15, 20 have been amended. Claims 7-14 have been canceled. Claims 1-6, 15-24 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 15, 20 are independent claims.
All rejections in previous office action not set forth below have been withdrawn as necessitated by the amendment.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10 February 2026 has been 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.
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.
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, 2, 3, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Demiya, US 2014/0219564 in view of Wynn et al, US 2004/0196313 A1 and Oh, US 7899487, and further in view of Marggraff et al., US 2009/0251338.
Regarding independent claim 1, Demiya teaches an electronic device, comprising: a touchscreen; memory storing one or more computer programs; and one or more processors communicatively coupled to the touchscreen and the memory, wherein the one or more computer programs include computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
display, on the touchscreen, a user interface of a note application for receiving a handwriting input, (Demiya, [0070]-[0072]; handwriting note application has pen button for user input handwriting text on a touch-screen),
receive the handwriting input through the user interface of the note application, (Demiya, [0070]-[0072]; receiving handwriting input from the user using pen button),
based on the handwriting input being received, display a string, corresponding to the handwriting input, without an underline, (Demiya, [0070]-[0074]; receiving handwriting input from the user using pen button, wherein the handwriting note application is a what you see is what you get (WYSIWYG) application). It is clear for figure 8 of Demiya and the disclosure of Demiya that not handwritten text is underlined.
Demiva does not teach after the handwriting input being completed: identify a keyword included in the string, wherein the keyword corresponds to a plurality of applications, …, wherein the plurality of applications are configured to execute a plurality of communication functions related to the keyword.
Wynn teaches electronic ink written in a document can be repurposed to be used in another application wherein the documents can be related to respective different applications (P 0018) repurposed ink is underlined (P 0051) the system looks for and recognizes ink “words” and places the ink “words” in the appropriate email application field or recognizes the ink “words” as an email address (P 0049 Fig 4c) or an address book (P 0067 Fig 6b) the respective fields identified by the appropriate rules in P 0049 and 0067 could be interpreted as functions specific to each respective application, an icon is displayed in association with selected ink to display related documents (repurposed ink can be related to documents in a plurality of applications) (P 0053) furthermore, when a repurposing menu is about to be shown, the ink entry application program finds and creates a listing of all the providers registered with it and use its interface to get the menu text and action ID for all the repurposing actions the components provide to add to the menu (P 0086).
Neither Demiya nor Wynn disclose a plurality of communication functions. In the same field of invention, Oh teaches the link manager assigns a sign corresponding to each specific data such as a telephone number and an email address (C 4 L 60-63) and selection of a link initiates the corresponding communication application (C 7 L 55-61). Oh teaches a plurality of communication functions may be initiated from the text, linked to the corresponding communication function, of a message.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill, before the effective filling date of the invention, to have combined Wynn’s teaching into Demiya’s teachings to include after the handwriting input being completed: identify a keyword included in the string, wherein the keyword corresponds to a plurality of applications, …, wherein the plurality of applications are configured to execute a plurality of communication functions related to the keyword, since the combination would have facilitated the user to recognize or format the linked data either in handwriting or text format as indicting associating of the handwriting with an associated application for processing.
Demiya does not teach and based on the identifying the keyword, display an underline below the keyword included in the string.
Marggraff teaches a digital file is retrieved by a computer system, one or ink tags in the file are identified by the computer system, characteristics or attributes of the data identify the one or more ink tags, for example, “http” or “www” or “name company.xxx”, underlined text identifies the ink tag (P 0041).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill, before the effective filling date of the invention, to have combined Marggraff’s teachings into Demiya’s, Wynn’s and Oh’s teachings to include and based on the identifying the keyword, display an underline below the keyword included in the string, since the combination would have facilitated the user to navigate specific underlined text to other page as Marggraff disclosed.
Demiya does not teach, receive a first user input with respect to the keyword for which the underline is displayed, and based on the first user input, execute, through a first application among the plurality of applications, a communication function among the plurality of communication functions.
Oh teaches and underscore indicates linked data (C 4 L 51-53) a sign is displayed next to a linked data (C 6 L 29-34) the sign associated with a phone number is selected and a call is made to the phone number (C 7 L 55-61). See also, Oh: the underline below the string, the string is associated with a uniform resource locator (URL), receiving a first user input with respect to the string for which the underline indicating the other application is displayed (Oh, fig.3; col.4, lines 39-53; underline specific data, such as hyperlink/URL, email address, phone number to indicate linked data). That is, neither Demiya nor Wynn disclose executing a function of an application linked to underlined text, however, Oh explicitly discloses this functionality.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill, before the effective filling date of the invention, to have combined Oh’s teaching into Demiya’s, Wynn’s and Marggraff’s and teaching to include receive a first user input with respect to the keyword for which the underline is displayed, and based on the first user input, execute, through a first application among the plurality of applications, a function communication among the plurality of communication functions, since the combination would have facilitated the user to recognize the linked data as Oh disclosed.
Demiya does not teach wherein the plurality of functions are configured to perform communication with a counterpart using the underlined keyword. Applicant’s specification does not define “counterpart”. But, from Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filed 10 February 2026, “counterpart” appears to correspond to a corresponding communication. For example, on page 11 of Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks, the applicant states, “As to the change in properties, if an address is selected as a hyperlink, properties of the email address may be changed so that a separate window may be open or so that the email address may be selected, the properties may be changed so that an email application may be executed. An email address of a sender may be an email address of the original user of the user device 100. According to the present claims, the function executed according to the selection of the underlined keyword is at least one communication function among communication functions (e.g., voice call function, video call function, message sending/receiving function, etc.) using the underlined keyword (e.g., counterpart's phone number). That is, the electronic device of the present claims execute at least one communication function (e.g., voice call function) among various communication functions that can be performed using the underlined keyword.”
Both Wynn and Oh explicitly disclose this limitation. Wynn teaches the system looks for and recognizes ink “words” and places the ink “words” in the appropriate email application field or recognizes the ink “words” as an email address (P 0049 Fig 4c) and Oh teaches the link manager assigns a sign corresponding to each specific data such as a telephone number and an email address (C 4 L 60-63) and selection of a link initiates the corresponding communication application (C 7 L 55-61). Oh teaches a plurality of communication functions may be initiated from the text, linked to the corresponding communication function, of a message.
Regarding claim 2, which is dependent on claim 1, Oh and Marggraff teach further comprising identifying the string as the keyword (Oh, abstract, identifying specific data; Marggraff, [0040]-[0042]; identifying string as keyword as http, www, phone number, email address, ect.). The same rationale is incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 3, which is dependent on claim 1, Marggraff teaches further comprising underlining only the keyword (Marggraff, [0041], [0042]. The same rationale of claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 5, which is dependent on claim 1, Oh teaches further comprising| changing a color of the keyword from a first color to a second color (Oh, col.6, lines 20-24; changing color of URL to blue). The same rationale is incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 6, which is dependent on claim 1, Oh teaches wherein the keyword includes a telephone number or an email address and wherein the method further comprises underlining the e-mail address and the URL (Oh, fig.3; col.4, lines 39-53). The same rationale of claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Demiya, Marggraff, Wynn, Oh, as applied to claims 1, 15, 20 above, and further in view of Yun et al., US 2012/0302167
Regarding claim 4, which is dependent on claim 1, Yun teaches further comprising refraining from underlining to the string when a pop-up window for changing a property of the string (Yun, fig.9 [0165]-[0166]; popup window to choose conversion scheme for handwritten, such text or image).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill, before the effective filling date of the invention, to have combined Yun’s teaching into the teaching of Demiya, Tonouchi, Wynn, Nagel, Oh, Marggraff to include refraining from underlining to the string when a pop-up window for changing a property of the handwriting input, since the combination would have facilitated the user to convert handwriting data in digital format by prompting the popup window as Yun disclosed before converting to digital text.
Claim(s) 15-16, 18-19, 20-21, 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Demiya, US 2014/0219564, in view of Tonouchi, US 2008/0240569, Wynn et al, US 2004/0196313 A1, Pettiross et al. (US 2005/0099406 A1), Nagel et al., US 2003/0016873, Oh, US 7899487 and Marggraff et al., US 2009/0251338.
Regarding independent claim 15, Demiya teaches an electronic device, comprising: a touchscreen; memory storing one or more computer programs; and one or more processors electrically coupled to the touchscreen and the memory, wherein the one or more computer programs include computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
display, through the touchscreen, an execution screen of a note application, (Demiya, [0070]-[0072]; handwriting note application has pen button for user input handwriting text on a touch-screen),
receive through the execution screen of the note application, a handwritten input, (Demiya, [0070]-[0072]; receiving handwriting input from the user using pen button),
based on the handwritten input being received, display a string corresponding to the handwritten input without an underline, (Demiya, [0070]-[0074]; receiving handwriting input from the user using pen button, wherein the handwriting note application is a what you see is what you get (WYSIWYG) application).
Demiya does not teach after on the handwritten input being completed. However, it is clear from Paragraph 0043 and Figure 4a of Demiya that the user must have selected the email option after the text is selected. Tonouchi teaches display an underline … below the handwriting input of the string after the handwriting input is completed (Tonouchi, fig.3 handwriting display with underline) and Wynn teaches a user completes any desired correction (Wynn, [0084]). One would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Tonouchi and Wynn of after on the handwritten input being completed with the teachings of Demiya, to allow a user to complete an action so the Demiya will be more responsive to the user’s needs.
Demiya does not teach identify, among the string, a keyword whose properties is changeable. Pettiross teaches displaying an original text and a correction interface that displays an editable text portion (Pettiross, [0007]). It would been obvious to combine the teachings of Pettiross of displaying an editable text portion with Demiya, Tonouchi, and Wynn, to allow the more pertinent parts of the string to be linked to relevant applications.
Demiya does not teach change the properties of the keyword. Tonouchi teaches display an underline … below the handwriting input of the string after the handwriting input is completed (Tonouchi, fig.3 handwriting display with underline). Nagel teaches after the handwriting is complete, wherein the string is associated with a uniform resource locator (URL) for accessing the internet (Nagel, [0015]; converting handwritten uniform resource locator (URL) text). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill, before the effective filling date of the invention, to have combined Tonouchi’s and Nagel’s teaching into Demiya’s, Tonouchi’s, Wynn’s and Pettiross’s teaching to change the properties of the keyword, since the combination would have facilitated the user to recognize or format the linked data either in handwriting or text format.
Demiya does not teach display the underline below the keyword whose properties are changed, wherein the underline is displayed below the keyword displayed in handwritten. Tonouchi teaches display an underline … below the handwriting input of the string after the handwriting input is completed (Tonouchi, fig.3 handwriting display with underline). Wynn teaches displayed data is repurposed from a first application (“original data”) into data suitable for use in a different application ("repurposed data"), and associating additional information with the original data and/or the repurposed data (Wynn, [0006]) displaying an original or source ink document from which ink was taken and repurposed into an email message and is marked by rendering it in a different color, underlining, bolding, italicizing, highlighting, and the like (Wynn, [0051]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill, before the effective filling date of the invention, to have combined Tonouchi’s and Wynn’s teaching into Demiya’s teachings to include display the underline below the keyword whose properties are changed, wherein the underline is displayed below the keyword displayed in handwritten, since the combination would have facilitated the user to recognize or format the linked data either in handwriting or text format as indicting associating of the handwriting with an associated application for processing.
Demiya does not teach, receive a first user input with respect to the keyword whose properties are changed for which the underline is displayed. Oh teaches and underscore indicates linked data (C 4 L 51-53) a sign is displayed next to a linked data (C 6 L 29-34) the sign associated with a phone number is selected and a call is made to the phone number (C 7 L 55-61). See also, Oh: the underline below the string, the string is associated with a uniform resource locator (URL), receiving a first user input with respect to the string for which the underline indicating the other application is displayed (Oh, fig.3; col.4, lines 39-53; underline specific data, such as hyperlink/URL, email address, phone number to indicate linked data). That is, neither Demiya nor Wynn disclose executing a function of an application linked to underlined text, however, Oh explicitly discloses this functionality. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill, before the effective filling date of the invention, to have combined Oh’s teaching into Demiya’s, Tonouchi’s, Wynn’s, Pettiross’s, Nagel’s teaching to include receive a first user input with respect to the keyword whose properties are changed for which the underline is displayed, since the combination would have facilitated the user to recognize the linked data as Oh disclosed.
Demiya does not teach based on the first user input, display an execution screen of a first application corresponding to a first path; among a plurality of paths to applications configured to execute a plurality of communication functions using the underlined keyword. However, Wynn teaches the system looks for and recognizes ink “words” and places the ink “words” in the appropriate email application field or recognizes the ink “words” as an email address (P 0049 Fig 4c). Oh teaches the link manager assigns a sign corresponding to each specific data such as a telephone number and an email address (C 4 L 60-63) and selection of a link initiates the corresponding communication application (C 7 L 55-61). Oh teaches a plurality of communication functions may be initiated from the text, linked to the corresponding communication function, of a message. Nagel teaches after the handwriting is complete, wherein the string is associated with a uniform resource locator (URL) for accessing the internet (Nagel, [0015]; converting handwritten uniform resource locator (URL) text). Oh teaches and underscore indicates linked data (C 4 L 51-53) a sign is displayed next to a linked data (C 6 L 29-34) the sign associated with a phone number is selected and a call is made to the phone number (C 7 L 55-61). See also, Oh: the underline below the string, the string is associated with a uniform resource locator (URL), receiving a first user input with respect to the string for which the underline indicating the other application is displayed (Oh, fig.3; col.4, lines 39-53; underline specific data, such as hyperlink/URL, email address, phone number to indicate linked data). That is, neither Demiya nor Wynn disclose executing a function of an application linked to underlined text, however, Oh explicitly discloses this functionality. Marggraff teaches the string is associated with a URL a first user input with respect to the string for which the underline indicating the other application is displayed; and based on the first user input, execute an internet application for accessing internet; based on the first user input, execute an internet application for accessing internet in a separate window (Marggraff, [0003], [0042]; in response the underline hyperlink or email is selected, launching a website corresponding to the URL in a web browser or email application). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill, before the effective filling date of the invention, to have combined Marggraff’s teaching into Demiya’s, Tonouchi’s, Wynn’s, Pettiross’s, Nagel’s and Oh’s teaching to include based on the first user input, display an execution screen of a first application corresponding to a first path; among a plurality of paths to applications configured to execute a plurality of communication functions using the underlined keyword, since the combination would have facilitated the user to navigate specific underlined text to other page as Marggraff disclosed.
Regarding claim 16, 18-19, the claims are directed to limitations similar to claims 2, 5, 6 and are rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is directed to limitations similar to claims 15 and is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 21, 23, 24, are directed to limitations similar to claims 16, 18-19 and are rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 17, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Demiya, Tonouchi, Wynn, Pettiross, Nagel, Oh, Marggraff, as applied to claims 15, 20 above, and further in view of Yun et al., US 2012/0302167.
Claim 17 is for an electronic device comprising: a touch screen; memory storing one or more computer programs; and at least one or more processors similar to the electronic device of Claim 4 and is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 22 is for non-transitory storage medium similar to the electronic device of Claim 17 and is rejected under the same rationale.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10 February 2026 and 20 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues:
According to the present claims, the function executed according to the selection of the underlined keyword is at least one communication function among communication functions (e.g., voice call function, video call function, message sending/receiving function, etc.) using the underlined keyword (e.g., counterpart's phone number). That is, the electronic device of the present claims execute at least one communication function (e.g., voice call function) among various communication functions that can be performed using the underlined keyword.
However, the cited references fail to disclose this feature of the present claims. For example, the cited reference Wynn discloses a feature of converting, e.g., repurposing, specific texts, and since each field, e.g., the name field (612), is not an element configured to perform a communication function with the counterpart, it cannot correspond to the "communication function" included in independent claim 1 of the present claims.
Claims 15 and 20 are minded to include similar features as Claim 1 and have been rejected under the same rationale.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s specification does not define “counterpart”. But, from Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filed 10 February 2026, “counterpart” appears to correspond to a corresponding communication. For example, on page 11 of Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks, the applicant states, “As to the change in properties, if an address is selected as a hyperlink, properties of the email address may be changed so that a separate window may be open or so that the email address may be selected, the properties may be changed so that an email application may be executed. An email address of a sender may be an email address of the original user of the user device 100. According to the present claims, the function executed according to the selection of the underlined keyword is at least one communication function among communication functions (e.g., voice call function, video call function, message sending/receiving function, etc.) using the underlined keyword (e.g., counterpart's phone number). That is, the electronic device of the present claims execute at least one communication function (e.g., voice call function) among various communication functions that can be performed using the underlined keyword.”
Both Wynn and Oh explicitly disclose this limitation. Wynn teaches the system looks for and recognizes ink “words” and places the ink “words” in the appropriate email application field or recognizes the ink “words” as an email address (P 0049 Fig 4c) and Oh teaches the link manager assigns a sign corresponding to each specific data such as a telephone number and an email address (C 4 L 60-63) and selection of a link initiates the corresponding communication application (C 7 L 55-61). Oh teaches a plurality of communication functions may be initiated from the text, linked to the corresponding communication function, of a message.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jobs et al., US 2008/0122796, [0527] teaches touching a phone number for creating and sending a text message to the selected phone number.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN M HEFFINGTON whose telephone number is 571-270-1696. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 am to 5:30 pm Eastern.
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, Cesar B Paula can be reached on 571-272-4128. 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.
/J.M.H/Examiner, Art Unit 2145 4/2/2026
/CESAR B PAULA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2145