DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the amendments filed 4/13/2026.
Claims 1-9 and 11-21 are pending. Claims 1, 11 and 12 are currently amended.
All prior rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are withdrawn as necessitated by amendment.
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 1-6, 11-17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yook, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2013/0332881 (“Yook”), in view of Kim, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2015/0338888 (“Kim”), in view of Choi, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2021/0109653 (“Choi”), and in view of Park, U.S. PGPUB No. 2014/0351729 (“Park”).
With regard to Claim 1, Yook teaches electronic device control method, wherein the electronic device control method comprises:
displaying a single first window in a first display region of a display screen while the first display region being in a single-window display state in response to a first preset operation (Fig. 4b shows a display region for applications, where the region does not occupy the entire display screen as a status bar is also displayed showing battery and signal information. A user launches application A, which causes the application to be displayed in a single window in the region); and
switching the single-window display state of the first display region to the multi-window display state of the first display region by dividing the first display region into a plurality of sub-regions in response to a second preset operation (Fig. 4b shows that when a user presses a home key while application A is displayed, the display shows windows for application A and application C in divisions of the original region, where the windows do not overlap one another. [0047] describes that the applications are presented such that related functional views of each application are visible in their respective areas).
Yook does not teach wherein the display screen comprises a foldable screen, wherein the foldable screen comprises a plurality of display regions, and wherein the first display region comprises one of the plurality of display regions of the foldable screen, wherein the second preset operation comprises unfolding the display screen from a folded state.
Kim teaches at [0168]-[0175] and Figs. 6 and 7 a foldable device with a first surface that contains one or two display areas, and a second surface without display areas. The device is foldable so that the regions of the second, non-display surface face each other and the first surface remains exposed; such an unfolding is illustrated at Fig. 24. [0408]-[0411] describe that when an unfolding operation is detected, the device can transition to a co-display of application screens, where a plurality of second application screens of the same or different applications can be displayed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Kim with Yook. One of skill in the art would have sought the combination, to improve user experience by providing convenient views of applications in a device that takes advantage of additional display space enabled by a larger screen that folds out.
Yook also does not teach reducing a size of the first window displayed while the first display region was in the single-window display state: and displaying the reduced first window and at least one second window in the plurality of sub-regions of the first display region in a preset manner while the first display region being in the multi-window display state, the reduced first window and the at least one second window being all in an active state, wherein the reduced first window and the at least one second window do not overlap each other.
Choi teaches at [0083] that a multi-window can be active when a device is unfolded. [0084]-[0086] describe that in a folded state, a single window can be displayed on an external screen as a full screen. [0089] describes that when unfolding is detected, the device returns to the state where multi-windows are shown. Fig. 8A shows that the single window displayed in the folded state is then displayed in the same display location in a reduced size, along with a second window from another application. As Kim teaches that a folding, multi-screen device can be folded such that the display on the right is both the single display when folded and the right side display when unfolded, the combined references teach that the same display can be used for both the single window display and the multi-window display including the reduced first application window.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Choi with Kim and Yook. One of skill in the art would have sought the combination, to improve user experience by integrating additional functions that ensure needed applications are maintained in various configurations of a folding device.
Yook, in view of Park teaches receiving a touch operation associated with the at least one second window; converting a coordinate value of a site of the touch operation on the display screen to a mapped coordinate value corresponding to a preset coordinate system corresponding to a full screen display of the display screen; and controlling an application associated with the at least one second window based on the mapped coordinate value.
Yook teaches at Fig. 4b that a second application window is visible with a first application window in a smaller size. Park teaches at [0079] that when a second window is displayed with a first window in a smaller than preset size, a recognized touch coordinate can be converted, with reference to the reduction rate to fit the preset size of the second window. The converted touch event is then transmitted to the second application operating in the window, which updates the application according to the converted coordinates of the touch input.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Park with Yook, Choi and Kim. One of skill in the art would have sought the combination, to improve system functioning by ensuring that inputs to reduced size windows of active applications are properly converted to ensure the intended input event is carried out in the reduced size application.
Claim 11 recites a device which carries out the method of Claim 1, and is similarly rejected. Claim 12 recites a medium storing code which causes a processor to carry out the method of Claim 1, and is likewise rejected.
With regard to Claim 2, Kim teaches that the display screen comprises a foldable flexible screen or two or more spliced display screens, the display screen further comprises a second display region, the first display region and the second display region at least partially overlap when the display screen is in a folded state, or the first display region and the second display region correspond to different display screens of the spliced display screens. [0168]-[0175] and Figs. 6 and 7 describe a foldable device with a first surface that contains one or two display areas, and a second surface without display areas. The device is foldable so that the regions of the second, non-display surface face each other and the first surface remains exposed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Kim with Yook, Choi and Park. One of skill in the art would have sought the combination, to improve user experience by providing convenient views of applications in a device that takes advantage of additional display space enabled by a larger screen that folds out.
Claim 13 recites a device which carries out the method of Claim 2, and is similarly rejected. Claim 21 recites a medium storing code which causes a processor to carry out the method of Claim 2, and is likewise rejected.
With regard to Claim 3, Yook teaches that the second preset operation comprises a gesture pinch operation, a click on a physical button or a virtual button or an expansion of the display screen when the display screen is in a folded state. [0047] describes that a user can generate a touch event on a button on the screen to display the multiple windows.
Claim 14 recites a device which carries out the method of Claim 3, and is similarly rejected.
With regard to Claim 4, Yook teaches that after the first display region displays the reduced first window and the at least one second window in a preset manner, one of the reduced first window and the at least one second window is displayed in a full screen manner in the first display region in response to a third preset operation on the one of the reduced first window and the at least one second window. [0075]-[0076] and Fig. 6 show that a user operating an application window can access a subordinate operation, in this case selecting a file to attach to a message being composed, where the subordinate operation is opened as one of the plurality of windows. When a user selects the files in the second window and selects to add them to the message, the messaging application is once again displayed in a full screen manner.
Claim 15 recites a device which carries out the method of Claim 4, and is similarly rejected.
With regard to Claim 5, Yook teaches that displaying the first window in the first display region comprises displaying the first window in the first display region in a full screen manner, and wherein displaying the reduced first window and the at least one second window in a preset manner comprises displaying the reduced first window and the at least one second window in a uniform manner over substantially the entire first display region. Fig. 4b shows that Application A is displayed in a full screen manner, where Applications A and C are presented together in a manner where each is of a uniform size and together they occupy substantially the entire display region.
Claim 16 recites a device which carries out the method of Claim 5, and is similarly rejected.
With regard to Claim 6, Yook teaches that the reduced first window and the at least one second window comprise a plurality of preset windows or a plurality of recently operated windows. Fig. 4b shows that the applications A and C displayed together were operated immediately prior to being displayed together on the display.
Claim 17 recites a device which carries out the method of Claim 6, and is similarly rejected.
Claims 7, 8, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yook, in view of Kim, in view of Choi, in view of Park, and in view of Kang, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2015/0113455 (“Kang”).
With regard to Claim 7, Kang describes that the gesture pinch operation comprises a touch operation and/or a non-touch operation. [0050] describes entering the pinch through a touch panel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Kang with Yook, Choi, Park and Kim, to improve user experience by enabling multiple application display and switching through a simple, well-known gesture.
Claim 18 recites a device which carries out the method of Claim 7, and is similarly rejected.
With regard to Claim 8, Kang teaches that when the gesture pinch operation is the touch operation, the gesture pinch operation is recognized by movement of coordinates of fingers in the display screen. [0064] describes that contact sensor information is used to identify gestures from input events. [0121] describes that the touch gesture event is recognized as corresponding to a specific pattern, and [0050] describes that the system identifies a particular touched location. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Kang with Yook, Choi, Park and Kim, to improve user experience by enabling multiple application display and switching through a simple, well-known gesture.
Claim 19 recites a device which carries out the method of Claim 8, and is similarly rejected.
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yook, in view of Kim, in view of Choi, in view of Park, in view of Kang, and in view of Marti, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2010/0053151 (“Marti”).
With regard to Claim 9, Marti teaches that when the gesture pinch operation is the non-touch operation, the gesture pinch operation is recognized by following steps: obtaining a plurality of images of fingers within a preset time interval; and determining whether a movement trajectory of the fingers is the gesture pinch operation by analyzing the plurality of images. [0030] describes that gestures can be recognized in a system by a camera taking images of a hand and its movements and gesture, including measuring a time-of-flight, which is the time taken to travel a distance. [0032] describes that the system recognizing pinching gestures.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Marti with Kang, Kim, Choi, Park and Yook. Marti contemplates recognizing pinching gestures in an interface for manipulating objects in 3D. One of skill in the art would seek to combine Marti with Yook, Kim, Park, Choi and Kang, to improve user experience by enabling the use of application switching and window viewing in an additional type of user interface.
Claim 20 recites a device which carries out the method of Claim 9, and is similarly rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot, as the newly cited Park reference cures the alleged deficiencies with regard to the previously cited references teaching or suggesting the elements of the claims which have been added by amendment.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH D BLOOMQUIST whose telephone number is (571)270-7718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30-5 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, Kieu Vu can be reached at 571-272-4057. 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.
/KEITH D BLOOMQUIST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
6/10/2026
Prosecution Insights