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 office action is a response to an application filed 04/27/2023, in which claims 1-14 are pending and ready for examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Examiner has considered the references listed on the Information Disclosure Statement submitted on 04/27/2023 and 05/30/2024.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Paragraph 80 of the instant specification states: “Referring to FIG. 1, a schematic diagram of a system input structure of an operating system in the prior art is shown.” As such, it seems apparent that figure 1 requires a Prior Art designation, as stated above.
Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. 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 fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication No. 2008/0309624 to Hotelling (hereinafter Hotelling), in view of Chinese Patent Publication No. CN109144396A to Qui (hereinafter Qui. English translation of CN109144396A is included and cited in this office action)..
Regarding claim 1, Hotelling teaches a data processing method, comprising: acquiring apparatus data sent by a hardware driving module (Hardware sensing sends data, such as input/touch data, to a layer, see Fig. 1, p26, 22-23, Hotelling), and converting the apparatus data into data in a standard format (input sensor data, such as touch coordinate data, is translated (converted) to display coordinates that are interpreted as a standard format, see p23, p26, 22-23, Hotelling);
dividing, after parsing the apparatus data that is converted into the standard format (Data is parsed, see Fig. 1, p23-24, Hotelling), the apparatus data into touch event data and control protocol data (Touch data is separated (divided) for relevant corresponding applications formmat, see p33, p7, Hotelling);
the touch event data into a touch event (Touch data to form touch events, see p19, Hotelling);
dispatching, according to an event dispatching mechanism of an operating system, the touch event to corresponding application software (Touch data for relevant corresponding applications sent in an operating system, see p33, p3, Hotelling);
parsing the control protocol data, and sending the parsed control protocol data to corresponding application software (Touch data for relevant corresponding applications’ control is sent from parser, see p33, Hotelling).
Hotelling does not explicitly teach encapsulating, according to a preset first data encapsulation format, a touch data into a touch event.
However, Qui from the same or similar field of touch input systems, teaches encapsulating, according to a preset first data encapsulation format, a touch data into a touch event (Encapsulation of touch data into touch events based on a specified format, see P69-70, p6, p22-26, 64, Qui).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the touch input and processing as described by Hotelling and incorporating encapsulation of touch data, as taught by Qui.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better form information with a format suitable for further layer processing or storage (see P69-70, p6, Qui).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Hotelling and Qui teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Hotelling further teaches wherein dispatching a touch event to a corresponding application software according to an event dispatching mechanism of a operating system comprises: dispatching, according to the event dispatching mechanism of the operating system, the touch event to application software at the uppermost layer of the system (Touch data events to upper layer, see P22, Fig. 1, Hotelling).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Hotelling and Qui teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Qui further teaches wherein a data processing method further comprises: acquiring application data sent by application software (Application response operations, see P4, Qui); performing, according to a preset second data encapsulation format, format encapsulation on application data (A second encapsulation at virtual touch event, see P16-23, Qui); sending encapsulated application data to a hardware driving module (Data sent to a hardware, such as storage hardware driver, see p22-26, Qui).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the touch input and processing as described by Hotelling and incorporating second encapsulation, as taught by Qui.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better form information with a format suitable for further layer processing such as for sending operating system application data to storage (see p22-26, P69-70, p6, Qui).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hotelling, in view of Qui, and in further view of US Patent Publication No. 2016/0004898 to Holz (hereinafter Holz)
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Hotelling and Qui teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Hotelling does not explicitly teach wherein a method further comprises: sending touch event to whiteboard application software when it is determined that an inquiry data packet sent by the whiteboard application software is received; the whiteboard application software responding after receiving the touch event, and no longer responding to the touch event received according to the event dispatching mechanism of the system.
However, Holz from the same or similar field of touch input systems, teaches sending touch event to whiteboard application software when it is determined that an inquiry data packet sent by the whiteboard application software is received (A whiteboard application detects touch events used by application, see p64, 72, Holz); the whiteboard application software responding after receiving the touch event, and no longer responding to the touch event received according to the event dispatching mechanism of the system (Once input is removed, whiteboard application system can respond such as by notification mechanism, see p64, 72, Holz).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the touch input and processing as described by the combination that includes Hotelling and incorporating whiteboard functionality, as taught by Holz.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better provide a functional touch input that can be beneficial during collaborative meetings (see see p64, 72, Holz).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hotelling, in view of Qui, and in further view of US Patent No. 11.394,813 to Petersen et al., (hereinafter Petersen)
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Hotelling and Qui teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Hotelling further teaches dividing apparatus data into touch event data and control protocol data (Touch data is separated (divided) for relevant corresponding applications, see p33, Hotelling)
Hotelling does not explicitly teach acquiring a data packet header format of data; dividing, according to a data packet header format, the data.
However, Petersen from the same or similar field of parsing systems, teaches acquiring a data packet header format of data (Headers of data packets are obtained, see C5 L19-40, Petersen); dividing, according to a data packet header format, the data (Headers of data packets are split, see C5 L19-40, C8 L22-35, Petersen).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the touch input and processing as described by the combination that includes Hotelling and incorporating splitting of header packets, as taught by Petersen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better separate related data that may have a desired distinction (see C5 L19-40, C8 L22-35, Petersen).
Claims 6, 7, 9, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hotelling, in view of Qui, and in further view of US Patent Publication No. 2023/0305680 to Liu et al., (hereinafter Liu)
Regarding claim 6, Hotelling teaches a data processing method, comprising: a hardware abstraction layer acquiring apparatus data sent by a hardware driving module (Hardware abstraction layer receives data from hardware, see Fig. 1, p23-24, Hotelling), and converting the apparatus data into data in a standard format (input sensor data, such as touch coordinate data, is translated (converted) to display coordinates that are interpreted as a standard format, see p23, p26, 22-23, Hotelling); the hardware abstraction layer dividing, after parsing the apparatus data that is converted into the standard format (Data is parsed, see Fig. 1, p23-24, Hotelling), the apparatus data into touch event data and control protocol data (Touch data is separated (divided) for relevant corresponding applications, see p33, Hotelling); the touch event data into a touch event (Touch data to form touch events, see p19, Hotelling); a touch event dispatching module dispatching, according to an event dispatching mechanism of an operating system, the touch event to corresponding application software (Touch data for relevant corresponding applications sent in an operating system, see p33, p3, Hotelling); the hardware abstraction layer sending the control protocol data to a protocol control module (Hardware abstraction layer sends data to parser, see Fig. 1, p22-24, Hotelling); the protocol control module parsing the control protocol data, and sending the parsed control protocol data to corresponding application software (Touch data for relevant corresponding applications’ control is sent from parser, see p33, Hotelling).
Hotelling does not explicitly teach a hardware abstraction layer sending a touch event data to an application framework layer; encapsulating, according to a preset first data encapsulation format, a touch data into a touch event; an application framework layer sending the touch event to a touch event dispatching module;
However, Lui from the same or similar field of input devices that include touch, teaches a hardware abstraction layer sending a touch event data to an application framework layer (A hardware abstraction layer reports input data to a framework layer, see p956, 464 Liu); an application framework layer sending a touch event to a touch event dispatching module (A framework layer sends (dispatches) to further system layer, thus a dispatch module, see Fig. 44, Fig. 2, p956, 464, Liu).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the touch input and processing as described by Hotelling and incorporating a framework layer and dispatch, as taught by Lui.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better provide application programming interface to provide specified function available to other layers of the system, including to send data between layers that may be needed for desired functionality (see Fig. 44, Fig. 2, p956, 464, Liu).
Hotelling does not explicitly teach encapsulating, according to a preset first data encapsulation format, a touch data into a touch event.
However, Qui from the same or similar field of touch input systems, teaches encapsulating, according to a preset first data encapsulation format, a touch data into a touch event (Encapsulation of touch data into touch events based on a specified format, see P69-70, p6, p22-26, 64, Qui).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the touch input and processing as described by the combination that includes Hotelling and incorporating encapsulation of touch data, as taught by Qui.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better form information with a format suitable for further layer processing or storage (see P69-70, p6, Qui).
Claim 7 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 2.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Hotelling, Liu, and Qui teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Hotelling further teaches wherein a hardware driving module is a driving module of a touch device (A hardware module that sends signals, is a touch device, see Fig. 1, p26, 22-23, Hotelling), an apparatus data is touch data of the touch device (touch data, see Fig. 1, p26, 22-23, Hotelling), the hardware abstraction layer acquiring apparatus data sent by the hardware driving module and converting the apparatus data into data in the standard format comprises: the hardware abstraction layer acquiring the touch data sent by the driving module of the touch device, and converting, after calculating and obtaining touch coordinates according to the touch data, the touch coordinates into data in the standard format (input sensor data, such as touch coordinate data, is translated (converted) to display coordinates that are interpreted as a standard format, see p23, p26, 22-23, Hotelling).
Claim 11 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 5.
Regarding claim 12, Hotelling teaches a data processing device, comprising a hardware driving module (Hardware driven by touch triggering signals, see Fig. 1, p22-24,26, Hotelling), a hardware apparatus and a data processing system (Hardware and processing of data, see Fig. 1, p22-24, 26, Hotelling), the data processing system comprises a hardware abstraction layer (Hardware abstraction layer receives data from hardware, see Fig. 1, p23-24, Hotelling), a touch event dispatching module and a protocol control module (Touch data event obtained and sent with control instance format to applications, thus a touch event module and control protocol module, see Fig. 1, p23-24, p33, p7, Hotelling); the hardware abstraction layer is configured to: acquire apparatus data sent by the hardware driving module (Hardware abstraction layer receives data from hardware, see Fig. 1, p23-24, Hotelling), and convert the apparatus data into data in a standard format (input sensor data, such as touch coordinate data, is translated (converted) to display coordinates that are interpreted as a standard format, see p23, p26, 22-23, Hotelling); divide, after parsing the apparatus data that is converted into the standard format (Data is parsed, see Fig. 1, p23-24, Hotelling), the apparatus data into touch event data and control protocol data (Touch data is separated (divided) for relevant corresponding applications, see p33, Hotelling); and send the touch event to the touch event dispatching module (Touch data to form touch events, see p19, Hotelling); the touch event dispatching module is configured to dispatch, according to an event dispatching mechanism of an operating system, the touch event to corresponding application software (Touch data for relevant corresponding applications sent in an operating system, see p33, p3, Hotelling); the hardware abstraction layer is further configured to send the control protocol data to the protocol control module (Hardware abstraction layer sends data to parser, see Fig. 1, p22-24, Hotelling); the protocol control module is configured to parse the control protocol data, and send the parsed control protocol data to application software (Touch data for relevant corresponding applications’ control is sent from parser, see p33, Hotelling).
Hotelling does not explicitly teach wherein the hardware apparatus is connected with the data processing system through the hardware driving module; an application framework layer; the hardware driving module is configured to report apparatus data of the hardware apparatus, the hardware abstraction layer is connected with the application framework layer and the protocol control module respectively, and the application framework layer is connected with the touch event dispatching module; and send the touch event data to the application framework layer; the application framework layer is configured to: encapsulate, according to a preset first data encapsulation format, the touch event data into a touch event.
However, Lui from the same or similar field of input devices that include touch, teaches wherein a hardware apparatus is connected with a data processing system through the hardware driving module (Touch driver connecting layer processing system and hardware, see p956, Fig. 44, Fig. 2, p956, 464, Liu); an application framework layer (A framework layer sends (dispatches) to further system layer, thus a dispatch module, see Fig. 44, Fig. 2, p956, 464, Liu); a hardware driving module is configured to report apparatus data of the hardware apparatus, the hardware abstraction layer is connected with the application framework layer and the protocol control module respectively (A hardware abstraction layer reports input data to a framework layer, and layers are connected in the system with format, see p956, 46, Fig. 44, Fig. 2, p956, 464, Liu), and a application framework layer is connected with a touch event dispatching module (Touch driver connecting for sending receiving touch events, see p956, Fig. 44, Fig. 2, p956, 464, Liu); and send touch event data to an application framework layer (Touch driver connecting for sending touch events through framework, see p956, Fig. 44, Fig. 2, p956, 464, Liu).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the touch input and processing as described by Hotelling and incorporating a framework layer and dispatch, as taught by Lui.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better provide application programming interface to provide specified function available to other layers of the system, including to send data between layers that may be needed for desired functionality (see Fig. 44, Fig. 2, p956, 464, Liu).
Hotelling does not explicitly teach encapsulating, according to a preset first data encapsulation format, a touch data into a touch event.
However, Qui from the same or similar field of touch input systems, teaches encapsulating, according to a preset first data encapsulation format, a touch data into a touch event (Encapsulation of touch data into touch events based on a specified format, see P69-70, p6, p22-26, 64, Qui).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the touch input and processing as described by the combination that includes Hotelling and incorporating encapsulation of touch data, as taught by Qui.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better form information with a format suitable for further layer processing or storage (see P69-70, p6, Qui).
Claims 8, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hotelling, in view of Liu, in view of Qui, and in further view of US Patent Publication No. 2016/0004898 to Holz (hereinafter Holz)
Claim 8 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 3.
Claim 13 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 8.
Claim 14 is rejected on the same grounds as claims 12 and 13.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hotelling, in view of Liu, in view of Qui, and in further view of US Patent No. 11.394,813 to Petersen et al., (hereinafter Petersen)
Claim 10 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 4.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hotelling et al., US. Patent Publication No. 2008/0158172 teaches a multi-touch detection system with associated hardware.
Gruzca et al., US. Patent No. 11,327,707 teaches a touch screen display system that includes translating touch information.
Zhang et al., US. Patent No. 2023/0251773 teaches a touch screen interface display system that includes a software architecture with application, framework, and kernel layers .
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILIO J SAAVEDRA whose telephone number is (571)270-5617. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-5:30pm (EST).
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, Robert E Fennema can be reached at (571) 272-2748. 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.
/EMILIO J SAAVEDRA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117