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 in response to the communication filed on 04/01/2026.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/01/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim(s) 36 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 of this title, 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.
Claim(s) 36-55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troyer et al. (U.S. Pub. 20160048307) in view of Gand et al. (U.S. Pub. 20200159323).
Regarding claim 36 Troyer disclose, a method to enable user-specific network analytics for application data services provided to a user equipment (UE) by a wireless network, the method performed by the UE and comprising:
establishing a user interaction overlay for the UE para. 8, Fig. 4, “user interface display”;
capturing a user interaction with an application on the UE using the user interaction overlay para. 124, “The dynamic content views described herein also may be integrated with the CMS or like information systems to provide text, graphics, animations, and other content, while also providing tracking and analytics occurring as a result of the display of the dynamic content views”,
said application configured to provide an application data service to the UE via the wireless network responsive to the captured user interaction para. 124, “the analytics performed at the game server may include analyzing the user inputs to determine patterns in user behavior”; and
forwarding user activity data for the captured user interaction to a centralized application node in the wireless network to trigger user-specific network analytics for the application data service para. 124, “As a user input is received at the user interface, the user interface may send a message to the game server indicating the unique identifier of the dialog and the user's activity”,
said user activity data comprising a UE identifier, information regarding the captured user interaction para. 124, “each dialog in a user interface is associated with a unique identifier to be referenced when tracking and analyzing data”, and at least one identifier for the corresponding application data service para. 137, “The database system 900 may include a database storage 902 that stores or manages information associated with the display and use of dynamic dialogs and user interface views”.
Troyer does not specifically disclose, wherein the user interaction overlay is independent of a user interface of the application data service, and is visually and functionally transparent to a user of the UE. However, Gand teach, para. 179, “stores and displays independently in the computer user interface via machine-learning algorithms external content in a digital form to an end-user based on the physical health of the end-user at the time of interaction between the end-user and the computer operating system”.
Troyer and Gand are analogous because they pertain to the field of network communications and, more specifically, to techniques of managing user interface parameters and function execution.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Gand in the system of Troyer to be able to manipulate and modify the information being used for several tasks without the direct interaction of the user in the process by any interface. The motivation for doing so would have been to ensure the that the system can perform autonomous functions that do not require the user intervention.
Regarding claim 37 Troyer disclose, wherein establishing the user interaction overlay comprises establishing a single user interaction overlay for the UE para. 37, “FIG. 4 is an interface diagram illustrating an example user interface layout of elements in a dynamic user interface. As illustrated, dialog 400 provides a display of both graphical and textual information”.
Regarding claim 38 Troyer disclose, wherein: establishing the user interaction overlay comprises establishing a plurality of user interaction overlay segments for the UE para. 37, “including a series of framed panels 410, 420, and 430 each including various text and graphics, and with portions of the panels nested over each other in view (as shown, panel 410 partially overlapping panel 420, and panel 430 entirely overlapping and centered on panel 420)”; and
capturing the user interaction comprises capturing, using one or more of the plurality of user interaction overlay segments, the user interaction with the application on the UE para. 37, “Panel 430 further includes a dialog button 440 entirely overlapping the panel 430”.
Regarding claim 39 Troyer disclose, wherein establishing the plurality of user interaction overlay segments comprises establishing the plurality of user interaction overlay segments according to a uniform grid para. 110, “Visual elements have no behavior characteristics, whereas controller elements define the behavior of visual elements. One example of pairing includes a positioning grid controller that lays out content”.
Regarding claim 40 Troyer disclose, further comprising determining a portion of a display of the UE involved in the user interaction responsive to a location of the one or more of the plurality of user interaction overlay segments used to capture the user interaction para. 37, “including a series of framed panels 410, 420, and 430 each including various text and graphics, and with portions of the panels nested over each other in view (as shown, panel 410 partially overlapping panel 420, and panel 430 entirely overlapping and centered on panel 420)”.
Regarding claim 41 Troyer disclose, wherein the user interaction overlay passes the captured user interaction to the application on the UE para. 41, “The various display techniques described herein may also be used to integrate with third party application programming interfaces (APIs), such as showing a feed popup from a third party social networking system in connection with dialogs and other displays”.
Regarding claim 42 Troyer disclose, wherein the user interaction overlay processes the captured user interaction for the application para. 142, “A client application, such as a browser, will request these additional data objects as it parses or otherwise processes the first data object”.
Regarding claim 43 Troyer disclose, further comprising: identifying the captured user interaction as either requiring a network response or as not requiring a network response para. 1391, “The client system 1030 can receive and transmit data 1023 to and from the game networking system 1020B. Data 1023 may include, for example, web pages, messages, game inputs, game displays, HTTP packets, data requests, transaction information, updates, and other suitable data”;
wherein forwarding the user activity data comprises only forwarding the user activity data to the centralized application node when the captured user interaction is identified as requiring a network response para. 139, “At some other time, or at the same time, the game networking system 1020B can communicate data 1043, 1047 (e.g., game state information, game system account information, page info, messages, data requests, updates, etc.) with other networking systems”.
Regarding claim 44 Troyer disclose, wherein the user interaction comprises: a voice command received by the UE; and/or a user interaction with a display of the UE; and/or a user interaction with a control button of the UE; and/or a movement of the UE para. 19, “For example, a dialog displayed in a user interface may or may not provide an input for user textual input, provide one or more selectable options to receive interaction from a user”.
Regarding claim 45 Troyer disclose, wherein the information regarding the captured user interaction comprises a trigger indicating that one or more user interactions with the application occurred para. 124, “As a user input is received at the user interface, the user interface may send a message to the game server indicating the unique identifier of the dialog and the user's activity (e.g., the user input)”.
Regarding claim 46 Troyer teaches, a user equipment (UE) read as: “mobile phone” for enabling user-specific network analytics for application data services provided to the UE by a wireless network, the UE comprising: processing circuitry read as: “a processor 1202” and memory circuitry read as: “, the memory circuitry read as: “system memory 1214” storing instructions executable by the processing circuitry; furthermore claim 46 recites an apparatus corresponding to the system of claim 36 and thus is rejected under the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 36.
Regarding claims 47-54 the limitations of claims 47-54, respectively, are rejected in the same manner as analyzed above with respect to claims 37-44, respectively.
Claim 55 recites a computer–program product corresponding to the apparatus of claim 46 and thus is rejected under the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 46.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Walkin et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220350463) which disclose(s) devices, methods, and graphical user interfaces for navigating between user interfaces, displaying a dock, and displaying system user interface elements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAUL RIVAS whose telephone number is (571)270–5590. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday, from 8:30am to 5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sujoy K. Kundu, can be reached on (571) 272 - 8586. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571–273–8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800–786–9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571–272–1000.
/RR/
Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/SUJOY K KUNDU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights