DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to Amendment filed 06/20/2025.
Claims 1-5, 7, 9-14 and 16-20 are pending in this application. In the Amendment, claims 1, 7. 9-10 and 16 are amended and claims 6, 15 and 21 are cancelled. This action is made Final.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
A) Applicant argued that Bowman fails to disclose a process for dealing with a case where the document Fragment is not created or supported.
Per A), the Examiner respectfully disagrees as Bowman’s determination of whether to create a document fragment deals with the case of whether it is created or not. Bowman teaches a method of creating fragments that determines whether a browser supports invoking a method for creating a document fragment (Bowman, para.269, 279, determine whether to create documentFragment).
B) Applicant argued Bowman fails to disclose the usage of a DIV tag.
Per B), the Examiner respectfully disagrees in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Zhang teaches creating the DIV tag (Zhang, col.6, lines 30-33, 47-50; col.8, lines 9-13, 45-64; col.10, line 1-21; col.10, line 64-col.11, line 9; pagelet are elements of webpage such as DIV where resources are embedded). Bowman teaches the use of the newly created documentFragment tag (Bowman, para.121, 427, insert element into document ie DIV tag or into new documentFragment).
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 1-4, 7, 9-13 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (“Zhang”, US 8,751,925) in view of Benjamin (US 2016/0012147) and further in view of Bowman et al. (“Bowman”, US 2005/0022116).
As per claim 1, Zhang teaches a visualized page rendering method, comprising:
acquiring page source data (Zhang, col.7, line 52-col.8, line 35, base structured HTML document received), wherein the page source data comprises data in a plurality of hyper markup language (HTML) files corresponding to a plurality of modules in a to-be-displayed page respectively (Zhang, col.4, lines 48-col.7, line 10, data in HTML element segments/pagelets);
identifying type attribute data (Zhang, col.5, lines 6-21) in the page source data, wherein the type attribute data is data in an HTML file of the plurality of HTML files referencing an external resource (Zhang, col.5, line 66-col.6, line 6; col.7, line 64-col.8, line 2, external resources);
adding the type attribute data to a newly created division (DIV) tag in the page source data to determine a child node set corresponding to the DIV tag (Zhang, col.6, lines 30-33, 47-50; col.8, lines 9-13, 45-64; col.10, line 1-21; col.10, line 64-col.11, line 9; pagelet are elements of webpage such as DIV where resources are embedded; insert pagelet into DOM placeholder; content i.e. child node set located within start/end tags);
acquiring an external resource referenced by a tag in the child node set and adding an acquired external resource to the DIV tag to obtain first to-be-displayed page data (Zhang, col.6, lines 30-33, 47-50; col.8, lines 9-13, 45-64; col.10, line 1-21; col.10, line 64-col.11, line 9; pagelet are elements of webpage such as DIV where resources are embedded; insert pagelet into DOM placeholder); and
rendering and displaying a page based on the first to-be-displayed page data (Zhang, col.2, lines 23-39, col.10, lines 17-21; sequential rendering).
However, Zhang does not teach identifying a custom template source data in an HTML file and adding the custom template source data. Benjamin teaches a method of rendering pages which includes identifying a custom template source data in an HTML file and adding the custom template source data (Benjamin, para.67, 81, identify custom template with function call containing type and data source). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Benjamin’s teaching with Zhang’s method in order to customize display of data.
Although the method of Zhang and Benjamin teaches wherein adding the custom template source data to the newly created DIV tag in the page source data comprises executing an operation of adding the custom template source data to the newly created DIV tag in the page source data (Benjamin, para.67, 81, identify custom template with function call containing type and data source; Zhang, col.6, lines 30-33, 47-50; col.8, lines 9-13, 45-64; col.10, line 1-21; col.10, line 64-col.11, line 9), the method of Zhang and Benjamin does not teach before adding the custom template source data to the newly created DIV tag in the page source data, further comprising: determining whether a browser supports invoking a method for creating a document fragment; in response to a fact that the browser does not support invoking the method for creating the document fragment, triggering and executing an operation of adding the custom template source data to the newly created DIV tag in the page source data. Bowman teaches a method of creating fragments that determines whether a browser supports invoking a method for creating a document fragment (Bowman, para.269, 279, determine whether to create documentFragment); wherein adding the custom template source data to the newly created DIV tag in the page source data comprising: in response to a fact that the browser does not support invoking the method for creating the document fragment, triggering and executing an operation of adding the custom template source data to the newly created DIV tag in the page source data (Bowman, para.121, 427, insert element into document ie DIV tag or into new documentFragment). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Bowman’s teaching with the method of Zhang and Benjamin as an alternative means of customizing documents.
As per claim 2, the method of Zhang, Benjamin and Bowman teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein identifying the custom template source data in the page source data comprises:
reading a template identifier and a file type corresponding to the template identifier from the plurality of HTML files (Benjamin, para.67, 81, function call containing type and data source); and
determining a template identifier corresponding to a file type that is a target type to be a custom template identifier (Benjamin, para.67, 81, function call containing type and data source); and
determining the data in the HTML file corresponding to the custom template identifier to be the custom template source data (Benjamin, para.67, 81, identify custom template with function call).
As per claim 3, the method of Zhang, Benjamin and Bowman teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein adding the custom template source data to the newly created DIV tag in the page source data to determine the child node set corresponding to the DIV tag comprises:
creating the DIV tag in the page source data (Zhang, col.6, lines 30-33, 47-50; col.8, lines 9-13, 45-64; col.10, line 1-21; col.10, line 64-col.11, line 9; pagelet are elements of webpage such as DIV where resources are embedded);
adding a root tag element of the custom template source data to the DIV tag (Zhang, col.5, lines 6-30, document structure elements include root tag); and
determining the child node set corresponding to the DIV tag according to the root tag element (Zhang, col.5, lines 6-30; col.6, lines 30-33, 47-50, content i.e. child node set located within start/end tags).
As per claim 4, the method of Zhang, Benjamin and Bowman teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein acquiring the external resource referenced by the tag in the child node set and adding the acquired external resource to the DIV tag to obtain the first to-be-displayed page data comprises:
converting the child node set into a child node array (Benjamin, para.72, 75; Zhang, col.10, lines 21-40);
traversing the child node array to determine a script tag (Benjamin, para.72, 75, iterate array; Zhang, col.1, lines 23-39);
acquiring the external resource referenced by the script tag from a server (Benjamin, para.82, JavaScript code Zhang, col.1, lines 23-39, col.5, lines 47-65, script element); and
adding the acquired external resource to the DIV tag to obtain the first to-be-displayed page data (Benjamin, para.82; Zhang, col.6, lines 30-33, 47-50; col.8, lines 9-13, 45-64; col.10, line 1-21; col.10, line 64-col.11, line 9; pagelet are elements of webpage such as DIV where resources are embedded; insert pagelet into DOM placeholder).
As per claim 7, the method of Zhang, Benjamin and Bowman teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising:
in response to a fact that the browser supports invoking the method for creating the document fragment (Bowman, para.269, 279, determine whether to create documentFragment), acquiring an element set of the custom template source data by invoking the method for creating the document fragment (Bowman, para.121, 269, 427, Creates new documentFragment), wherein the method for creating the document fragment is used for analyzing the custom template source data into a document fragment, and obtaining the element set of the custom template source data based on the document fragment (Bowman, para.279);
traversing the element set to determine a script tag (Benjamin, para.72, 75, iterate array; Zhang, col.1, lines 23-39);
loading an external resource referenced by the script tag (Benjamin, para.82, JavaScript code Zhang, col.1, lines 23-39, col.5, lines 47-65, script element);
creating a document partition (Bowman, para.121, 427; Zhang, col.6, lines 30-33, 47-50; col.8, lines 9-13, 45-64; col.10, line 1-21; col.10, line 64-col.11, line 9; placeholder);
sequentially adding a loaded external resource to the document partition (Zhang, col.2, lines 23-26; col.8, lines 48-59, sequential process); and
adding the document partition to the page source data to obtain second to-be-displayed page data and rendering and displaying a page based on the second to-be-displayed page data (Benjamin, para.82; Zhang, col.6, lines 30-33, 47-50; col.8, lines 9-13, 45-64; col.10, line 1-21; col.10, line 64-col.11, line 9; insert pagelet into DOM placeholder).
Claims 9-10 are similar in scope to claim 1, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 11 and 17 are similar in scope to claim 2, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 12 and 18 are similar in scope to claim 3, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 13 and 19 are similar in scope to claim 4, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 16 is similar in scope to claim 7, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 5, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (“Zhang”, US 8,751,925), Benjamin (US 2016/0012147) and Bowman et al. (“Bowman”, US 2005/0022116) in view of Shafer (US 5,583,762).
As per claim 5, the method of Zhang, Benjamin and Bowman teaches the method according to claim 1, however does not teach before adding the custom template source data to the newly created DIV tag in the page source data, further comprising: determining a wrong single tag in the custom template source data by regular matching; and modifying the wrong single tag. Shafer teaches a document structure method that includes determining a wrong single tag in the source data by regular matching; and modifying the wrong single tag (Shafer, col.5, lines 54-61, tag error corrected with tag added). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Shafer’s teaching with the method of Zhang, Benjamin and Bowman in order to ensure proper structure.
Claims 14 and 20 are similar in scope to claim 5, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
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.
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAJEDA MUHEBBULLAH whose telephone number is (571)272-4065. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Tue/Thur-Fri 10am-8pm.
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, William L Bashore can be reached on 571-272-4088. 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.
/S.M./
Sajeda MuhebbullahExaminer, Art Unit 2174
/WILLIAM L BASHORE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights