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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/2/2026 has been entered.
DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is responsive to applicant’s amendment dated 1/2/2026.
2. Claims 1, 3-15 and 17-20 are pending in the case.
3. Claims 2 and 16 are cancelled.
4. Claims 1 and 15 are independent claims.
Applicant’s Response
5. In Applicant’s response dated 1/2/2026, applicant has amended the following:
a) Claims 1 and 15
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The dependent claims included in the statement of rejection but not specifically addressed in the body of the rejection have inherited the deficiencies of their parent claim and have not resolved the deficiencies. Therefore, they are rejected based on the same rationale as applied to their parent claims above.
Claims 1 and 15 :
Claims 1 and 15 recite: “displaying the lite version component on the display in response to detecting an occurrence of the at least one user selectable event trigger without requiring a direct end-user request to launch the digital application at a time of detecting the at least one user selectable event trigger, to override a currently displayed graphical user interface on the portable computing device by assigning to the lite version component a foreground display priority and user focus input to at least one other graphical user interface displayed on the display, wherein the configuration selection deprioritizes at least one of the plurality of portable computing device resources when the lite version component is executed by limiting utilization of the at least one resource of the digital application without executing the lite version component.” (emphasis added)
There is no mention of the newly amended limitation in the original Specification. Thus, the limitations include subject matter that was not described in the original Specification.
If the examiner has overlooked the portion of the original Specification that describes this feature of the present invention, then Applicant should point it out (by page number and line number) in the response to this Office Action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-15 and 17-20 would be allowable if Applicant can point out written support from instant specification for amendments to overcome outstanding 35 U.S.C. 112(a) Rejection to the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20160162270 A1 Kumar; Atul
[0038] A sandboxed environment may be provided that allows a “lite” or trial/demo version of an application to be installed with a minimum number of user interaction. For example, the user may be presented with an “install all” option. Trial versions may be limited by time or functionality by a developer or by the application store. For example, the user may be permitted to play only a limited number of levels of a game. The system may provide functionality, as described below, that permits users to try or test the alternative applications using the user's existing data generated by one of the most frequently used applications on the user's device.
[0051] In an implementation, the system may determine whether a lite, demo, or trial version of an application exists (hereinafter referred to as a “lite” version). A lite version may be a version of the application that limits the functionality or features available to end users. For example, the lite version may only have a limited number of levels or allow a user to access only a select number of items available. The lite version may be provided by the developer of the application. Generally, it is in a developer's interest to highlight features of an application that will entice users to try out the application and/or retain the application. If a lite version of an application exists, the system may send the lite version's installation package at 120 instead of the full installation package.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY ORR whose telephone number is (571)270-1308. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Adam Queler can be reached at (571)272-4140. 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.
/HENRY ORR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172