DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Remarks
2. This Office action is responsive to the Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed under 37 CFR §1.53(d) for the instant application on December 30, 2025. Applicants have properly set forth the RCE, which has been entered into the application, and an examination on the merits follows herewith.
Claims 13-33 have been examined and rejected. This Office action is responsive to the amendment filed on November 28, 2025, which has been entered in the above identified application.
Drawings
3. Figure 7 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). 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.
Double Patenting
4. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
5. Claims 13, 17, 18, 31, and 32 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 20, and 21 of U.S. Patent No. 9,383,898, in view of Miyazaki et al (U.S. Patent No. 9,513,735), and further in view of Graham (U.S. Patent No. 7,954,056). Claims 1, 20, and 21 of patent ‘898 do not expressly teach a touch panel, a plurality of object groups, that the first number of objects of the plurality of objects being displayed in a same row in an x-direction on an xy-plane parallel with a surface of the display in the first layout state, that the second layout state is one in which at least one of the first number of objects of the object group is displayed in a column in a y-direction on the xy-plane,… and not display at least one object group of the plurality of object groups displayed in the first layout state, the second layout state including a second total number of objects less than the first total number of objects.
Miyazaki discloses an information display terminal having a touch panel [column 10, lines 40-49]. Based on touch input, objects are moved from one layout to another layout having a different number of objects [column 16, lines 23-43; figures 5A-D; column 22, lines 34-54; figures 10, 11A-D, 14-16]. The function of moving a plurality of objects included in an object group can be applied in the same manner in the case where the two-dimensional GUI is implemented on the information display terminal [column 16, lines 44-52]. Thus, the plurality of objects may lie within an xy-plane, and can be initially displayed in a same row in an x-direction as shown in [figure 5C]. When the sliding operation is started, the sliding operation is carried out on a specific object column among a plurality of object columns, and the specific object column is slid along the y axis and displayed so that the amount of overlap of the plurality of objects which form the specific object column with each other is reduced in response to the amount of the dragging operation [column 23, lines 27-37; figure 14]. When the sliding operation is continued and the amount of the dragging operation on the frontmost object reaches to a predetermined value, the other object columns, excluding the specific object column which is the object of the sliding operation, are not displayed in the object display region [column 23, lines 42-47; figure 15]. These operations are part of a second embodiment described in Miyazaki where the information display terminal has the same functional configuration as the information display terminal according to the first embodiment [column 20, lines 8-13]. As discussed above, in the first embodiment, an object column may comprise objects displayed in a same row on an xy-plane [column 16, lines 44-52] as shown in [figure 5C] and based on touch input, the degree of overlap between the objects may be changed when moving objects to another layout [column 16, lines 23-43, 53-67] such as from [figure 5C] to [figure 5D]. While the second embodiment provides an example of changing the layout of an object column initially having objects aligned along the z-axis to an object column having its objects aligned along the y-axis [see figures 14-16] where upon such change, other object columns that were displayed in the object display region of the initial layout are no longer displayed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide such a function when changing the layout of an object column having objects displayed in a same row on an xy-plane to a layout where objects of the object column are displayed in a same column in a y-direction on the xy-plane. This would allow such objects of the object column to be more clearly seen by the user after the layout change, since the other object columns would no longer be displayed. This would provide easy access to objects within a group and allow such objects of the object group to be more clearly seen by the user after the layout change. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a touch panel to switch from a first layout having objects displayed along an x-direction in an xy plane to a second layout having a different number of objects as the first layout that are displayed in a y-direction on the xy-plane, where object groups that were displayed in the first layout are no longer displayed in the second layout, as taught by Miyazaki. This would provide easy access to objects within a group and allow such objects of the object group to be more clearly seen by the user after the layout change.
The ‘898 patent in view of Miyazaki do not expressly teach at least one object of the object group that is not displayed in the same row in the first layout state is displayed in the column in the y-direction on the xy-plane to display a second number of objects of the object group different than the first number of objects in the column in the y-direction on the xy-plane. Graham discloses displaying a plurality of objects in a same row [column 8, lines 13-15; figure 3] or in a same column [column 13, lines 31-33; figure 8]. When displaying the plurality of objects in a same row, the max number of objects is determined based on the width of the container divided by the width of an object [column 15, lines 14-23] and when displaying the plurality of objects in a same column, the max number of objects is determined based on the height of the container divided by the height of an object [column 17, lines 26-36]. This would help maximize the number of objects displayed on the screen according to a horizontal layout and a vertical layout, thus increasing productivity. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display objects in the layouts of the ‘898 patent in view of Miyazaki based on the width and height of the display screen, as taught by Graham. This would help maximize the number of objects displayed on the screen according to a horizontal layout and a vertical layout, thus increasing productivity. Since the ‘898 patent in view of Miyazaki discloses providing a display screen where objects are displayed in a portrait mode with the width of the screen being less than the height of the screen [Miyazaki, figures 10, 14-17], using the teaching of Graham for determining the number of objects to display in a same row and a same column, the number of objects displayed for a group in a same column will be more than the number of objects displayed for the group in a same row. Thus, an object will be displayed in the same column in the second layout that is not displayed in the same row in the first layout.
6. Claims 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, and 28-32 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 8, 10, 15, 18, 20, and 21 of U.S. Patent No. 10,379,736, in view of Miyazaki et al (U.S. Patent No. 9,513,735), and further in view of Graham (U.S. Patent No. 7,954,056). Claims 1, 20, and 21 of patent ‘736 do not expressly teach a touch panel, a plurality of object groups, that the plurality of objects being displayed in a same row in an x-direction on an xy-plane parallel with a surface of the display in the first layout state, that the second layout state is one in which at least one of the first number of objects of the object group is displayed in a column in a y-direction on the xy-plane,… and not display at least one object group of the plurality of object groups displayed in the first layout state, the second layout state including a second total number of objects less than the first total number of objects.
Miyazaki discloses an information display terminal having a touch panel [column 10, lines 40-49]. Based on touch input, objects are moved from one layout to another layout having a different number of objects [column 16, lines 23-43; figures 5A-D; column 22, lines 34-54; figures 10, 11A-D, 14-16]. The function of moving a plurality of objects included in an object group can be applied in the same manner in the case where the two-dimensional GUI is implemented on the information display terminal [column 16, lines 44-52]. Thus, the plurality of objects may lie within an xy-plane, and can be initially displayed in a same row in an x-direction as shown in [figure 5C]. When the sliding operation is started, the sliding operation is carried out on a specific object column among a plurality of object columns, and the specific object column is slid along the y axis and displayed so that the amount of overlap of the plurality of objects which form the specific object column with each other is reduced in response to the amount of the dragging operation [column 23, lines 27-37; figure 14]. When the sliding operation is continued and the amount of the dragging operation on the frontmost object reaches to a predetermined value, the other object columns, excluding the specific object column which is the object of the sliding operation, are not displayed in the object display region [column 23, lines 42-47; figure 15]. These operations are part of a second embodiment described in Miyazaki where the information display terminal has the same functional configuration as the information display terminal according to the first embodiment [column 20, lines 8-13]. As discussed above, in the first embodiment, an object column may comprise objects displayed in a same row on an xy-plane [column 16, lines 44-52] as shown in [figure 5C] and based on touch input, the degree of overlap between the objects may be changed when moving objects to another layout [column 16, lines 23-43, 53-67] such as from [figure 5C] to [figure 5D]. While the second embodiment provides an example of changing the layout of an object column initially having objects aligned along the z-axis to an object column having its objects aligned along the y-axis [see figures 14-16] where upon such change, other object columns that were displayed in the object display region of the initial layout are no longer displayed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide such a function when changing the layout of an object column having objects displayed in a same row on an xy-plane to a layout where objects of the object column are displayed in a same column in a y-direction on the xy-plane. This would allow such objects of the object column to be more clearly seen by the user after the layout change, since the other object columns would no longer be displayed. This would provide easy access to objects within a group and allow such objects of the object group to be more clearly seen by the user after the layout change. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a touch panel to switch from a first layout having objects displayed along an x-direction in an xy plane to a second layout having a different number of objects as the first layout that are displayed in a y-direction on the xy-plane, where object groups that were displayed in the first layout are no longer displayed in the second layout, as taught by Miyazaki. This would provide easy access to objects within a group and allow such objects of the object group to be more clearly seen by the user after the layout change.
The ‘736 patent in view of Miyazaki do not expressly teach at least one object of the object group that is not displayed in the same row in the first layout state is displayed in the column in the y-direction on the xy-plane to display a second number of objects of the object group different than the first number of objects in the column in the y-direction on the xy-plane. Graham discloses displaying a plurality of objects in a same row [column 8, lines 13-15; figure 3] or in a same column [column 13, lines 31-33; figure 8]. When displaying the plurality of objects in a same row, the max number of objects is determined based on the width of the container divided by the width of an object [column 15, lines 14-23] and when displaying the plurality of objects in a same column, the max number of objects is determined based on the height of the container divided by the height of an object [column 17, lines 26-36]. This would help maximize the number of objects displayed on the screen according to a horizontal layout and a vertical layout, thus increasing productivity. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display objects in the layouts of the ‘736 patent in view of Miyazaki based on the width and height of the display screen, as taught by Graham. This would help maximize the number of objects displayed on the screen according to a horizontal layout and a vertical layout, thus increasing productivity. Since the ‘736 patent in view of Miyazaki discloses providing a display screen where objects are displayed in a portrait mode with the width of the screen being less than the height of the screen [Miyazaki, figures 10, 14-17], using the teaching of Graham for determining the number of objects to display in a same row and a same column, the number of objects displayed for a group in a same column will be more than the number of objects displayed for the group in a same row. Thus, an object will be displayed in the same column in the second layout that is not displayed in the same row in the first layout.
7. Claims 13 and 16-32 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 15-17, 20, and 21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,714,545, in view of Miyazaki et al (U.S. Patent No. 9,513,735), and further in view of Graham (U.S. Patent No. 7,954,056). Claims 1, 20, and 21 of patent ’545 do not expressly teach a plurality of object groups, that the plurality of objects being displayed in a same row in an x-direction on an xy-plane parallel with a surface of the display in the first layout state, that the second layout state is one in which at least one of the first number of objects of the object group is displayed in a column in a y-direction on the xy-plane,… and not display at least one object group of the plurality of object groups displayed in the first layout state, the second layout state including a second total number of objects less than the first total number of objects.
Miyazaki discloses an information display terminal having a touch panel [column 10, lines 40-49]. Based on touch input, objects are moved from one layout to another layout having a different number of objects [column 16, lines 23-43; figures 5A-D; column 22, lines 34-54; figures 10, 11A-D, 14-16]. The function of moving a plurality of objects included in an object group can be applied in the same manner in the case where the two-dimensional GUI is implemented on the information display terminal [column 16, lines 44-52]. Thus, the plurality of objects may lie within an xy-plane, and can be initially displayed in a same row in an x-direction as shown in [figure 5C]. When the sliding operation is started, the sliding operation is carried out on a specific object column among a plurality of object columns, and the specific object column is slid along the y axis and displayed so that the amount of overlap of the plurality of objects which form the specific object column with each other is reduced in response to the amount of the dragging operation [column 23, lines 27-37; figure 14]. When the sliding operation is continued and the amount of the dragging operation on the frontmost object reaches to a predetermined value, the other object columns, excluding the specific object column which is the object of the sliding operation, are not displayed in the object display region [column 23, lines 42-47; figure 15]. These operations are part of a second embodiment described in Miyazaki where the information display terminal has the same functional configuration as the information display terminal according to the first embodiment [column 20, lines 8-13]. As discussed above, in the first embodiment, an object column may comprise objects displayed in a same row on an xy-plane [column 16, lines 44-52] as shown in [figure 5C] and based on touch input, the degree of overlap between the objects may be changed when moving objects to another layout [column 16, lines 23-43, 53-67] such as from [figure 5C] to [figure 5D]. While the second embodiment provides an example of changing the layout of an object column initially having objects aligned along the z-axis to an object column having its objects aligned along the y-axis [see figures 14-16] where upon such change, other object columns that were displayed in the object display region of the initial layout are no longer displayed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide such a function when changing the layout of an object column having objects displayed in a same row on an xy-plane to a layout where objects of the object column are displayed in a same column in a y-direction on the xy-plane. This would allow such objects of the object column to be more clearly seen by the user after the layout change, since the other object columns would no longer be displayed. This would provide easy access to objects within a group and allow such objects of the object group to be more clearly seen by the user after the layout change. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a touch panel to switch from a first layout having objects displayed along an x-direction in an xy plane to a second layout having a different number of objects as the first layout that are displayed in a y-direction on the xy-plane, where object groups that were displayed in the first layout are no longer displayed in the second layout, as taught by Miyazaki. This would provide easy access to objects within a group and allow such objects of the object group to be more clearly seen by the user after the layout change.
The ‘545 patent in view of Miyazaki do not expressly teach at least one object of the object group that is not displayed in the same row in the first layout state is displayed in the column in the y-direction on the xy-plane to display a second number of objects of the object group different than the first number of objects in the column in the y-direction on the xy-plane. Graham discloses displaying a plurality of objects in a same row [column 8, lines 13-15; figure 3] or in a same column [column 13, lines 31-33; figure 8]. When displaying the plurality of objects in a same row, the max number of objects is determined based on the width of the container divided by the width of an object [column 15, lines 14-23] and when displaying the plurality of objects in a same column, the max number of objects is determined based on the height of the container divided by the height of an object [column 17, lines 26-36]. This would help maximize the number of objects displayed on the screen according to a horizontal layout and a vertical layout, thus increasing productivity. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display objects in the layouts of the ‘545 patent in view of Miyazaki based on the width and height of the display screen, as taught by Graham. This would help maximize the number of objects displayed on the screen according to a horizontal layout and a vertical layout, thus increasing productivity. Since the ‘545 patent in view of Miyazaki discloses providing a display screen where objects are displayed in a portrait mode with the width of the screen being less than the height of the screen [Miyazaki, figures 10, 14-17], using the teaching of Graham for determining the number of objects to display in a same row and a same column, the number of objects displayed for a group in a same column will be more than the number of objects displayed for the group in a same row. Thus, an object will be displayed in the same column in the second layout that is not displayed in the same row in the first layout.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set 5forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
9. Claims 13-15, 18, and 29-32 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Miyazaki et al (U.S. Patent No. 9,513,765) in view of Graham (U.S. Patent No. 7,954,056).
9-1. Regarding claims 13, 31, and 32, Miyazaki teaches the claim comprising: a touch panel; a display, by disclosing an information display terminal having a touch panel [column 10, lines 40-49], display, control unit, and storing unit [column 11, lines 16-37].
Miyazaki teaches circuitry configured to: control a displaying of, with the display, as a first layout state, a plurality of object groups, an object group of the plurality of object groups including a plurality of objects, and a first number of objects of the plurality of objects of the object group being displayed in a same row in an x-direction on an xy-plane parallel with a surface of the display in the first layout state, the first state including a first total number of objects, by disclosing displaying a plurality of objects groups, each object group having a plurality of objects in an initial display [column 11, line 66 to column 12, line 12; figure 3; column 15, lines 23-24, figure 5C; column 20, lines 27-43; figure 10]. The function of moving a plurality of objects included in an object group can be applied in the same manner in the case where the two-dimensional GUI is implemented on the information display terminal [column 16, lines 44-52]. Thus, the plurality of objects may lie within an xy-plane, and can be initially displayed in a same row in an x-direction as shown in [figure 5C]. The sum of all objects displayed for each group may be considered the total number of objects.
Miyazaki teaches detect an operation input that is input to the display, by disclosing detecting the moving state of contact points [column 15, lines 40-42].
Miyazaki teaches change, based on the circuitry detecting the operation input to the display, the first layout state into a second layout state in which at least one of the first number of objects of the object group is displayed in a column in a y-direction on the xy-plane, by disclosing based on touch input, changing the degree of overlap when moving the objects to another layout [column 16, lines 23-43] such as from [figure 5C] to [figure 5D]. Touch input continues until an amount of overlap between the objects becomes 0, in which case the transition from the initial display to another layout will be complete [column 22, lines 2-7, 34-54; column 23, lines 7-12, figures 14-16; column 26, lines 14-22]. The function of moving a plurality of objects included in an object group can be applied in the same manner in the case where the two-dimensional GUI is implemented on the information display terminal [column 16, lines 44-52].
Miyazaki teaches… and not display at least one object group of the plurality of object groups displayed in the first layout state, by disclosing that when the sliding operation is started, the sliding operation is carried out on a specific object column among a plurality of object columns, and the specific object column is slid along the y axis and displayed so that the amount of overlap of the plurality of objects which form the specific object column with each other is reduced in response to the amount of the dragging operation [column 23, lines 27-37; figure 14]. When the sliding operation is continued and the amount of the dragging operation on the frontmost object reaches to a predetermined value, the other object columns, excluding the specific object column which is the object of the sliding operation, are not displayed in the object display region [column 23, lines 42-47; figure 15]. These operations are part of a second embodiment described in Miyazaki where the information display terminal has the same functional configuration as the information display terminal according to the first embodiment [column 20, lines 8-13]. As discussed above, in the first embodiment, an object column may comprise objects displayed in a same row on an xy-plane [column 16, lines 44-52] as shown in [figure 5C] and based on touch input, the degree of overlap between the objects may be changed when moving objects to another layout [column 16, lines 23-43, 53-67] such as from [figure 5C] to [figure 5D]. While the second embodiment provides an example of changing the layout of an object column initially having objects aligned along the z-axis to an object column having its objects aligned along the y-axis [see figures 14-16] where upon such change, other object columns that were displayed in the object display region of the initial layout are no longer displayed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide such a function when changing the layout of an object column having objects displayed in a same row on an xy-plane to a layout where objects of the object column are displayed in a same column in a y-direction on the xy-plane. This would allow such objects of the object column to be more clearly seen by the user after the layout change, since the other object columns would no longer be displayed.
Miyazaki does not expressly teach at least one object of the object group that is not displayed in the same row in the first layout state is displayed in the column in the y-direction on the xy-plane to display a second number of objects of the object group different than the first number of objects in the column in the y-direction on the xy-plane. Graham discloses displaying a plurality of objects in a same row [column 8, lines 13-15; figure 3] or in a same column [column 13, lines 31-33; figure 8]. When displaying the plurality of objects in a same row, the max number of objects is determined based on the width of the container divided by the width of an object [column 15, lines 14-23] and when displaying the plurality of objects in a same column, the max number of objects is determined based on the height of the container divided by the height of an object [column 17, lines 26-36]. This would help maximize the number of objects displayed on the screen according to a horizontal layout and a vertical layout, thus increasing productivity. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display objects in the layouts of Miyazaki based on the width and height of the display screen, as taught by Graham. This would help maximize the number of objects displayed on the screen according to a horizontal layout and a vertical layout, thus increasing productivity. Since Miyazaki discloses providing a display screen where objects are displayed in a portrait mode with the width of the screen being less than the height of the screen [Miyazaki, figures 10, 14-17], using the teaching of Graham for determining the number of objects to display in a same row and a same column, the number of objects displayed for a group in a same column will be more than the number of objects displayed for the group in a same row. Thus, an object will be displayed in the same column in the second layout that is not displayed in the same row in the first layout.
Miyazaki-Graham teach the second layout state including a second total number of objects less than the first total number of objects, by disclosing that when the sliding operation is continued and the amount of the dragging operation on the frontmost object reaches to a predetermined value, the other object columns, excluding the specific object column which is the object of the sliding operation, are not displayed in the object display region [Miyazaki, column 23, lines 42-47; figures 14-15]. Since the second layout only displays objects of a single group vertically based on the height of the container divided by the height of an object [Graham, column 17, lines 26-36] whereas the initial layout displays objects from multiple groups using the entire display space, the second layout would include a total number of objects less than the number of objects in the initial layout.
9-2. Regarding claim 14, Miyazaki-Graham teach all the limitations of claim 13, wherein the first layout state includes the first number of objects displayed in a third number of rows in which a fourth number of objects of the plurality of objects are displayed in each of the third number of rows, by disclosing displaying objects in rows, with each row having a number of objects in the initial display [Miyazaki, figures 3, 10]
Miyazaki-Graham teach wherein the second layout state includes the second number of objects displayed in a fifth number of rows in which a sixth number of objects of the plurality of objects different than the fourth number are displayed in each of the fifth number of rows, by disclosing that after moving the objects to another layout, displaying a number of objects in a number of rows [Miyazaki, figures 14-16].
9-3. Regarding claim 15, Miyazaki-Graham teach all the limitations of claim 13, wherein the first layout state includes the first number of objects displayed in a third number of columns in which a fourth number of objects of the plurality of objects are displayed in each of the third number of columns, by disclosing displaying objects in columns, with each column having a number of objects in the initial display [Miyazaki, figures 3, 10].
Miyazaki-Graham teach wherein the second layout state includes the second number of objects displayed in a fifth number of columns different than the third number of columns and in which a sixth number of objects of the plurality of objects are displayed in each of the fifth number of columns, by disclosing that sliding operations may be carried out along the x axis to move objects into another layout having a number of columns along the x axis [Miyazaki, column 15, lines 14-21, 23-24; column 16, lines 35-43; figures 5A-C; column 22, lines 2-7].
9-4. Regarding claim 18, Miyazaki-Graham teach all the limitations of claim 13, wherein information which is related to the plurality of objects and is not included in the first layout state, is displayed in the second layout state, by disclosing displaying affiliated information for each object in the changed layout [Miyazaki, column 23, lines 37-41; figures 10, 14-16].
9-5. Regarding claim 29, Miyazaki-Graham teach all the limitations of claim 13, wherein the plurality of objects comprise photographs, by disclosing that the objects may be photographs [Miyazaki, column 27, lines 47-50].
9-6. Regarding claim 30, Miyazaki-Graham teach all the limitations of claim 13, wherein the plurality of objects comprise thumbnail icons, by disclosing displaying thumbnails [Miyazaki, figure 10].
10. Claims 16-17, 19-23, 25, and 27-28 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Miyazaki et al (U.S. Patent No. 9,513,765), in view of Graham (U.S. Patent No. 7,954,056), and further in view of Murrett et al (Pub. No. US 2010/0070913).
10-1. Regarding claim 16, Miyazaki-Graham teach all the limitations of claim 13, wherein the circuitry is further configured to… shift from the first layout to the second layout in response to a second operation input different from the first operation input, by disclosing that touch input continues until an amount of overlap between the objects becomes 0, in which case the transition from the initial display to another layout will be complete [Miyazaki, column 23, lines 7-12; figures 14-16; column 26, lines 14-22].
Although Miyazaki-Graham disclose moving the objects in the initial display based on touch input [Miyazaki, column 16, lines 23-43; figures 5A-D; column 22, lines 34-54; figures 10, 11A-D, 14-16], Miyazaki-Graham do not expressly teach scroll the plurality of objects in response to a first operation input. Murrett discloses displaying a plurality of objects in a stack along a simulated z-axis that can be navigated by a user moving a finger along a vector collinear to the simulated z-axis [paragraph 51; figure 4D]. This would provide an easy way to traverse objects within a stack. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to scroll through objects in a stack using touch movement, as taught by Murrett. This would provide an easy way to traverse objects within a stack.
10-2. Regarding claim 17, Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach all the limitations of claim 16, wherein the first operation input is a drag operation, by disclosing that the plurality of objects move in response to the continuous change in the location of a touch operation on the touch panel [Miyazaki, column 22, lines 55-63; column 26, lines 10-18, 23-31].
10-3. Regarding claim 19, Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach all the limitations of claim 16, wherein the circuitry is further configured to control a displaying of an intermediate display for indicating a layout shift from the first layout state to the second layout state as an animation, by disclosing that based on touch input, moving the object to another layout [Miyazaki, column 16, lines 23-43; figures 5A-D; column 22, lines 34-54; figures 10, 11A-D, 14-16].
10-4. Regarding claim 20, Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach all the limitations of claim 19, wherein a state of the intermediate display comprises a first intermediate state capable of shifting to the first layout state and a second intermediate state capable of shifting to the second layout state, by disclosing that the plurality of objects move in response to the continuous change in the location of a touch operation on the touch panel [Miyazaki, column 16, lines 23-43; figures 5A-5D; column 22, lines 55-63; column 26, lines 10-18, 23- 31]. As shown in [Miyazaki, figure 11B] and [Miyazaki, figure 11C], a first and second intermediate state may be entered. During the touch operation, if there is still overlap between display objects of the selected object column and drag has stopped for over a predetermined time, then the display will transition back to the state of the initial display [Miyazaki, column 23, line 60-64; column 26, lines 23-38]. If there is no more overlap between the display objects of the selected object column, transitioning to the new layout [Miyazaki, column 26, lines 14-22].
10-5. Regarding claim 21, Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach all the limitations of claim 20, wherein a change between the first intermediate state and the second intermediate state is based on a position change of the second operation input, by disclosing that the plurality of objects move in response to the continuous change in the location of a touch operation on the touch panel [Miyazaki, column 16, lines 23-43; figures 5A-5D; column 22, lines 55-63; column 26, lines 10-18, 23- 31].
10-6. Regarding claim 22, Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach all the limitations of claim 21, wherein the state of the intermediate display is the first intermediate state when movement distance of the second operation input is less than a first threshold, and the state of the intermediate display is the second intermediate state when the movement distance of the second operation input is greater than the first threshold, by disclosing the point where the display objects do not overlap is considered the threshold distance such that when the display objects are moved less than that point such that they still overlap as shown in [Miyazaki, figure 11B], the display will transition back to the state of the initial display when drag has stopped for over a predetermined time [Miyazaki, column 23, line 60-64; column 26, lines 23-38] and when the display objects are moved greater than the point such that the display objects do not overlap as shown in [Miyazaki, figure 11C], the display objects will transition to the new layout [Miyazaki, column 26, lines 14-22] as shown in [Miyazaki, figure 11D].
10-7. Regarding claim 23, Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach all the limitations of claim 22, wherein the second operation input is detected with a touch panel, by disclosing an information display terminal having a touch panel [Miyazaki, column 10, lines 40-49].
Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach wherein, when the second operation input is released from the touch panel in the first intermediate state, the plurality of objects moved by the operation input goes back to the first layout state automatically, by disclosing that if there is still overlap between display objects of the selected object column and drag has stopped for over a predetermined time, then the display will transition back to the state of the initial display [Miyazaki, column 23, line 60-64; column 26, lines 23-38].
10-8. Regarding claim 25, Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach all the limitations of claim 21, wherein the position change includes a movement distance of the second operation input, by disclosing that the amount of overlap is reduced corresponding to the amount of the dragging operation on the selected object [Miyazaki, column 22, lines 41-63; figures 11A-D].
10-9. Regarding claim 27, Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach all the limitations of claim 22, wherein when movement distance of the second operation input when the operation input is released from the touch panel is greater than the first threshold and less than a second threshold, the state of the intermediate display is the second intermediate state, and wherein the second threshold is greater than the first threshold, by disclosing that a first threshold may be some distance before the dragged position in the intermediate state shown in [Miyazaki, figure 11B] and a second threshold may be some distance beyond the dragged position in the intermediate state shown in [Miyazaki, figure 11B].
10-10. Regarding claim 28, Miyazaki-Graham teach all the limitations of claim 13. Miyazaki-Graham do not expressly teach wherein the plurality of objects are arranged based on date information. Murrett discloses sorting objects based on a time related to the objects [paragraph 53]. This would allow a user to more easily find an object. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to sort objects based on a time related to the objects, as taught by Murrett. This would allow a user to more easily find an object.
11. Claims 24 and 26 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Miyazaki et al (U.S. Patent No. 9,513,765), in view of Graham (U.S. Patent No. 7,954,056), in view of Murrett et al (Pub. No. US 2010/0070913), and further in view of Kwon et al (Pub. No. US 2009/0313567).
11-1. Regarding claim 24, Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach all the limitations of claim 23. Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett do not expressly teach wherein, when the second operation input is released from the touch panel in the second intermediate state, the plurality of objects moved in accordance with the operation input is kept moving to the second layout state automatically. Kwon discloses displaying a plurality of objects in a list layout [paragraph 58]. A user may change the layout of a plurality of objects by dragging and dropping a particular object in a direction perpendicular to the scroll direction of the list [paragraph 60; paragraph 80, lines 8-10]. If the dragged length of an object is equal to or more than a predetermined length, selected objects will move to a dropped area [paragraph 74; paragraph 80, lines 8-10]. This would shorten the input operation required to change the layout of objects. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to perform the layout transition of Miyazaki after dragging for a predetermined length, as taught by Kwon. This would shorten the input operation required to change the layout of objects.
11-2. Regarding claim 26, Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett teach all the limitations of claim 25, wherein the second operation input is detected with a touch panel, by disclosing an information display terminal having a touch panel [column 10, lines 40-49].
Although Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett disclose that the plurality of objects move in response to the continuous change in the location of a touch operation on the touch panel [Miyazaki, column 22, lines 55-63; column 26, lines 10-18, 23-31], Miyazaki-Graham-Murrett do not expressly teach wherein the movement distance of the second operation input is a distance between an initial position of the second operation input when the second operation input contacts the touch panel and a position of the second operation input when the second operation input is released from the touch panel. Kwon discloses displaying a plurality of objects in a list layout [paragraph 58]. A user may change the layout of a plurality of objects by dragging and dropping a particular object in a direction perpendicular to the scroll direction of the list [paragraph 60; paragraph 80, lines 8-10]. When the drag operation is released, a determination is made whether the dragged length is equal to or more than a predetermined length, and if so, the selected objects will move to a dropped area [paragraph 74; paragraph 80, lines 8-10]. This would shorten the input operation required to change the layout of objects. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to perform the layout transition of Miyazaki after dragging and dropping for a predetermined length, as taught by Kwon. This would shorten the input operation required to change the layout of objects.
12. Claim 33 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Miyazaki et al (U.S. Patent No. 9,513,765), in view of Graham (U.S. Patent No. 7,954,056), and further in view of Sadikali et al (U.S. Patent No. 7,634,733).
12-1. Regarding claim 33, Miyazaki-Graham teach all the limitations of claim 13. Miyazaki-Graham do not expressly teach wherein the first number of objects of the plurality of objects of the object group are displayed in the first layout state to not overlap in the same row in the x-direction. Sadikali discloses displaying a patient summary interface 140 containing a list of imaging studies 143, with each imaging study containing one or more imaging series 141 [column 6, lines 45-48; figure 1]. As shown in [figure 3], an imaging study view 250 of an imaging study 143 in the imaging study list 142 displays a plurality of non-overlapping thumbnail images in the same row in the x-direction [column 11, lines 33-36, 51-60]. A dock module is utilized to provide a user with docking functionality for patient summary interface 140 within diagnostic interface 145, where the user is allowed to position primary elements of patient summary interface 140 along an edge of diagnostic interface 145 while hiding secondary elements [column 9, lines 45-52]. The patient summary interface 140 may be condensed or docked by a user to a vertical edge of diagnostic interface 145, to retain some display elements while eliminating others [column 16, lines 27-32]. As shown in [figure 8B], in a patient summary interface 140 in a vertical docked patient summary interface mode 800b, ordinary features of patient summary interface 145, such as non-selected medical imaging study views 250 are omitted to minimize required display area and allow the user to focus only on the selected studies [column 16, lines 54-63]. Thus, Sadikali discloses displaying a plurality of object groups in a patient summary interface where a selected one of the object groups is displayed in a first layout having non-overlapping objects in the same row in the x-direction, and receiving input to change the first layout to a second layout in which a second number of objects in the selected object group are displayed in a same column in a y-direction on the xy-plane. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display the objects of Miyazaki-Graham in the first layout where objects are displayed in the same row along the x-direction, in a non-overlapping state before changing the layout to the second layout having objects displaying in a same column in a y-direction on the xy-plane, as taught by Sadikali. This would allow the user to more easily focus on certain objects of interest.
Response to Arguments
13. The Examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s amendments to claims 13, 31, and 32 and the cancellation of claim 34.
Regarding independent claim 13, Applicant alleges that Miyazaki (U.S. Patent No. 9,513,765) in view of Chaudhri et al (U.S. Patent No. 9,086,785) fail to teach or suggest, “circuitry configured to… change, based on the circuitry detecting the operation input to the display, the first layout state into a second layout state in which at least one of the first number of objects of the object group is displayed in a column in a y-direction on the xy-plane and at least one object of the object group that is not displayed in the same row in the first layout state is displayed in the column in the y-direction on the xy-plane to display a second number of objects of the object group different than the first number of objects in the column in the y-direction on the xy-plane and not display at least one object group of the plurality of object groups displayed in the first layout state, the second layout state including a second total number of objects less than the first total number of objects," as has been amended to the claim.
Examiner has rejected claim 13 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Miyazaki et al (U.S. Patent No. 9,513,765) in view of Graham (U.S. Patent No. 7,954,056).
Graham discloses displaying a plurality of objects in a same row [column 8, lines 13-15; figure 3] or in a same column [column 13, lines 31-33; figure 8]. When displaying the plurality of objects in a same row, the max number of objects is determined based on the width of the container divided by the width of an object [column 15, lines 14-23] and when displaying the plurality of objects in a same column, the max number of objects is determined based on the height of the container divided by the height of an object [column 17, lines 26-36]. This would help maximize the number of objects displayed on the screen according to a horizontal layout and a vertical layout, thus increasing productivity. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display objects in the layouts of Miyazaki based on the width and height of the display screen, as taught by Graham. This would help maximize the number of objects displayed on the screen according to a horizontal layout and a vertical layout, thus increasing productivity. Since Miyazaki discloses providing a display screen where objects are displayed in a portrait mode with the width of the screen being less than the height of the screen [Miyazaki, figures 10, 14-17], using the teaching of Graham for determining the number of objects to display in a same row and a same column, the number of objects displayed for a group in a same column will be more than the number of objects displayed for the group in a same row. Thus, an object will be displayed in the same column in the second layout that is not displayed in the same row in the first layout.
Miyazaki-Graham disclose that when the sliding operation is continued and the amount of the dragging operation on the frontmost object reaches to a predetermined value, the other object columns, excluding the specific object column which is the object of the sliding operation, are not displayed in the object display region [Miyazaki, column 23, lines 42-47; figures 14-15]. Since the second layout only displays objects of a single group vertically based on the height of the container divided by the height of an object [Graham, column 17, lines 26-36] whereas the initial layout displays objects from multiple groups using the entire display space, the second layout would include a total number of objects less than the number of objects in the initial layout.
Similar arguments have been presented for independent claims 31 and 32 and thus, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive for the same reasons.
Applicant states that dependent claims 14-30 and 33 recite all the limitations of the independent claim, and thus, are allowable in view of the remarks set forth regarding independent claim 13. However, as discussed above, Miyazaki in view of Graham are considered to teach claim 13, and consequently, claims 14-30 and 33 are rejected.
After reviewing Applicant’s specification, claim 13 appears to be directed to the first embodiment, as shown and described in [paragraphs 24-54; figures 1-3]. The first embodiment aims to allow the user to more easily understand in what way the layout changes based on a continuous operation of the user [see paragraph 52] wherein the continuous operation causes the operational state of the interface to switch between a scrollable state (S1) [paragraph 41], a navigation state (S2) [paragraph 43], and two intermediate states (S3 and S5) [paragraphs 45, 48]. Based on Applicant’s disclosure, Examiner suggests amending the independent claims to recite, in addition to the current limitations, content from [paragraphs 41-45], which disclose (1) a continuous operation input such that initiation of the continuous operation input initiates a scrollable state [paragraph 41] where movement of the input in the lateral direction scrolls the plurality of objects in the lateral direction [paragraph 42], (2) keeping the input in the same position for a predetermined time period while in the scrollable state causes the plurality of objects to be slightly misaligned and initiates a navigation state where the plurality of objects are still scrollable in the lateral direction in response to movement of the input in the lateral direction [paragraph 43], and (3) movement of the input in the vertical direction equal to or larger than a first threshold while in the navigation state initiates an intermediate state where movement of the input in the vertical direction while in the intermediate state moves the first layout state towards the second layout state [paragraph 45]. Such an amendment would more accurately reflect the aim of the first embodiment [see paragraph 52] and help distinguish the claims from the cited prior art.
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVIN H TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8595. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6PM.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/ALVIN H TAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118