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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/10/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 2/10/2026 has been entered and made of record. Claims 1-4, 6-8, 10-11, and 14-19 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 10 and 16 have been considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that the cited combination of references does not teach or suggest the limitations “in case that information regarding the content is received while the wearable electronic device is connected to an external electronic device and the reference object is simultaneously displayed in both the wearable electronic device and the external electronic device, display, via the display, a first content identified by the server device with respect to both a first user of the wearable electronic device and a second user of the external electronic device as visually associated with the reference object; and in case that information regarding the content is received while the reference object is displayed in the wearable electronic device and not displayed in the external electronic device, display, via the display, a second content different from the first content identified by the server device with respect to the first user of the wearable electronic device as visually associated with the reference object" (p. 13-14 of Remarks).
Applicant states that these new limitations can be supported at least in Fig 10B and 10C. During the interview of 4/17/26, applicant’s representative further confirms that at least paragraph [0136] teaches one embodiment of cited limitation in claim 1. Fig 10B/10C are reproduced as below.
PNG
media_image1.png
545
823
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
390
645
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Here, the first user device refers to wearable electronic device, and second/third user device refers to an external electronic device. C1/C2 refers to reference object, and A1/A2/A3 are the first content. For the first condition, “in case that… and the reference object is simultaneously displayed in both the wearable electronic device and the external electronic device…”, the reference object (i.e. C1 in Fig 10B) is simultaneously displayed in both the wearable electronic device (first user) and the external electronic device (second user), a first content (A1/A2) is displayed. However, the second condition, “in case that… while the reference object is displayed in the wearable electronic device and not displayed in the external electronic device…”, isn’t supported by Fig 10C, because applicant discloses “In case that the display of the multimedia content by the wearable device corresponding to the first user is stopped by the different application, the server may sequentially transmit multimedia contents B23-1, B23-2, and B23-3 corresponding to a cluster including the second user and the third user who are possible to access the multimedia content, to wearable devices corresponding to the second user to the third user” in [0137]. Examiner notices that there is no written description in the specification to disclose the reference object is displayed in the wearable electronic device and not displayed in the external electronic device. Examiner requests applicant to clearly map the claim language “a reference object”, “a first content” and “a second content” to the counterparts within the specification and the paragraph numbers to support “in case that information regarding the content is received while the reference object is displayed in the wearable electronic device and not displayed in the external electronic device, display, via the display, a second content different from the first content identified by the server device with respect to the first user of the wearable electronic device as visually associated with the reference object”.
Independent claim 10 recites “a first content to be displayed as visually associated with the reference object in the first external electronic device… based on the second external electronic device being identified as accessing the position while the first external electronic device is positioned in the position, transmitting, to both the first external electronic device and the second external electronic device, a second content different from the first content to be simultaneously displayed as visually associated with the reference object in the first external electronic device and the second external electronic device”. Here, it is unclear what is really displayed on the first external electronic device and the second external electronic device. The claim 10 recites that a first content are displayed in the first external electronic device, and a second content different from the first content, is simultaneously displayed in the both first external electronic device and the second external electronic device. Claim 10 may recite to display the first content and the second content on the first external electronic device, but it is unclear to the relationship between the first content and the second content, for example, both the first content and the second content are displayed simultaneously or at different time slot. Further, it is unclear whether the first content is displayed on the second external electronic device because claim 10 only recites the second content is displayed on the second external electronic device.
Examiner requests applicant provides direct paragraphs in the specification or drawings to support these amendment by mapping the claim language “reference object”, “first content” and “second content”, as well as the condition “in case that… while the reference object is displayed in the wearable electronic device and not displayed in the external electronic device…”
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 1-9 and 16-20 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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent claims 1 and 16 cite the limitation “in case that information regarding the content is received while the reference object is displayed in the wearable electronic device and not displayed in the external electronic device, display, via the display, a second content different from the first content identified by the server device with respect to the first user of the wearable electronic device as visually associated with the reference object”. There is no any embodiment in the original specification to map a situation of a reference object, first content and second content to be displayed on the wearable electronic device and the external electronic device based on above condition. See also detailed discussion in above Response to Arguments. Claims 2-9 and 17-20 are dependent claims and rejected under the same rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Independent claim 10 cites limitation “a first content to be displayed as visually associated with the reference object in the first external electronic device… a second content different from the first content to be simultaneously displayed as visually associated with the reference object in the first external electronic device and the second external electronic device”. Here, it is unclear how to display both first content and second content in the FIRST external electronic device, for example, displayed simultaneously or at different time slots. It is also unclear whether the first content is displayed in the SECOND external electronic device because claim 10 recites the second content is different from the first content. If both first content and second content are displayed in the second external electronic device, how are they displayed in the second external electronic device? See also detailed discussion in above Response to Arguments. Claims 11-15 are dependent claims and rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEIMING HE whose telephone number is (571)270-1221. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Tammy Goddard can be reached on 571-272-7773. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR 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.
/WEIMING HE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights