DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
The Amendment filed on 2/2/2026 has been received and entered. Application No. 18/243,917 Claims 1-3, 5-21 are now pending. Claim 4 is canceled. Claims 1, 5-12, 14-17, 19, 20 have been amended. Claim 21 is new.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment necessitated new grounds of rejection.
This action is made final in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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, 5-15 & 19-21 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.
As per Claim 1 recites the newly amended claim language “obtaining multiple screenshot sets by combining the first screenshots of the at least three display windows arbitrarily with all possible combinations exhausted,” The Specification does not teach the underlined language nor does it list exhausting all possible combination. The newly amended language is adding elements that are not clearly taught in the Specification. Therefore, the claim is 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.
Claims 2-15 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 due to their dependency on claim 1.
As per Claim 19 recites the newly amended claim language “without displaying other screenshots” wherein the Specification repeatedly teaches in paragraphs 37, 43 and 113 displaying the to-be-previewed screenshot along with other screenshots. For example “In some embodiments, after the first screenshots and the at least one second screenshot are obtained, one screenshot (i.e., a to-be-previewed screenshot) may be first selected to make its preview displayed, and then it is determined whether a screenshot editing operation is received within a preset duration. When the screenshot editing operation is not received within the preset duration, it shows that the screenshot whose preview is currently displayed is a screenshot desired by the user, and the screenshot may be directly saved. When the screenshot editing operation is received within the preset duration, it shows that the screenshot whose preview is currently displayed is probably not a screenshot desired by the user; and in this case, the first screenshots and the at least one second screenshot may be directly displayed in the preview mode for the user to select the desired type of screenshot, and the electronic device may save the screenshot selected by the user. The preset duration may be preset according to an actual scenario, which is not limited herein, for example, it may be 5S.” Examiner did not find direct language to support the claimed amendment above. Therefore, claim 19 is 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.
Claim 20 is similar in scope to Claim 19; therefore, Claim 20 is rejected under the same rationale as Claim 19.
Claim 21 is 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 due to their dependency on claim 20.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-18 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to independent Claims 16-18, the prior art found does not specifically teach the newly amended language of claim 16 wherein a determination of display priorities in a descending order is achieved wherein screenshots are saved based on preset touch operations related toa priority determination of the highest priority of the screenshots wherein the operation is within a target display window that allows for at least two display windows to be compared for their priority and a determination of the highest priority is achieved.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGIE BADAWI whose telephone number is (571)270-7590. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Wednesday 9:00am - 5:00pm EST with Thursdays and Fridays off.
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, Fred Ehichioya can be reached at (571) 272-4034. 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.
/ANGIE BADAWI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2179