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 .
Notice for all US Patent Applications filed on or after March 16, 2013
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/16/25 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
This communication is in response to communications received on 10/16/25. Claim(s) 15, 32, and 34 is/are amended, claim(s) none is/are cancelled, claim(s) none is/are new, and applicant states support can be found at instant specification Fig. 2 and [0068-0072]. Therefore, Claims 15-34 is/are pending and have been addressed below.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application(s) CN202110909762.3 filed in People’s Republic of China on 8/9/21. Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Claims Without Prior Art Rejections
Claim(s) 22-25 do not have prior art rejections.
Closest prior art to the invention claims without rejections include
Jung et al. (US 2020/0258029 A1) in view of Mountain (US 2016/0029085 A1) for claim(s) 22-25.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remarks, filed 10/16/25, with respect to rejections under 35 USC 112 for claim(s) 15-34 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Examiner respectfully withdraws rejections under 35 USC 112 for claim(s) 15-34.
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remarks, filed 10/16/25, with respect to rejections under 35 USC 101 for claim(s) 15-34 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as far as they apply to the amended 101 rejection(s) below.
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remarks, filed 10/26/25, with respect to rejections under 35 USC 102 and 103 for claim(s) 15-34 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as far as they apply to the amended 102 and 103 rejection(s) below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 15-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as noted below.
The limitation(s) below for representative claim(s) 15, 32, and 34 that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, is directed to schedule conflict processing.
Step 1: The claim(s) as drafted, is/are a process (claim(s) 15-31 recites a series of steps) and system (claim(s) 32-34 recites a series of components).
Step 2A – Prong 1: The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) (emphasis added):
Claim 15: responsive to receiving a first schedule, detecting a conflict between the first schedule and a second schedule, wherein the first schedule and the second schedule are each events that are scheduled in a calendar;
responsive to detecting the conflict between the first schedule and the second schedule:
displaying a first interface that comprises information of the first schedule comprising a first occurrence time of the first schedule, a first event name of the first schedule, and first location information of the first schedule; and
generating and displaying, in the first interface, an interactive interface comprising first prompting information visually identifying the existence of the conflict and a selectable call to action for obtaining further information regarding the conflict between the first and second schedules;
displaying, in response to a first operation on the first interface, a second processing interface that comprises the information including at least event names of a plurality of schedules including at least the first and second schedules;
displaying, in response to an operation on the second processing interface, a schedule detail interface of the first schedule; and
displaying, in response to a second operation on the first interface, the schedule detail interface of the first schedule.
Claim(s) 32 and 34: same analysis as claim(s) 15.
Dependent claims 16-31 and 33 recite the same or similar abstract idea(s) as independent claim(s) 15, 32, and 34 with merely a further narrowing of the abstract idea(s): .
The identified limitations of the independent and dependent claims above fall well-within the groupings of subject matter identified by the courts as being abstract concepts of:
a method of organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, or business relations) because the invention is directed to economic and/or business relationships as they are associated with schedule conflict processing.
Step 2A – Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because:
The additional elements unencompassed by the abstract idea include interfaces, an interactive button (claim(s) 15, 32, 34), an electronic device, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories (claim(s) 32), a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of an electronic device (claim(s) 34), interface (various) (claim(s) 16-17, 19, 22-24, 26-28, 30-31, 33), pop-up window (claim(s) 20-21), another device (claim(s) 27), interfaces (claim(s) 29), .
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 fails to describe:
Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine – see MPEP 2106.05(b)
Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo.
Thus the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 are merely (as additionally noted by instant specification [00138-00153]) invoked as a tool and/or general purpose computer to apply instructions of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and/or mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(f)&(h)).
Step 2B: The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 are merely (as additionally noted by instant specification [00138-00153]) invoked as a tool and/or a general purpose computer to apply instructions of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and/or mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application and thus similarly the combination and arrangement of the above identified additional elements when analyzed under Step 2B also fails to necessitate a conclusion that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons as set forth above (MPEP 2106.05(f)&(h)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 15-19, 26-27, 30-31, 32-33, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jung et al. (US 2020/0258029 A1).
Regarding claim 15, 32, and 34 (currently amended), Jung teaches a method for displaying a schedule, comprising:
{An electronic device, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories coupled to the one or more processors and storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the electronic device to be configured to – claim 32
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of an electronic device, cause the electronic device to be configured to: - claim 34 [see at least Fig. 1-2 and [0057, 0088] system including a server 108, electronic devices 101, 102, 104 and “The UE 200 according to an embodiment may be a terminal device (or the electronic device 101) that can be connected to the Internet, and may be, for example, a mobile phone, a smart phone, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a notebook computer, a television (TV), a major appliance or domestic appliance, a wearable device, a head mounted display (HMD), or a smart speaker.”] }
responsive to receiving a first schedule, detecting a conflict between the first schedule and a second schedule, wherein the first schedule and the second schedule are each events that are scheduled in a calendar;
responsive to detecting the conflict between the first schedule and the second schedule [see at least Fig. 11 and [0210] “According to an embodiment, FIG. 11 illustrates an example of an operation (e.g., operation 615 or operation 617 in FIG. 6) of suggesting a recommendation associated with a device schedule when a conflict occurs between a first schedule (e.g., a new schedule) newly input based on a user input and previously registered another second schedule (e.g., an adjacent schedule).”;
[0214] the schedules are in a calendar application “According to an embodiment, when the device schedule requires the user intervention, the processor 120 may determine whether the schedule of the other user exists based on the calendar application. For example, the processor 120 may identify schedule information for each of the multiple users based on the calendar application,”]:
displaying a first interface that comprises information of the first schedule comprising a first occurrence time of the first schedule, a first event name of the first schedule, and first location information of the first schedule; and
generating and displaying, in the first interface, an interactive interface comprising first prompting information visually identifying the existence of the conflict and a selectable call to action for obtaining further information regarding the conflict between the first and second schedules [for the limitations above, see at least Fig. 14 and [0229-0230, 0234] schedule conflict can be singular or multiple depending on schedules and prompting information is a displayed schedule “In operation 1305, the processor 120 may search for another user who can control the device at a task time when device control by the user (e.g., user A) is impossible. According to an embodiment, as illustrated in element 1420 of FIG. 14, schedules of user A, user B, user C, and user D exist in the calendar application, and the device schedule and the user schedule conflict of the user A conflict with each other. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may analyze schedule information of the other users (e.g., user B, user C, and user D) registered in the calendar application, and may analyze each schedule state (or current status) of the other users based on the schedule information. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may search for another user (or a user who does not have a schedule conflict) that can control the device from the schedules and the device schedules of the other users (e.g., a time related to device control). According to an embodiment, in element 1420, the user B and the user D may be the user who can control device.”;
[0200] a schedule item can include an unlimited number of details “According to an embodiment, in FIG. 7, an example in which a newly input schedule (e.g., a new schedule) is classified into, for example, three schedule types (e.g., a first schedule type, a second schedule type, and a third schedule type), and a device-related configuration, a location-related configuration, or a task-related configuration is identified in schedule information has been described, but the disclosure is not limited thereto. For example, the schedule information may include a combination of at least two of the device-related configuration, the location-related configuration, or the task-related configuration, and the processor 120 may generate each identification tag and associated identification tag (or integrated identification tag) according to the schedule type based on the combination of the at least two of the first schedule type, the second schedule type, or the third schedule type.”;
Fig. 8b and 9 and [0189, 0197, 0203] display a first schedule including “location information (e.g., 250 West Kenwood Ave. Calmness Studio)”, title, and date;
Fig. 17A and [0227-0279] display a button in response to a conflict “According to an embodiment, as shown in the example of the screen 1703, the electronic device 101 may provide information related to a schedule conflict (e.g., the completion time of 5:20 overlaps an external schedule in a currently configured standard washing mode) and at least one change option (e.g., a first option (e.g., proceed as is), a second option 1750, a third option 1760).
According to an embodiment, the second option 1750 is an option of suggesting to change the operation mode of the device to prevent a conflict between the user schedule and the device schedule in consideration of the schedule of the user, and may include an option of suggesting a change in the operation mode of the device that can avoid a conflict, for example, “washing is completed at 4:30 when you switch to quick mode. Do you want to change to the quick mode?”.
According to an embodiment, the third option 1760 is an option of suggesting to request device management from another user registered in the calendar application in consideration of the schedule of the other user, and may include an option of suggesting to request device management from another user, for example, “Do you want to request corresponding schedule from the second user (“Ted”)?”. In the example of FIG. 17A, a user may select the second option 1750.” ;
Fig. 17B and [0289] display a button in response to a conflict “According to an embodiment, when there is the section where the time information between the first schedule and the second schedule at least partially overlap each other (e.g., when a conflict occurs), in operation 1715, the device 1700 may output an option 1780 capable of changing the operation of the device related to the first schedule. For example, the device 1700 may output at least one option 1780 such as “There is a conflict with OOO schedule in currently set mode 5. Do you want to switch to mode 2 where washing is completed more quickly? Otherwise, do you want to request drying laundry from Family A?”.”];
displaying, in response to a first operation on the first interface, a second processing interface that comprises event names of a plurality of schedules including at least the first and second schedules [see at least Fig. 14 and [0179, 0234, 0239] schedule conflict can be singular or multiple depending on schedules and prompting information is a displayed schedule “In operation 1305, the processor 120 may search for another user who can control the device at a task time when device control by the user (e.g., user A) is impossible. According to an embodiment, as illustrated in element 1420 of FIG. 14, schedules of user A, user B, user C, and user D exist in the calendar application, and the device schedule and the user schedule conflict of the user A conflict with each other. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may analyze schedule information of the other users (e.g., user B, user C, and user D) registered in the calendar application, and may analyze each schedule state (or current status) of the other users based on the schedule information. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may search for another user (or a user who does not have a schedule conflict) that can control the device from the schedules and the device schedules of the other users (e.g., a time related to device control). According to an embodiment, in element 1420, the user B and the user D may be the user who can control device. …
In operation 1313, the processor 120 may provide recommendation information based on the recommended option to the user. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may display, on a display (e.g., the display device 160 in FIG. 1), recommendation information for requesting a corresponding task from the user B.”;
Fig. 8b, 9, and 18 and [0200;0189, 0197, 0203] recommendation information of [0239] is interpreted as schedule information, where as noted in a) ([0200]) a schedule item can include an unlimited number of details, b) (Fig. 8b and 9 and [0200;0189, 0197, 0203]) display a first schedule including “location information (e.g., 250 West Kenwood Ave. Calmness Studio)”, title, and date, and c) (Fig. 18 and [0279]) “According to an embodiment, as to the request information, as shown in the example of the screen 1801, the device schedule (e.g., washing schedule) may be requested from the first user (“Susan”),”;
Fig. 16 and [0259] recommendation may not involve another user “According to an embodiment, the external server 530 may identify an operation (or mode) in which the user can control the device (e.g., can avoid a conflict with the user schedule) based on the schedule information, or may identify other users who can perform device-related control based on the schedule information for each of the other users registered in the calendar application.”;
Fig. 16 and [0262-0263, 0266-0267] “In operation 1621, the electronic device 101 may display the recommendation information on a display (e.g., the display device 160 of FIG. 1 and the display 240 of FIG. 2). According to an embodiment, the electronic device 101 may receive the recommendation information from the external server 201 through the communication module 190 and may superimpose (or overlay) the received recommendation information on at least a portion of the user interface and may display the same through superimposition or pop-up.
In operation 1623, the electronic device 101 may receive a user input (hereinafter, referred to as a “second user input”) for confirming the recommendation information. According to an embodiment, the electronic device 101 may identify whether to apply the recommendation information in response to the second user input. For example, the electronic device 101 may identify whether the second user input accepts (or applies) or cancels a change in the device schedule according to the recommendation information. According to an embodiment, it is assumed that the second user input is an input of accepting (or applying) the change in the device schedule. …
In operation 1629, the external server 530 may perform scheduling. According to an embodiment, the external server 530 may monitor an alarm and/or a control time point associated with each schedule through scheduling of the schedules registered in the calendar application.
In operation 1631, the external server 530 may perform a corresponding function on the schedule. According to an embodiment, the external server 530 may perform a function related to the schedule at an alarm and/or a control time point related to the specific schedule, based on the result of the scheduling (or the result of monitoring).”];
displaying, in response to an operation on the second processing interface, a schedule detail interface of the first schedule [see at least Fig. 16 and [0262-0263, 0266-0267] “In operation 1621, the electronic device 101 may display the recommendation information on a display (e.g., the display device 160 of FIG. 1 and the display 240 of FIG. 2). According to an embodiment, the electronic device 101 may receive the recommendation information from the external server 201 through the communication module 190 and may superimpose (or overlay) the received recommendation information on at least a portion of the user interface and may display the same through superimposition or pop-up.
In operation 1623, the electronic device 101 may receive a user input (hereinafter, referred to as a “second user input”) for confirming the recommendation information. According to an embodiment, the electronic device 101 may identify whether to apply the recommendation information in response to the second user input. For example, the electronic device 101 may identify whether the second user input accepts (or applies) or cancels a change in the device schedule according to the recommendation information. According to an embodiment, it is assumed that the second user input is an input of accepting (or applying) the change in the device schedule. …
In operation 1629, the external server 530 may perform scheduling. According to an embodiment, the external server 530 may monitor an alarm and/or a control time point associated with each schedule through scheduling of the schedules registered in the calendar application.
In operation 1631, the external server 530 may perform a corresponding function on the schedule. According to an embodiment, the external server 530 may perform a function related to the schedule at an alarm and/or a control time point related to the specific schedule, based on the result of the scheduling (or the result of monitoring).”;
Fig. 18 and [0299-0300] “According to an embodiment, the electronic device 101 (or the external server 530 according to an embodiment) may apply (or reflect) the device schedule to the calendar application based on the schedule information (e.g., standard washing mode) input (or configured) by the first user (e.g., “Susan”) without changing the device schedule (e.g., without changing the operation mode of the device according to a recommended option {e.g., standard washing mode->quick mode}), based on the acceptance related to the request of the device schedule of the target electronic device (or the second user (“Ted”)).
According to an embodiment, as shown in an example of a screen 1803, the electronic device 101 may generate the device schedule in a region (e.g., a region 1850) corresponding to the configured device schedule among device schedule regions in the calendar application. For example, the electronic device 101 may maintain a configuration value in the standard washing mode and may reflect the same on the device schedule to display the same. According to an embodiment, when generating and displaying the device schedule, the electronic device 101 may classify and display device operation-related users (or a person in charge (e.g., the second user “Ted”)) based on colors.”]; and
displaying, in response to a second operation on the first interface, the schedule detail interface of the first schedule [see at least Figs. 24 and [0331] “Referring to FIG. 24, in an example of a screen of FIG. 24, an element 2410 may indicate an object (e.g., a first object (“day”), a second object (“week”), and a third object (“agenda”)) capable of selecting a viewing method (e.g., dashboard view) of a user interface included in the calendar application. For example, the user may select the object 2410 related to the viewing method and may change the viewing method related to the schedule information of the user interface. According to an embodiment, FIG. 24 illustrates an example of providing schedule information related to multiple users and the device in a daily view based on the selection of the object “day” among the objects 2410 related to the viewing method. According to an embodiment, the user may change the schedule information related to the multiple users and the device to a weekly view based on the selection of the object “week” among the objects 2410 related to the viewing method, or may change the same to detailed schedule information view related to the multiple users and the device based on the selection of the object “agenda” ”].
Regarding claim 16 and 33, Jung teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the schedule detail interface of the first schedule comprises:
the occurrence time of the first schedule; the event name of the first schedule; the location information of the first schedule; the inviter of the first schedule; and a number of participants in the first schedule [see at least [0200] a schedule item can include an unlimited number of details “According to an embodiment, in FIG. 7, an example in which a newly input schedule (e.g., a new schedule) is classified into, for example, three schedule types (e.g., a first schedule type, a second schedule type, and a third schedule type), and a device-related configuration, a location-related configuration, or a task-related configuration is identified in schedule information has been described, but the disclosure is not limited thereto. For example, the schedule information may include a combination of at least two of the device-related configuration, the location-related configuration, or the task-related configuration, and the processor 120 may generate each identification tag and associated identification tag (or integrated identification tag) according to the schedule type based on the combination of the at least two of the first schedule type, the second schedule type, or the third schedule type.”;
...Fig. 18 and [0313] schedule information including inviter and number of participants “According to an embodiment, based on a user input for configuring “device calendar” of the user, the electronic device 101 may transmit request information related to the device schedule to a target electronic device (e.g., the electronic device of “Ted”). … According to an embodiment, as shown in the example of the screen 2003, as to the request information, the device schedule (e.g., washing schedule) may be requested from the user (e.g., “Susan”)”;
Fig. 8b and 9 and [0189, 0197, 0203] display a first schedule (schedule information) including “location information (e.g., 250 West Kenwood Ave. Calmness Studio)”, title, and date].
Regarding claim 17, Jung teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the second processing interface further comprises time information of the plurality of schedules [see at least Fig. 8b, 9, and 18 and [0200;0189, 0197, 0203] recommendation information of [0239] is interpreted as schedule information, where as noted in a) ([0200]) a schedule item can include an unlimited number of details, b) (Fig. 8b and 9 and [0200;0189, 0197, 0203]) display a first schedule including “location information (e.g., 250 West Kenwood Ave. Calmness Studio)”, title, and date, and c) (Fig. 18 and [0279]) “According to an embodiment, as to the request information, as shown in the example of the screen 1801, the device schedule (e.g., washing schedule) may be requested from the first user (“Susan”),”].
Regarding claim 18, Jung teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the first prompting information does not comprise the event names of the plurality of schedules [see at least Fig. 6 and [0179] “According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may superimpose (or overlay) and display the recommendation information on the at least a portion of the user interface through a popup based on a popup window. … According to an embodiment, the recommendation information may include at least one piece of information related to information suggesting to change according to the change option of the operation (or mode) of the device, information suggesting to request the control of the device from appropriate another user, or information suggesting to proceed as is without a change according to the recommendation information.”].
Regarding claim 19, Jung teaches the method of claim 15, wherein displaying the schedule detail interface of the first schedule is in response to an operation on an area corresponding to the event name of the first schedule on the second processing interface [see at least Fig. 16 and [0262-0263, 0266-0267] “In operation 1621, the electronic device 101 may display the recommendation information on a display (e.g., the display device 160 of FIG. 1 and the display 240 of FIG. 2). According to an embodiment, the electronic device 101 may receive the recommendation information from the external server 201 through the communication module 190 and may superimpose (or overlay) the received recommendation information on at least a portion of the user interface and may display the same through superimposition or pop-up.
In operation 1623, the electronic device 101 may receive a user input (hereinafter, referred to as a “second user input”) for confirming the recommendation information. According to an embodiment, the electronic device 101 may identify whether to apply the recommendation information in response to the second user input. For example, the electronic device 101 may identify whether the second user input accepts (or applies) or cancels a change in the device schedule according to the recommendation information. According to an embodiment, it is assumed that the second user input is an input of accepting (or applying) the change in the device schedule. …
In operation 1629, the external server 530 may perform scheduling. According to an embodiment, the external server 530 may monitor an alarm and/or a control time point associated with each schedule through scheduling of the schedules registered in the calendar application.
In operation 1631, the external server 530 may perform a corresponding function on the schedule. According to an embodiment, the external server 530 may perform a function related to the schedule at an alarm and/or a control time point related to the specific schedule, based on the result of the scheduling (or the result of monitoring).”;
Fig. 20B and [0316] “According to an embodiment, as shown in an example of a screen 2005, the device schedule may be generated in a region (e.g., a region 2050) corresponding to the configured device schedule among the device schedule regions in the calendar application. For example, the electronic device 101 may reflect and represent an echo mode to the device schedule. According to an embodiment, when generating the device schedule, the electronic device 101 may identify the entire schedule of the target user (e.g., “Ted”) and the optimized condition (e.g., low-electric charge section) related to the device operation to thereby suggest the identified information as an option. For example, as shown in an example of a screen 2007, information related to a recommendation (e.g., recommend washing schedule by reflecting your schedule and high energy-efficient time) and related options (e.g., a first option {e.g. air conditioner mode 4:00 to 5:00 PM}, a second option (e.g., another time recommendation), a third option (e.g., direct selection)) may be provided.”].
Regarding claim 26, Jung teaches the method of claim 15, wherein displaying the first interface comprises displaying the first interface based on time conflicts among the plurality of schedules [see at least Fig. 14 and [0229-0230, 0234] schedule conflict can be singular or multiple depending on schedules and prompting information is a displayed schedule “In operation 1305, the processor 120 may search for another user who can control the device at a task time when device control by the user (e.g., user A) is impossible. According to an embodiment, as illustrated in element 1420 of FIG. 14, schedules of user A, user B, user C, and user D exist in the calendar application, and the device schedule and the user schedule conflict of the user A conflict with each other. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may analyze schedule information of the other users (e.g., user B, user C, and user D) registered in the calendar application, and may analyze each schedule state (or current status) of the other users based on the schedule information. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may search for another user (or a user who does not have a schedule conflict) that can control the device from the schedules and the device schedules of the other users (e.g., a time related to device control). According to an embodiment, in element 1420, the user B and the user D may be the user who can control device.”;
[0200] a schedule item can include an unlimited number of details “According to an embodiment, in FIG. 7, an example in which a newly input schedule (e.g., a new schedule) is classified into, for example, three schedule types (e.g., a first schedule type, a second schedule type, and a third schedule type), and a device-related configuration, a location-related configuration, or a task-related configuration is identified in schedule information has been described, but the disclosure is not limited thereto. For example, the schedule information may include a combination of at least two of the device-related configuration, the location-related configuration, or the task-related configuration, and the processor 120 may generate each identification tag and associated identification tag (or integrated identification tag) according to the schedule type based on the combination of the at least two of the first schedule type, the second schedule type, or the third schedule type.”;
Fig. 8b and 9 and [0189, 0197, 0203] display a first schedule including “location information (e.g., 250 West Kenwood Ave. Calmness Studio)”, title, and date].
Regarding claim 27, Jung teaches the method of claim 26, wherein before displaying the first interface, the method further comprises
receiving the information of the first schedule from another device;
adjusting the occurrence time of the first schedule responsive to existence of overlaps with occurrence times of established schedules to be executed, wherein the established schedules to be executed exclude expired schedules; and
determining the plurality of schedules that overlap with the occurrence time of the first schedule [as noted by the 112 rejection the adjusting limitation is unclear and is interpreted as whether the occurrence time of the first schedule overlaps with occurrence times of established schedules to be executed, wherein the established schedules to be executed exclude expired schedules,
then see at least Fig. 6 and 14 and [0179, 0234] schedule conflict can be singular or multiple depending on schedules and in response a change can be made and this process can continue to different users until a new user to address the issue is found thus the process can start with any user “In operation 1305, the processor 120 may search for another user who can control the device at a task time when device control by the user (e.g., user A) is impossible. According to an embodiment, as illustrated in element 1420 of FIG. 14, schedules of user A, user B, user C, and user D exist in the calendar application, and the device schedule and the user schedule conflict of the user A conflict with each other. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may analyze schedule information of the other users (e.g., user B, user C, and user D) registered in the calendar application, and may analyze each schedule state (or current status) of the other users based on the schedule information. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may search for another user (or a user who does not have a schedule conflict) that can control the device from the schedules and the device schedules of the other users (e.g., a time related to device control). According to an embodiment, in element 1420, the user B and the user D may be the user who can control device.” and “According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may superimpose (or overlay) and display the recommendation information on the at least a portion of the user interface through a popup based on a popup window. … According to an embodiment, the recommendation information may include at least one piece of information related to information suggesting to change according to the change option of the operation (or mode) of the device, information suggesting to request the control of the device from appropriate another user, or information suggesting to proceed as is without a change according to the recommendation information.”;
Fig. 18 and [0297-0298, 0300-0301] the change made can be viewed by another user “Referring to FIG. 18, the electronic device 101 may transmit request information related to the device schedule to a target electronic device (e.g., the electronic device of the second user (“Ted”)) based on a user input of selecting the third option 1760 of the user. …
According to an embodiment, the target electronic device may provide state view related to the device schedule, or accept or reject the device schedule based on the user input of the second user (“Ted”). According to an embodiment, the target electronic device may transmit a response related to acceptance or rejection to the electronic device 101 (e.g., the external server 530 according to an embodiment) based on the user input. According to an embodiment, FIG. 18 illustrates an example in which the second user (“Ted”) accepts the device schedule. …
According to an embodiment, as shown in an example of a screen 1803, the electronic device 101 may generate the device schedule in a region (e.g., a region 1850) corresponding to the configured device schedule among device schedule regions in the calendar application. …
According to an embodiment, as in the region 1850 related to the device schedule in FIG. 18, the device schedule may be generated as “PM 4:00 to PM 5:20” (e.g., time related to the device schedule input by the first user (“Susan”)) and may be provided by a corresponding color indicating that the device operation-related user is the second user (“Ted”).”].
Regarding claim 30, Jung teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the first interface further comprises a schedule list of the plurality of schedules, second labels are respectively displayed in display regions corresponding to the plurality of schedules, and each second label of the second labels comprises text content indicating a schedule conflict [see at least Fig. 8b and 9 and [0189, 0197, 0203] display a first schedule including “location information (e.g., 250 West Kenwood Ave. Calmness Studio)”, title, and date;
[0200] a schedule item can include an unlimited number of details “According to an embodiment, in FIG. 7, an example in which a newly input schedule (e.g., a new schedule) is classified into, for example, three schedule types (e.g., a first schedule type, a second schedule type, and a third schedule type), and a device-related configuration, a location-related configuration, or a task-related configuration is identified in schedule information has been described, but the disclosure is not limited thereto. For example, the schedule information may include a combination of at least two of the device-related configuration, the location-related configuration, or the task-related configuration, and the processor 120 may generate each identification tag and associated identification tag (or integrated identification tag) according to the schedule type based on the combination of the at least two of the first schedule type, the second schedule type, or the third schedule type.”;
Fig. 14 and [0234] schedule conflict can be singular or multiple depending on schedules “In operation 1305, the processor 120 may search for another user who can control the device at a task time when device control by the user (e.g., user A) is impossible. According to an embodiment, as illustrated in element 1420 of FIG. 14, schedules of user A, user B, user C, and user D exist in the calendar application, and the device schedule and the user schedule conflict of the user A conflict with each other. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may analyze schedule information of the other users (e.g., user B, user C, and user D) registered in the calendar application, and may analyze each schedule state (or current status) of the other users based on the schedule information. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may search for another user (or a user who does not have a schedule conflict) that can control the device from the schedules and the device schedules of the other users (e.g., a time related to device control). According to an embodiment, in element 1420, the user B and the user D may be the user who can control device.”;
Fig. 23-25 and [0330-0332] show scheduled items as calendar or list view;
[0079] combine parts of the invention].
Regarding claim 31, Jung teaches the method of claim 30, wherein the plurality of schedules comprises a third schedule, wherein the method further comprises modifying an occurrence time of the third schedule, wherein the modified occurrence time of the third schedule does not overlap with the occurrence time of established schedules to be executed, and wherein after modifying, via the first interface, the occurrence time of the third schedule, a display region corresponding to the third schedule does not comprise the second label [as noted in the 112 rejection, the claim is unclear and is interpreted as wherein the plurality of schedules comprises a third schedule, wherein the method further comprises modifying an occurrence time of the third schedule, wherein the modified occurrence time of the third schedule does not overlap with the occurrence time of established schedules to be executed, and wherein after modifying the occurrence time of the third schedule a display region does not comprise the second label,
then see at least Fig. 17 and [0289] “According to an embodiment, when there is the section where the time information between the first schedule and the second schedule at least partially overlap each other (e.g., when a conflict occurs), in operation 1715, the device 1700 may output an option 1780 capable of changing the operation of the device related to the first schedule. For example, the device 1700 may output at least one option 1780 such as “There is a conflict with OOO schedule in currently set mode 5. Do you want to switch to mode 2 where washing is completed more quickly? Otherwise, do you want to request drying laundry from Family A?”.”;
Fig. 6 and 14 and [0179, 0234] schedule conflict can be singular or multiple depending on schedules and in response a change can be made “In operation 1305, the processor 120 may search for another user who can control the device at a task time when device control by the user (e.g., user A) is impossible. According to an embodiment, as illustrated in element 1420 of FIG. 14, schedules of user A, user B, user C, and user D exist in the calendar application, and the device schedule and the user schedule conflict of the user A conflict with each other. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may analyze schedule information of the other users (e.g., user B, user C, and user D) registered in the calendar application, and may analyze each schedule state (or current status) of the other users based on the schedule information. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may search for another user (or a user who does not have a schedule conflict) that can control the device from the schedules and the device schedules of the other users (e.g., a time related to device control). According to an embodiment, in element 1420, the user B and the user D may be the user who can control device.” and “According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may superimpose (or overlay) and display the recommendation information on the at least a portion of the user interface through a popup based on a popup window. … According to an embodiment, the recommendation information may include at least one piece of information related to information suggesting to change according to the change option of the operation (or mode) of the device, information suggesting to request the control of the device from appropriate another user, or information suggesting to proceed as is without a change according to the recommendation information.”;
Fig. 18 and [0297-0298, 0300-0301] the change made can be viewed by another user “Referring to FIG. 18, the electronic device 101 may transmit request information related to the device schedule to a target electronic device (e.g., the electronic device of the second user (“Ted”)) based on a user input of selecting the third option 1760 of the user. …
According to an embodiment, the target electronic device may provide state view related to the device schedule, or accept or reject the device schedule based on the user input of the second user (“Ted”). According to an embodiment, the target electronic device may transmit a response related to acceptance or rejection to the electronic device 101 (e.g., the external server 530 according to an embodiment) based on the user input. According to an embodiment, FIG. 18 illustrates an example in which the second user (“Ted”) accepts the device schedule. …
According to an embodiment, as shown in an example of a screen 1803, the electronic device 101 may generate the device schedule in a region (e.g., a region 1850) corresponding to the configured device schedule among device schedule regions in the calendar application. …
According to an embodiment, as in the region 1850 related to the device schedule in FIG. 18, the device schedule may be generated as “PM 4:00 to PM 5:20” (e.g., time related to the device schedule input by the first user (“Susan”)) and may be provided by a corresponding color indicating that the device operation-related user is the second user (“Ted”).”].
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
It has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of applicant’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
Claims 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2020/0258029 A1) in view of Mountain (US 2016/0029085 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Jung teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the second processing interface is a pop- up window, wherein the occurrence time of the first schedule, the event name of the first schedule, the location information of the first schedule, and the inviter of the first schedule are displayed in a first area of the pop-up window, wherein the data are displayed in a second area of the pop-up window, and wherein the second area is below the first area [see at least Fig. 14 and [0179, 0234, 0239] schedule conflict can be singular or multiple depending on schedules and prompting information is a displayed schedule “In operation 1305, the processor 120 may search for another user who can control the device at a task time when device control by the user (e.g., user A) is impossible. According to an embodiment, as illustrated in element 1420 of FIG. 14, schedules of user A, user B, user C, and user D exist in the calendar application, and the device schedule and the user schedule conflict of the user A conflict with each other. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may analyze schedule information of the other users (e.g., user B, user C, and user D) registered in the calendar application, and may analyze each schedule state (or current status) of the other users based on the schedule information. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may search for another user (or a user who does not have a schedule conflict) that can control the device from the schedules and the device schedules of the other users (e.g., a time related to device control). According to an embodiment, in element 1420, the user B and the user D may be the user who can control device. …
In operation 1313, the processor 120 may provide recommendation information based on the recommended option to the user. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may display, on a display (e.g., the display device 160 in FIG. 1), recommendation information for requesting a corresponding task from the user B.”;
Fig. 8b, 9, and 18 and [0200;0189, 0197, 0203] recommendation information of [0239] is interpreted as schedule information, where as noted in a) ([0200]) a schedule item can include an unlimited number of details, b) (Fig. 8b and 9 and [0200;0189, 0197, 0203]) display a first schedule including “location information (e.g., 250 West Kenwood Ave. Calmness Studio)”, title, and date, and c) (Fig. 18 and [0279]) “According to an embodiment, as to the request information, as shown in the example of the screen 1801, the device schedule (e.g., washing schedule) may be requested from the first user (“Susan”),”;
Fig. 16 and [0259] recommendation may not involve another user “According to an embodiment, the external server 530 may identify an operation (or mode) in which the user can control the device (e.g., can avoid a conflict with the user schedule) based on the schedule information, or may identify other users who can perform device-related control based on the schedule information for each of the other users registered in the calendar application.”;
Fig. 16 and [0262-0263, 0266-0267] “In operation 1621, the electronic device 101 may display the recommendation information on a display (e.g., the display device 160 of FIG. 1 and the display 240 of FIG. 2). According to an embodiment, the electronic device 101 may receive the recommendation information from the external server 201 through the communication module 190 and may superimpose (or overlay) the received recommendation information on at least a portion of the user interface and may display the same through superimposition or pop-up.
In operation 1623, the electronic device 101 may receive a user input (hereinafter, referred to as a “second user input”) for confirming the recommendation information. According to an embodiment, the electronic device 101 may identify whether to apply the recommendation information in response to the second user input. For example, the electronic device 101 may identify whether the second user input accepts (or applies) or cancels a change in the device schedule according to the recommendation information. According to an embodiment, it is assumed that the second user input is an input of accepting (or applying) the change in the device schedule. …
In operation 1629, the external server 530 may perform scheduling. According to an embodiment, the external server 530 may monitor an alarm and/or a control time point associated with each schedule through scheduling of the schedules registered in the calendar application.
In operation 1631, the external server 530 may perform a corresponding function on the schedule. According to an embodiment, the external server 530 may perform a function related to the schedule at an alarm and/or a control time point related to the specific schedule, based on the result of the scheduling (or the result of monitoring).”].
Jung doesn’t/don’t explicitly teach but Mountain discloses
wherein the second processing interface is a pop-up window, wherein first data are displayed in a first area of the pop -up window, wherein the event names of the plurality of schedules are displayed in a second area of the pop-up window, and wherein the second area is below the first area [see at least Fig. 7 and [0127-0130] scheduling conflicts presented in a pop up window, where the information is presented in the following order of event, conflicting events, and a third section “Any suitable form of the GUI 702 may be used. … The GUI 702 can be presented at various times to the user and/or when one or more predefined events occur. …
In some embodiments, the user may be notified of identified schedule conflicts with identified media content events that may be of interest to the user. For example, the GUI 702 may be automatically presented to the user at some predefined time that is in advance of the scheduled appointment and/or at the time of the scheduled appointment. Alternatively, an EPG 148 (FIG. 1) with an associated scheduled appointment region 150 may be presented to the user at some predefined time that is in advance of the scheduled appointment and/or at the time of the scheduled appointment. Or, a reminder icon, such as the selectable prompt or graphical icon 154 on the display 136, or another suitable indicator such as a pop up window or the like, may be presented to the user at the predefined time in advance of the scheduled appointment and/or at the time of the scheduled appointment.
Although similar to conventional reminders, a difference is that the above-described indications of a conflict between one or more media content events and a scheduled appointment is that the appointment information is received from an electronic calendar application residing in one or more of the electronic devices 104. Also, the above-described appointment schedule conflict indications identify a plurality of conflicting media content events that have been identified from a larger number of conflicting media content events based on media content events that are identified in the user's favorites list, that are identified during the learning process, that are identified in a media content event recommendation list, and/or that are identified as related or similar media content events.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jung with Mountain to include the limitation(s) above as disclosed by Mountain. Doing so would further define Jung’s [0003-0006] recommendation message to explicitly provide additional options to users thus furthering Jung’s goal of improvement of managing a user’s schedule [see at least Mountain [0003-0007, 0127-0130] ].
Furthermore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior arts of a) Jung and b) Mountain and c) one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 21, modified Jung teaches the method of claim 20,
and Jung teaches wherein the pop-up window further comprises a plurality of candidate items for processing the first schedule, and wherein the plurality of candidate items is displayed below the event names of the plurality of schedules [see at least Fig. 14 and [0179, 0234, 0239] schedule conflict can be singular or multiple depending on schedules and prompting information is a displayed schedule “In operation 1305, the processor 120 may search for another user who can control the device at a task time when device control by the user (e.g., user A) is impossible. According to an embodiment, as illustrated in element 1420 of FIG. 14, schedules of user A, user B, user C, and user D exist in the calendar application, and the device schedule and the user schedule conflict of the user A conflict with each other. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may analyze schedule information of the other users (e.g., user B, user C, and user D) registered in the calendar application, and may analyze each schedule state (or current status) of the other users based on the schedule information. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may search for another user (or a user who does not have a schedule conflict) that can control the device from the schedules and the device schedules of the other users (e.g., a time related to device control). According to an embodiment, in element 1420, the user B and the user D may be the user who can control device. …
In operation 1313, the processor 120 may provide recommendation information based on the recommended option to the user. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may display, on a display (e.g., the display device 160 in FIG. 1), recommendation information for requesting a corresponding task from the user B.”;
Fig. 18 and [0297] pop up window includes processing of first schedule (appointment/meeting/etc) “According to an embodiment, as to the request information, as shown in the example of the screen 1801, the device schedule (e.g., washing schedule) may be requested from the first user (“Susan”), and schedule information (e.g., start time and end time) according to the device schedule and state information (e.g., state view, acceptance, and rejection) related to the device schedule may be provided.”].
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2020/0258029 A1) in view of Dutta et al. (US 2014/0365107 A1).
Regarding claim 28, Jung teaches the method of claim 15, wherein displaying the first interface comprises displaying the first interface based on conflicts among the plurality of schedules [see at least [0200] a schedule item can include an unlimited number of details “According to an embodiment, in FIG. 7, an example in which a newly input schedule (e.g., a new schedule) is classified into, for example, three schedule types (e.g., a first schedule type, a second schedule type, and a third schedule type), and a device-related configuration, a location-related configuration, or a task-related configuration is identified in schedule information has been described, but the disclosure is not limited thereto. For example, the schedule information may include a combination of at least two of the device-related configuration, the location-related configuration, or the task-related configuration, and the processor 120 may generate each identification tag and associated identification tag (or integrated identification tag) according to the schedule type based on the combination of the at least two of the first schedule type, the second schedule type, or the third schedule type.”;
Fig. 8b and 9 and [0189, 0197, 0203] display a first schedule including “location information (e.g., 250 West Kenwood Ave. Calmness Studio)”, title, and date;
Fig. 14 and [0234] schedule conflict can be singular or multiple depending on schedules “In operation 1305, the processor 120 may search for another user who can control the device at a task time when device control by the user (e.g., user A) is impossible. According to an embodiment, as illustrated in element 1420 of FIG. 14, schedules of user A, user B, user C, and user D exist in the calendar application, and the device schedule and the user schedule conflict of the user A conflict with each other. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may analyze schedule information of the other users (e.g., user B, user C, and user D) registered in the calendar application, and may analyze each schedule state (or current status) of the other users based on the schedule information. According to an embodiment, the processor 120 may search for another user (or a user who does not have a schedule conflict) that can control the device from the schedules and the device schedules of the other users (e.g., a time related to device control). According to an embodiment, in element 1420, the user B and the user D may be the user who can control device.”].
Jung doesn’t/don’t explicitly teach but Dutta discloses
displaying the data based on location conflicts among the plurality of schedules [see at least [0146-0147] location conflicts for a schedule such as schedule conflicts arise if travel time is insufficient between the end of a first meeting at a first location to reach a second meeting at a second location “The process then determines (at 2540) whether the travel time increases significantly over a previously calculated travel time. In some embodiments, an increased travel time is significant when the new travel time interferes with neighboring appointments.” Thus a person skilled in the art would immediately recognize that this teaching in the context of updating a schedule equally applies to any schedule at any time;
[0047] “In some embodiments, the travel time item blocks off time in a user's schedule, allowing a user of the application to see where new appointments may conflict with the time required to travel to an existing appointment. In some embodiments, the travel time item indicates to other users that the particular user is busy during the travel time, when the particular user's calendar is made available to other users in a calendaring system. When other users view the particular user's calendar to schedule appointments or to check availability, the particular user will be shown as unavailable during a travel time to or from an appointment, because of the travel time item. Like an appointment item, the travel time item in some embodiments can block other appointments on the calendar or it can be shown to collide with appointment and travel time items that overlap with it.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jung with Dutta to include the limitation(s) above as disclosed by Dutta. Doing so would further define Jung’s [0003-0006] recommendation message to explicitly provide additional options to users thus furthering Jung’s goal of improvement of managing a user’s schedule [see at least Dutta [0001-0005] ].
Furthermore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior arts of a) Jung and b) Dutta and c) one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2020/0258029 A1) in view of Tian (US 2013/0174071 A1).
Regarding claim 29, Jung teaches the method of claim 15, further comprising:
displaying a second interface, wherein the second interface is a day view interface, the second interface comprises the event name of the first schedule and the event name of the second schedule, and the second schedule conflicts with the first schedule; and
modifying the second schedule based on and in response to a operation on the second schedule [see at least Fig. 14 and [0232] “For example, referring to FIG. 14, as illustrated in element 1410, a time associated with a schedule “washing” according to the device schedule of a user (e.g., user A) is “4:00 to 6:30” and a time associated with a schedule “book club” according to the user schedule of the user (e.g., user A) is “5:10”. Here, the schedule “washing” and the schedule “book club” may conflict with each other starting from “5:10”. According to an embodiment, when a conflict occurs, the processor 120 may separate and phase the respective tasks according to the device schedule. For example, referring to FIG. 14, as illustrated in element 1420, a schedule good for washing of “4:00 to 6:30” may be phased (or separated) into, for example, a first task (e.g., washer: during washing), a second task (e.g., washer: laundry pickup), and a third task (e.g., drying machine: standard drying).”;
Fig. 18 and [0297-0298, 0300-0301] the change made can be viewed by another user “Referring to FIG. 18, the electronic device 101 may transmit request information related to the device schedule to a target electronic device (e.g., the electronic device of the second user (“Ted”)) based on a user input of selecting the third option 1760 of the user. …
According to an embodiment, the target electronic device may provide state view related to the device schedule, or accept or reject the device schedule based on the user input of the second user (“Ted”). According to an embodiment, the target electronic device may transmit a response related to acceptance or rejection to the electronic device 101 (e.g., the external server 530 according to an embodiment) based on the user input. According to an embodiment, FIG. 18 illustrates an example in which the second user (“Ted”) accepts the device schedule. …
According to an embodiment, as shown in an example of a screen 1803, the electronic device 101 may generate the device schedule in a region (e.g., a region 1850) corresponding to the configured device schedule among device schedule regions in the calendar application. …
According to an embodiment, as in the region 1850 related to the device schedule in FIG. 18, the device schedule may be generated as “PM 4:00 to PM 5:20” (e.g., time related to the device schedule input by the first user (“Susan”)) and may be provided by a corresponding color indicating that the device operation-related user is the second user (“Ted”).”].
Jung doesn’t/don’t explicitly teach but Tian discloses
modifying an occurrence time of the second schedule based on a position of the second schedule after and in response to a dragging operation on the second schedule along a time axis [see at least [0063] “4. When the visual unit 310 is being dragged, if the user drags the visual unit 310 only in the X axis dimension 110, the visual unit 310 will only change its coordinate value on the X axis dimension. According to the position of the X axis dimensions 110, the server 410 may re-record the coordinate value of the visual unit 310. If the user drags the visual unit 310 only in the Y axis dimension 120, the visual unit 310 will only change its coordinate value on the Y axis dimension 120. The server 410 will calculate the current position of the visual unit 310 in the Y axis dimension 120. If the visual unit 310 is dragged at the same time both in the X axis dimension and the Y axis dimension, the server 410 will calculate the X axis dimension coordinate and the Y axis coordinate of the moved visual unit 310 at the same time, and store the calculated value.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jung with Tian to include the limitation(s) above as disclosed by Tian. Doing so would further define Jung’s [0003-0006] recommendation message to explicitly provide additional options to users thus furthering Jung’s goal of improvement of managing a user’s schedule [see at least Tian [0002-0005] ].
Furthermore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior arts of a) Jung and b) Tian and c) one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
When responding to the office action, any new claims and/or limitations should be accompanied by a reference as to where the new claims and/or limitations are supported in the original disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES WEBB whose telephone number is (313)446-6615. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10-3.
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, Jerry O’Connor can be reached on (571) 272-6787. 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.
/J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3624
/Jerry O'Connor/Supervisory Patent Examiner,Group Art Unit 3624