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 .
1. This communication is responsive to the Amendment filed 2/10/2026.
2. Claims 22-41 are pending in this application. Claims 22, 34 and 36 are independent claims. This action is made Final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
4. Claim(s) 22-41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian (US 2008/0163258) in view of Sohn et al (“Sohn” US 2017/0235435).
Regarding claim 22, Balasubramanian discloses a focus synchronization method, comprising:
displaying, by a second electronic device, a plurality of windows in a display interface of the second electronic device, with each of the plurality of windows displaying a user interface of an application, wherein a first window in the plurality of windows displays a first user interface of a first application, (see fig 5 where application 2 is shown overlapping application 1),
wherein a second window in the plurality of windows is displayed at the top layer of the display interface (see fig 5 where application 2 is shown overlapping application 1), the second window is a focus window and displays a user interface of a second application, and the second application is a focus application (see paragraph [0029]; e.g., ‘When multiple applications are running,…one application is considered ‘in-focus’ and the others are considered ‘out-of-focus’”);
receiving, by the second electronic device, focus switching data that corresponds to a focus switching event and indicates a third application as the focus application (see paragraph [0029]; e.g., When multiple applications are running,…one application is considered "in-focus" and the others are considered "out-of-focus"…Control widgets within windows may require a further click to focus them, to differentiate the different places input may go.…also see paragraph [0031]; e.g., “In the task bar a task button (control widget) is displayed for each running application. The task button includes a task button icon and a title. In-focus and out-of-focus applications may also appear in windows displayed on the desktop. The in-focus application is indicated by a highlighted task button and/or highlighted window associated with the in-focus application. A title-bar appears at the top of the window.”); and
setting, by the second electronic device, a third window displaying a user interface of the third application (see fig 8 where applications A, B and C are shown) as the focus window in accordance with the focus switching data such that the third window is displayed at the top layer of the display interface (see paragraph [0029]; e.g., When multiple applications are running,…one application is considered "in-focus" and the others are considered "out-of-focus"…Control widgets within windows may require a further click to focus them, to differentiate the different places input may go.…also see paragraph [0031]; e.g., “In the task bar a task button (control widget) is displayed for each running application. The task button includes a task button icon and a title. In-focus and out-of-focus applications may also appear in windows displayed on the desktop. The in-focus application is indicated by a highlighted task button and/or highlighted window associated with the in-focus application. A title-bar appears at the top of the window.”).
Balasubramanian does not expressly disclose displaying a user interface of an application installed and run on a first electronic device in communication with the second electronic device; and the first user interface includes a same user interface element as a second user interface of the first application that is displayed on the first electronic device; and the second application is a focus application of the first electronic device; and switching focus on the first electronic device.
However, Sohn discloses displaying a user interface of an application installed and run on a first electronic device in communication with the second electronic device; and the first user interface includes a same user interface element as a second user interface of the first application that is displayed on the first electronic device; and the second application is a focus application of the first electronic device; and switching focus on the first electronic device (paragraph [0126]; e.g., “when the application whose content is displayed on the first electronic device 400 is changed, the processor 510 may change the application content displayed in one region of the screen and the application information displayed in the remaining region of the screen…Before application switching, the second electronic device 500 may display a mirrored screen image”… see figs 4, 6A and 13B; also see paragraphs [0095], [0105], [0117], [0118], [0164] and [0215]; e.g., “the processor 510 of the second electronic device 500 may display at least one application window in the remaining region of the screen excluding the region assigned for displaying a mirrored screen image. That is, the second electronic device 500 may display at least one application window in the remaining region of the screen excluding the region assigned to a window for displaying application data received from an application running on the first electronic device 400”…see paragraphs [0139]-[0140]; e.g., “from an external device (e.g. second electronic device 500) having detected an input event on an application window displayed in the remaining region of the screen, the processor 410 may receive a request signal for displaying an application window corresponding to the input event on the screen of the first electronic device 400”). It would have been obvious to an artisan before the effective filing date of the present invention to include Sohn’s teachings in Balasubramanian’s user interface in an effort to provide a more user-friendly interface that allows user to easily display and interact with content displayed on a first electronic device on a second electronic device (see paragraphs [0004] and [0007]).
Regarding claim 23, Sohn discloses when the focus application is the second application: detecting, by the second electronic device, a first user input; and updating, by the second electronic device, the user interface of the second application (see paragraph [0214]; e.g., “The second electronic device 500 may receive an input signal for selecting an application for a window 1303 displayed in a section of the remaining region. Upon reception of the input signal, the second electronic device 500 may display the selected application for the window 1303 in the full-screen format.”); and
when the focus application is the third application: detecting, by the second electronic device, a second user input; and updating, by the second electronic device, the user interface of the third application (see paragraph [0214]; e.g., “The second electronic device 500 may receive an input signal for selecting an application for a window 1303 displayed in a section of the remaining region. Upon reception of the input signal, the second electronic device 500 may display the selected application for the window 1303 in the full-screen format.”).
Regarding claim 24, Sohn discloses after the first switch of the focus application from the second application to the third application, the method further comprising:
setting, by the second electronic device, the first window as the focus window in response to a second switch of the focus application from the third application to the first application in the first electronic device (see paragraph [0126]);
detecting, by the second electronic device, a third user input; updating, by the second electronic device, the first user interface of the first application; and updating, by the first electronic device, the second user interface of the first application (see paragraphs [0139]-[0140]).
Regarding claim 25, Sohn discloses after the detecting the first user input, and before the updating the user interface of the second application, the method further comprising: sending, by the second electronic device to the first electronic device, a first data packet generated based on the first user input; processing, by the first electronic device, data of the second application based on the first data packet, to obtain first display data of the second application; and sending, by the first electronic device, the first display data to the second electronic device (see figs 6E and 6F; also see paragraphs [0169]-[0170]).
Regarding claim 26, Sohn discloses wherein the updating, by the second electronic device, the user interface of the second application comprises: updating, by the second electronic device, the user interface of the second application from a third user interface to a fourth user interface based on the first display data, wherein the third user interface is different from the fourth user interface (see figs 6E and 6F; also see paragraphs [0169]-[0170]; e.g., “when a function of the application window associated with the first electronic device 400 is selected by using the pointer of the external input unit 700 interworking with the second electronic device 500, the second electronic device 500 may send corresponding coordinate values to the first electronic device 400. Then, the first electronic device 400 may perform a requested operation on the basis of the received information”).
Regarding claim 27, Sohn discloses after the detecting the second user input, and before the updating the user interface of the third application, the method further comprising: sending, by the second electronic device to the first electronic device, a second data packet generated based on the second user input; processing, by the first electronic device, data of the third application based on the second data packet, to obtain second display data of the third application; and sending, by the first electronic device, the second display data to the second electronic device (see figs 6E and 6F; also see paragraphs [0169]-[0170]).
Regarding claim 28, Sohn discloses wherein the updating, by the second electronic device, the user interface of the third application comprises: updating, by the second electronic device, the user interface of the third application from a fifth user interface to a sixth user interface based on the second display data, wherein the fifth user interface is different from the sixth user interface (see figs 6E and 6F; also see paragraphs [0169]-[0170]).
Regarding claim 29, Sohn discloses wherein the first user input is the same as the second user input, and the first user input and the second user input are pressing operations on a first key (see figs 6A and 13B; also see paragraphs [0109], [0145], [0168]-[0170] and [0216]).
Regarding claim 30, Sohn discloses after the switching the focus application from the second application to the third application, and before the setting the third window as the focus window, the method further comprising: generating, by the first electronic device, the first focus switching data in accordance with information of the third application detected to be the focus application in the focus switching event; and sending, by the first electronic device, first focus switching data to the second electronic device, wherein the first focus switching data is generated by the first electronic device in response to the first focus switching event (see paragraph [0126]; e.g., “when the application whose content is displayed on the first electronic device 400 is changed, the processor 510 may change the application content displayed in one region of the screen and the application information displayed in the remaining region of the screen…Before application switching, the second electronic device 500 may display a mirrored screen image”).
Regarding claim 31, Sohn discloses wherein the first electronic device stores a reference status identifier and a reference identity, and after the switching of the focus application from the second application to the third application, and before the sending the first focus switching data to the second electronic device, the method further comprises: if the reference status identifier is a first status identifier and a first identity of the third application is different from the reference identity, updating the reference status identifier to a second status identifier; or if the reference status identifier is a second status identifier, generating the first focus switching data based on the first identity, wherein if the reference status identifier is the first status identifier, it indicates that before the first electronic device switches the focus application to the third application, the first electronic device sets the second application as the focus application based on third focus switching data sent by the second electronic device; and if the reference status identifier is the second status identifier, it indicates that before the first electronic device switches the focus application to the third application, the first electronic device sets the second application as the focus application based on a third focus switching event detected by the first electronic device (see paragraph [0126]; e.g., “when the application whose content is displayed on the first electronic device 400 is changed, the processor 510 may change the application content displayed in one region of the screen and the application information displayed in the remaining region of the screen…Before application switching, the second electronic device 500 may display a mirrored screen image”).
Regarding claim 32, Sohn discloses after the second electronic device sets the second window as the focus window, and before the switching of the focus application from the second application to the third application, the method further comprising: sending, by the second electronic device, second focus switching data to the first electronic device, wherein the second focus switching data is generated by the second electronic device in response to the first focus switching event (see paragraphs [0126] and [0139]-[0140]; e.g., “display an application window corresponding to the input event on the screen of the first electronic device 400.”).
Regarding claim 33, Sohn discloses wherein the first electronic device stores a reference status identifier and a reference identity, and after the switching the focus application from the second application to the third application, the method further comprises: updating the reference status identifier to a first status identifier; and updating the reference identity to an identity of the third application, wherein if the reference status identifier is the first status identifier, it indicates that the focus application is set by the first electronic device based on fourth focus switching data sent by the second electronic device; and if the reference status identifier is a second status identifier, it indicates that the focus application is set by the first electronic device based on a fourth focus switching event detected by the first electronic device (see paragraph [0126]; e.g., “when the application whose content is displayed on the first electronic device 400 is changed, the processor 510 may change the application content displayed in one region of the screen and the application information displayed in the remaining region of the screen…Before application switching, the second electronic device 500 may display a mirrored screen image”).
Claim 34 is similar in scope to claim 22 and is therefore rejected under similar rationale. In addition, Balasubramanian teaches a window with focus (e.g., a second window or a third window) is displayed at a top layer of the display interface with the tile bar of the focused window being in highlighted state (see paragraph [0029]; e.g., When multiple applications are running,…one application is considered "in-focus" and the others are considered "out-of-focus"…also see paragraph [0031]; e.g., “The in-focus application is indicated by a highlighted task button and/or highlighted window associated with the in-focus application. A title-bar appears at the top of the window.”).
Claims 35 and 36 are similar in scope to claims 23 and 22, respectively, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 37, Balasubramanian discloses wherein when the second window is displayed at the top layer of the display interface and is the focus window, a title bar of the second window is in a highlighted state; and when the third window is displayed at the top layer of the display interface and is the focus window, a title bar of the third window is in the highlighted state (see paragraph [0029]; e.g., When multiple applications are running,…one application is considered "in-focus" and the others are considered "out-of-focus"…also see paragraph [0031]; e.g., “In-focus and out-of-focus applications may also appear in windows displayed on the desktop. The in-focus application is indicated by a highlighted task button and/or highlighted window associated with the in-focus application. A title-bar appears at the top of the window.”).
Claim 38 is similar in scope to claim 37 and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 39 is similar in scope to claim 37 and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 40, Balasubramanian discloses wherein the focus switching data comprises an identity of the third application as the focus application and a reference status identifier (inherent feature).
Regarding claim 41, Balasubramanian discloses wherein the reference status identifier is an identity of a focus application indicated by a last sent focus switching data corresponding to a previous focus switching event (inherent feature).
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant's arguments filed 2/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments concerning Balasubramanian failing to disclose “receiving, by the second electronic device, focus switching data that corresponds to a focus switching event and indicates a third application as the focus application” the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As noted by Applicant in the arguments, Balasubramanian discloses focus switching. In addition, the Examiner notes that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As noted in the previous office action, Balasubramanian does not expressly disclose the method is performed on the first electronic device. Sohn was relied upon for teaching mirroring content displayed in a first device with content displayed in a second device, such that switching an application window displayed in the first device switches a corresponding application window displayed in the second device.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the Examiner contends that it would have been obvious to an artisan before the effective filing date of the present invention to include Sohn’s teachings in Balasubramanian’s user interface in an effort to provide a more user-friendly interface that allows user to easily display and interact with content displayed on a first electronic device on a second electronic device (see paragraphs [0004] and [0007]).
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Malmstrom (US 2009/0172556); e.g., when a window 80 is activated or selected for the focus of control, the title bar 150 may be highlighted (see paragraph [0013]).
7. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASHAWN N TILLERY whose telephone number is (571)272-6480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00a - 5:30p.
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, William L Bashore can be reached on (571) 272-4088. 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.
/RASHAWN N TILLERY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights