DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is in responsive to communication(s):
Application filed on 6/20/2023 with effective filing date of 3/3/2022 based on foreign application CN202210209969.4 and PCT application PCT/CN2022/140359.
The status of the claims is summarized as below:
Claims 1-19 are pending.
Claims 1, 18, and 19 are independent claims.
Examiner’s Remarks
The examiner notes all emphasis of recited claims and specification are added by the examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) filed on 7/19/2023, 6/14/2024, 11/7/2024, 12/4/2024, 6/11/2025 comply/complies with the provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 1.97, 1.98, and MPEP § 609, and therefore has/have been placed in the application file. The information referred to therein has/have been considered as to the merits.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1, 18, 19 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Per claim 1, claim 1 recites a method that “… detecting that the electronic device meets a second preset condition in a case that the first floating ball is displayed on an interface of the electronic device …”. The examiner notes the phrase “in a case” denote conditional language subject the associated limitation as contingent limitation. The step(s) included in the contingent limitation are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent may or may not be met. MPEP 2111.04(II). The examiner suggests to reword the limitation if the recited step(s) is/are not intended to be optional in the method.
Claims 18 and 19 recite similar limitations and are likewise objected.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 19 is directed to “a computer-readable storage medium". In the specification:
[0316] … The computer-readable storage medium may be any usable medium accessible by a computer, or a data storage device, such as a server or a data center, integrating one or more usable media. The usable medium may be a magnetic medium (for example, a soft disk, a hard disk, or a magnetic tape), an optical medium (for example, a DVD), a semiconductor medium (for example, an SSD), or the like.
A computer-readable storage medium including magnetic or optical medium appears to encompass mechanism for transmitting information, which covers carrier waves. A carrier wave is a transitory form of signal transmission that does not belong to one of the statutory categories of invention. Therefore, claim 19 is directed to subject matter that is ineligible for patent protection.
It is suggested that claim 19 be amended to recite “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium”.
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.
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 of this title, 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 9, 13-15, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US Pub 20220318036, from IDS, hereinafter Zhang), in view of Zhu et al. (US Pub 20190230215, hereinafter Zhu).
Per claim 1, Zhang teaches:
A multitasking interaction method, applicable to an electronic device, the method comprising: (abstract: method of interface for displaying two applications in full screen and floating window mode);
detecting that the electronic device meets a first preset condition, and displaying a first floating ball ([0194-0195] when a new message from WeChat is received (first preset condition), a prompt information (a first floating ball) is displayed as shown in Fig. 3A; the examiner notes floating ball is interpreted as any floating prompt, window or image icon on a screen representing a notification or an application or an option, etc., as the term is not explicitly defined in the specification), wherein an identifier of a first application and first information are displayed in the first floating ball (Fig. 3A shows “WeChat” and the application icon (identifier of first application) on top of the prompt information and the content of the message as well as sender avatar of a received message (first information) in the body of the prompt information); and … .
While Zhang teaches different states of floating ball/floating window such as Fig. 3A, 3B, and 3C, and three or more interfaces being displayed on the screen with two in floating states (Fig. 11A-11E, 12A-12D, 13A-13D), Zhang does not explicitly teach the same first application floating ball being displayed while a second preset condition triggers display of second floating ball. However, Zhu teaches push notifications to mobile device under different conditions:
… detecting that the electronic device meets a second preset condition in a case that the first floating ball is displayed on an interface of the electronic device, and displaying a second floating ball while displaying the first floating ball on the interface of the electronic device ([0200] Fig. 4(b): while a previous notification (first floating ball) was displayed as shown in Fig. 4(b), another notification (second floating ball) from same or different application may come in, i.e. top of the screen shows a WeChat message about Roy sending a voice message (second present condition)), wherein an identifier of a second application and second information are displayed in the second floating ball. ([0200] Fig 4(b): the latest notification on top shows an application icon (identifier of a second application) and content of the notification (second information), where previous notifications may show same or different application icons).
Zhu and Zhang are analogous art because Zhu also teaches displaying floating notifications in different display styles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in art before the effective filing date, having the teachings of Zhu and Zhang before him/her, to modify the teachings of Zhang to include the teachings of Zhu so that notifications/floating balls can be alternatively displayed in a list style. One would be motivated to make the combination, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would provide an notification interface that is classified based on different services, thereby providing the users with an organized listing of notifications.
Per claim 2, Zhang-Zhu teach all the limitations of claim 1, and further teach:
wherein the second floating ball is displayed above the first floating ball. (Zhu Fig. 4(b) shows latest notification/floating ball is on top).
Per claim 9, Zhang-Zhu teach all the limitations of claim 1, but Zhang-Zhu do not explicitly teach the first information being notification of current time being within a flight check-in time, or notification of current location being within a range of an airport, or notification current location being within a range for a station, or translation prompt of a copied content being a different language of the system:
“wherein the first information is a check-in prompt for a flight booked by a user, and the first preset condition comprises that: a notification of the flight is acquired, and a current time of the electronic device is within a check-in time range of the flight; or
the first information is a boarding prompt for a flight booked by a user, and the first preset condition comprises that: a notification of the flight is acquired, a current time of the electronic device is within a waiting time range of the flight, and a current location of the electronic device is within a geographic range of a departure airport of the flight; or
the first information is a subway boarding prompt, and the first preset condition comprises that: a current location of the electronic device is within a geographic range of a subway station; or
the first information is a translation prompt, and the first preset condition comprises that: a copy operation is detected, and a language used for copied content is a language uncommonly used by a system.”
However, Zhu further teaches:
wherein the first information is a check-in prompt for a flight booked by a user, and the first preset condition comprises that: a notification of the flight is acquired, and a current time of the electronic device is within a check-in time range of the flight; or ([0198, 0202] Fig. 4(f) shows a notification is displayed when status of flight is change to “Can check in”, and a “Check in” action button is displayed in the notification).
the first information is a boarding prompt for a flight booked by a user, and the first preset condition comprises that: a notification of the flight is acquired, a current time of the electronic device is within a waiting time range of the flight, and a current location of the electronic device is within a geographic range of a departure airport of the flight; or
the first information is a subway boarding prompt, and the first preset condition comprises that: a current location of the electronic device is within a geographic range of a subway station; or
the first information is a translation prompt, and the first preset condition comprises that: a copy operation is detected, and a language used for copied content is a language uncommonly used by a system.
Zhu and Zhang-Zhu are analogous art because Zhu also teaches displaying notifications as floating window/prompt in a user interface. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in art before the effective filing date, having the teachings of Zhu and Zhang-Zhu before him/her, to modify the teachings of Zhang-Zhu to include the additional teachings of Zhu so that a floating notification window is displayed for various conditions such as flight check-in starts. One would be motivated to make the combination, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would provide the user with timely notifications from service provider such as airlines to notify users of status change such as check-in start time, enhancing user experiences.
Per claim 13, Zhang-Zhu teach all the limitations of claim 1, and further teach:
further comprising: detecting a second user operation on the first floating ball; and (Zhang [0195] Fig. 3B shows a user operation on the floating prompt in Fig. 3A displays a floating window with dialog between the user and the message sender);
displaying a first page in response to the second user operation, wherein third information is displayed on the first page, and the third information comprises the first information, or the third information is associated with the first information. (Zhang [0195] Fig. 3B shows a second interface as floating window (first page) in response to a user operation on the information prompt from Fig. 3A, where the dialog (third information) between the user and sender of the message is displayed, where the dialog is associated with the send message (first information) shown information prompt from Fig. 3A).
Per claim 14, Zhang-Zhu teach all the limitations of claim 13, and further teach:
wherein the first page further comprises the second floating ball, (Zhang [0403, 0406] Fig. 15A shows that when a message app/interface E in floating window mode enters into an input state, the interface E becomes the full screen application (first page) as shown in Fig. 15B, which comprises two floating balls representing interface C and D (second floating ball)) or further comprises the second floating ball in a thumbnail state (Zhang [0406] Fig. 15B shows interface C/D in thumbnail state), wherein the second floating ball in the thumbnail state comprises the identifier of the second application, and does not comprise the second information (Zhang [0406] Fig. 15B shows the thumbnail state for interface C/D comprises application icons, and does not include contents from interfaces C/D; also see Fig. 9D).
Per claim 15, Zhang-Zhu teach all the limitations of claim 14, and further teach:
wherein in a case that a graphic code is displayed on the first page, the graphic code does not overlap with the second floating ball; (Zhang [0310] Fig. 9B shows a QR code being displayed in the second interface in full screen mode, and the first interface in minimized state (second floating ball) does not overlap with the QR code) and the graphic code comprises a two-dimensional code and a bar code.(Zhang Fig. 9B shows a two dimensional QR code).
Per claim 18, claim 18 is a system claim comprising one or more processors (Zhang [0100] Fig. 1, processor 110), one or more memories (Zhang [0100] Fig.1, memory 120, 121), that executes the same method as claim 1, and is likewise rejected.
Per claim 19, claim 19 is a medium claim (Zhang [0100] Fig. 1 memories 120, 121) that includes limitations that are substantially the same as claim 1, and is likewise rejected.
Claim(s) 3-8, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, in view of Zhu, and Horvitz et al. (US Pub 20040098462, hereinafter Horvitz).
Per claim 3, Zhang-Zhu teach all the limitations of claim 1, and Zhang further teach a floating ball with at least two different state of floating window state (Fig. 3B), and minimized thumbnail state (Fig. 3C):
.. displaying the first floating ball in a thumbnail state, wherein the first floating ball in the thumbnail state comprises the identifier of the first application, and does not comprise the first information. (Zhang [0307, 0313] Fig. 9D shows a floating ball in a thumbnail state where the floating ball comprised of the identifier of the minimized application “Alipay”, and does not comprise of the information/QR code shown in a floating window state in Fig. 9A for the Alipay application; Also see Fig. 9B and associated paragraphs).
But Zhang does not explicitly teach a first duration to reduce the floating ball from a first state to a second thumbnail state without user interaction: “determining that no user operation on the first floating ball is detected within a first duration after the first floating ball is displayed, and displaying the first floating ball in a thumbnail state, …”
However, Horvitz teaches:
determining that no user operation on the first floating ball is detected within a first duration after the first floating ball is displayed, and (abstract [0035, 0061]: method for rendering notifications, where the notification herald (first floating ball) can be displayed for some timeout/wait period without user operation, before it is faded away into the notification folder as shown in Fig. 10);
displaying the first floating ball in a thumbnail state, … . ([0056, 0061] notification herald are placed into a journal folder and can be displayed together at will).
Horvitz and Zhang-Zhu are analogous art because Horvitz also teaches displaying floating notifications in a multi-window environment. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in art before the effective filing date, having the teachings of Horvitz and Zhang-Zhu before him/her, to modify the teachings of Zhang-Zhu to include the teachings of Horvitz so that floating ball can be minimized after a preset duration without user interaction. One would be motivated to make the combination, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would allow the user to send an implicit signal that they are not interested by ignoring the notification, and move the notification out of the user’s way without requiring an explicit user action (Horvitz [0035]).
Per claim 4, Zhang-Zhu-Horvitz teach all the limitations of claim 3, and further teach:
determining that no user operation on the second floating ball is detected within a second duration after the second floating ball is displayed, and displaying the second floating ball in a thumbnail state, (Horvitz [0035, 0056, 0061]: after a notification herald is displayed for a preset time out/wait time period without user interaction, it is faded away to the journal folder) wherein the second floating ball in the thumbnail state comprises the identifier of the second application, and does not comprise the second information (Zhang [0307, 0313] 9D shows a minimized Alipay application displaying the application identifier icon “Alipay” without detailed information from the floating window; also Fig. 9B).
Per claim 5, Zhang-Zhu-Horvitz teach all the limitations of claim 4, and further teach:
wherein the first duration is equal to the second duration. (Horvitz [0056] based on the urgency, the notifications can be assigned different time period of display; so if two notifications are the same urgency, they have the same timeout duration).
Per claim 6, Zhang-Zhu-Horvitz teach all the limitations of claim 4, and further teach:
wherein the displaying the second floating ball in a thumbnail state comprises:
determining that another floating ball in a thumbnail state is displayed on the interface of the electronic device, and aggregating the second floating ball in the thumbnail state and the another floating ball in the thumbnail state into a third floating ball, (Zhang [0381-0384] Fig. 12C shows a first floating ball of “Phoenix News” is displayed in minimized thumbnail state; when interface E enter into full screen mode in Fig. 12D, the minimized messaging interface D is aggregated together with the existing minimized interface C (third floating ball));
wherein the identifier of the second application is displayed in the third floating ball. (Zhang: Fig. 12D shows the aggregated floating ball shows the second messaging application identifier icon on top).
Per claim 7, Zhang-Zhu-Horvitz teach all the limitations for claim 6, and further teach:
wherein the third floating ball comprises indication information, wherein the indication information is used for indicating that the third floating ball is an aggregated floating ball comprising a plurality of floating balls. (Zhang Fig. 12D shows the aggregated floating balls shows both application icons partially overlapped/stacked to indicate aggregation of two floating balls).
Per claim 8, Zhang-Zhu-Horvitz teach all the limitations of claim 7, and further teach:
detecting a first user operation on the third floating ball; and (Zhang Fig. 12B show a third floating ball of two partially overlapped floating ball; when the user, [0381] in response to user operation on the aggregated third floating ball - interface E/C, specifically user operation on minimized interface E, Fig. 12C shows two floating applications – interface C and E);
displaying the plurality of floating balls in response to the first user operation. (Zhang [0381] in response to user operation on the aggregated third floating ball, in particular minimized interface E, Fig. 12C shows the two floating applications C and E, with interface C in minimized state, and interface E in floating window state).
Per claim 10, Zhang-Zhu teach all the limitations of claim 1, but Zhang-Zhu do not explicitly teach a duration to end displaying the first floating ball: “determining that no user operation on the first floating ball is detected within a third duration after the first floating ball is displayed, and ending displaying of the first floating ball”.
However, Horvitz teaches:
determining that no user operation on the first floating ball is detected within a third duration after the first floating ball is displayed, and ending displaying of the first floating ball ( [0035, 0056]: after a notification herald is displayed for a preset time out/wait time period without user interaction, it is faded away).
Horvitz and Zhang-Zhu are analogous art because Horvitz also teaches displaying floating notifications in a multi-window environment. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in art before the effective filing date, having the teachings of Horvitz and Zhang-Zhu before him/her, to modify the teachings of Zhang-Zhu to include the teachings of Horvitz so that floating ball can be minimized after a preset duration without user interaction. One would be motivated to make the combination, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would allow the user to send an implicit signal that they are not interested by ignoring the notification, and move the notification out of the user’s way without requiring an explicit user action (Horvitz [0035]).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, in view of Zhu, and Rogers (US Pub 20100122194, hereinafter Rogers).
Per claim 12, Zhang-Horvitz-Zhu teach all the limitations of claim 10, and do not explicitly teach:
wherein the first information is a navigation prompt, and the first preset condition comprises that: a copy operation is detected, and copied content indicates a first location on a map; or
the first information is a dialing prompt, and the first preset condition comprises that: a copy operation is detected, and copied content comprises a first phone number.
However, Rogers teaches:
wherein the first information is a navigation prompt, and the first preset condition comprises that: a copy operation is detected, and copied content indicates a first location on a map; or
the first information is a dialing prompt, and the first preset condition comprises that: a copy operation is detected, and copied content comprises a first phone number. (Fig. 12 shows when the user has made selection/copy of a telephone number 90, and dragged the selection, a popup menu/prompt is displayed that shows a call/dialing icon 88).
Rogers and Zhang-Horvitz-Zhu are analogous art because Rogers also teaches displaying floating menu icons based on user operations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in art before the effective filing date, having the teachings of Rogers and Zhang-Horvitz-Zhu before him/her, to modify the teachings of Zhang-Horvitz-Zhu to include the teachings of Rogers so that floating menu icons can be displayed based on the content of a user copied. One would be motivated to make the combination, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would provide more context dependent floating options to the user without the user having to explicitly invoke the corresponding applications, saving user’s time and effort.
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, in view of Zhu, and Meng (US Pub 20210397309, from IDS, hereinafter Meng).
Per claim 16, Zhang-Zhu teach all the limitations of claim 1, and do not explicitly teach two additional floating balls: “wherein a fourth floating ball and a fifth floating ball are further displayed on the interface of the electronic device, the fourth floating ball covers the fifth floating ball, and the method further comprises: detecting a third user operation on the interface of the electronic device; and displaying the fourth floating ball and the fifth floating ball in response to the third user operation, wherein the fifth floating ball is not covered by the fourth floating ball”.
However, Meng teaches:
wherein a fourth floating ball and a fifth floating ball are further displayed on the interface of the electronic device, the fourth floating ball covers the fifth floating ball, and the method further comprises: ([0044, 0060] Fig. 4 shows 4 floating window tasks and 1 process tasks (fourth/fifth floating balls) are displayed on the screen; [0060, 0103] Fig. 3 and Fig. 11 illustrate the alternate forms when these floating windows/processes are combined together, Fig. 3 shows a task icon 303 where one element covers another; also see Fig. 11 overlapping icon balls);
detecting a third user operation on the interface of the electronic device; and ([0044-0047] Fig. 4 shows when a trigger signal to the multi-task floating window 302 is received, the set of floating window are displayed; also see[0060-0062]);
displaying the fourth floating ball and the fifth floating ball in response to the third user operation, wherein the fifth floating ball is not covered by the fourth floating ball. ([0044-0047] Fig. 4 shows when a trigger signal to the multi-task floating window 302 is received, the set of floating window are displayed in a list not overlapping/covering each other; also see[0060-0062]);
Meng and Zhang-Zhu are analogous art because Meng also teaches displaying floating balls for minimized application windows/processes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in art before the effective filing date, having the teachings of Meng and Zhang-Zhu before him/her, to modify the teachings of Zhang-Zhu to include the teachings of Meng so that stacked/collapsed floating balls can be opened to show a list form. One would be motivated to make the combination, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would provide the user with both open and collapsed forms floating windows, provide user with more convenience with managing the open floating windows.
Per claim 17, Zhang teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach “further comprising: detecting a fourth user operation on the first floating ball or the second floating ball; and displaying the first floating ball and the second floating ball at a first position on the interface of the electronic device in response to the fourth user operation, wherein the first position is a position at which the fourth user operation ends”.
However, Meng teaches:
further comprising: detecting a fourth user operation on the first floating ball or the second floating ball; and ([0103] Fig. 11: Fig. 11 shows the multiple floating ball can be collapsed/stacked together to become multi-task floating window, where it can be dragged on the screen together to a different position);
displaying the first floating ball and the second floating ball at a first position on the interface of the electronic device in response to the fourth user operation, wherein the first position is a position at which the fourth user operation ends. ([0103] Fig. 11: the multi-task floating window can be dragged on the screen to a location of a user’s choice, where all the stacked floating window are moved together and end at the same position).
Meng and Zhang are analogous art because Meng also teaches displaying floating balls for minimized application windows/processes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in art before the effective filing date, having the teachings of Meng and Zhang before him/her, to modify the teachings of Zhang to include the teachings of Meng so that stacked/collapsed floating balls can be dragged to desired location by users. One would be motivated to make the combination, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enable users to drag the floating balls to desired location together as a group, to void them blocking a certain section of a screen, providing better user experiences.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected based claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim(s) 11 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The specific feature of having a displayed countdown timer for the remaining display time for a floating ball when it changes into a thumbnail state, in combination with another time period for displaying the floating ball in a first state before it changes into thumbnail state when there is no user interaction with the floating ball, is not found in the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
US Patents & Publications
US 20160253089 A1
LEE; Jae-Ho et al.
Method for displaying information by electronic device e.g. smart phone, involves displaying first and second information received from outside of electronic device in first and second information display areas
Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when responding to this action.
The examiner requests, in response to this Office action, support by shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line no(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application.
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections, See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHOEBE X PAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7794. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fred Ehichioya can be reached at (571) 272-4034. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PHOEBE X PAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2179
/IRETE F EHICHIOYA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2179