DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the amendment filed 2/23/2026.
Claims 1, 4-7, 9-12, 14, 16, 17, 19-25, 29, 30, and 32 are currently pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/23/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 12-17 of amendment, filed 2/23/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Smolyansky in view of Shalit have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Huckey (US 10,789, 417), originally cited in the Non-Final office action filed 4/23/2025.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by “Announcing Connected Papers – a visual tool for researchers to find and explore academic papers”, by Eddie Smolyansky, published 2020, taken from https://medium.com/connectedpapers/announcing-connected-papers-a-visual-tool-for-researchers-to-find-and-explore-academic-papers-89146a54c7d4, hereinafter Smolyansky, in view of Shalit et al. (US 5,714,971), hereinafter Shalit, in view of Huckey.
As per claim 1, Smolyansky teaches the following:
a method for querying a relationship of documents, comprising:
determining a first document displayed on a target page in response to a document relationship query operation performed by a user on the target page, wherein content of the first document is displayed on the target page. As Smolyansky teaches on page 1, a user enters a paper of interest. This may be seen in the figure of page 2, the “first document” is that of “Darts: Differentiable Architecture Search”. As Smolyansky further teaches, the preview pane shows content of the selected document. Therefore, upon a user selecting the origin document of “Darts”, content of that document would be presented;
displaying, in a first area of the target page, a relationship diagram for the first document and a second document. As may be further seen in the figure of page 2, upon a user selecting “Build a graph”, a graph of related documents (associated) is generated in a second area (applicant’s “first area); and
displaying, in a second area of the target page, the content of the first document. See right side of figure on page 2,
wherein the first document is in a first association relationship or a second association relationship with the second document. As Smolyansky teaches on page 1, a few dozen papers with the strongest connections (relationship} to the origin pager are graphed.
While Smolyansky shows a third area on the left side of the figure on page 2, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of creating the third area in response to a click operation on a node. In a similar field of endeavor, Shalit teaches of graphical user interfaces for browsing through information (see abstract). Shalit further teaches the following:
wherein the method further comprises:
creating a third area in response to a click operation on the node indicating the first document displayed in the first area, wherein first information of the first document and second information of a third document are displayed in the third area, and the first document is in the first association relationship or the second association relationship with the third document, and updating, based on a display range of the third area, a display range of the first area in the target page; or
in response to a click operation on the node indicating any first document displayed in the first area, updating a display range of the first area and a display range of the second area, and updating display content in the second area to be first information of the first document and second information of a third document, wherein the first document is in the first association relationship or the second association relationship with the third document. As Shalit teaches in column 5, lines 1-33, and corresponding Figs. 2A-2D, upon a user selecting a file or document (click operation on node) and dragging the object to split bar box, a new pane is created with the selected object being presented in the new pane. As seen in Fig. 2D, a “display range”, i.e. size, of the original pane is updated based on the size of the newly created pane. As Shalit shows in Figs. 6 and 7, multiple panes may be created in this fashion. Shalit further shows in Fig. 10D, two separate objects may be placed within a single pane, thus first information and second information are displayed in a same pane (third area).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the third pane of Smolyansky being created in response to user input of Shalit. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modifications because as Shalit teaches in column 1 lines 49-67, such multiple pane methods benefit users in navigating and viewing multiple documents at once, including higher level hierarchical organization.
Furthermore, Smolyansky does note explicitly teaches of a selected node being displayed. In a similar field of endeavor, Huckey teaches of a method of graphing relationships between documents (see abstract). Huckey further teaches the following:
wherein the relationship diagram comprises a plurality of nodes, one node of the plurality of nodes indicates the first document and other node of the plurality of nodes indicates a document associated with the first document. As Huckey shows in Fig. 3, and corresponding column 10, lines 33-41, a display may show a first document node 50 and related document nodes 52, which are documents that have been accessed from the first document. Huckey further teaches in column 11, lines 25-61, that other documents with different types of relationships may be displayed as being related to the first document. Furthermore, as Huckey shows in Figs. 4-6, selection of a node causes new relationship graphs to be displayed and in column 12, lines 1-17, documents represented by nodes may be view via selecting the corresponding nodes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the graph display of Smolyansky with the affinity rose display of Huckey. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such further modification because as Huckey teaches in column 1, lines 15-32, such interfaces benefit users in recalling relevant search patterns performed in the past or by others.
Regarding claim 4, modified Smolyansky teaches the method claim 1 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
updating display content in the first area to be associated with display content in a target area for displaying the first information and the second information, wherein the target area is the second area or the third area. As may be further seen in the figure of page 2, upon a user selecting “Build a graph”, a graph of related documents is generated in a second area (applicant’s “first area”). Therefore, the graph is based upon information in “the second area or third area”.
Regarding claim 5, modified Smolyansky teaches the method claim 4 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
displaying both the first area and the target area in a display-allowed area of the target page. As seen in the figure on page 2, the areas are within an overall window and are therefore interpreted as being in “a display-allowed area” of the page.
Regarding claim 6, modified Smolyansky teaches the method claim 1 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
updating a display state of a node of the third document in response to a trigger operation on the second information of the third document. As may be further seen in the figure of page 2, upon a user selecting “Build a graph”, a graph of related documents is generated in a second area (applicant’s “first area”). Therefore, the user may “Build a graph” of the third document, where the third document would be highlighted at the center, thus updated.
Regarding claim 7, modified Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
the first document is in the first association relationship with the second document, and the displaying, in the first area of the target page, the relationship diagram for the first document and the second document comprises displaying, in the relationship diagram, a node of the first document in a first display state, a node of the second document in a second display state, and a node other than the node of the first document or the node of the second document in a third display state; or
the first document is in the second association relationship with the second document, and the displaying, in the first area of the target page, the relationship diagram for the first document and the second document comprises displaying, in the relationship diagram, a node of the first document in a first display state, a node of a fourth document in a second display state, and a node other than the node of the first document or the node of the fourth document in a third display state, wherein the first document is in the first association relationship with the fourth document, and the node other than the node of the first document or the node of the fourth document comprises a node of the second document. As Smolyansky shows in the figure on page 5, the selected (first) document is displayed with a highlight (first display state) and other nodes are sized, colored, and located based upon the listed characteristics. Thus the nodes would all be in different “display states”.
Regarding claim 12, Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
the displaying, in the first area of the target page, the relationship diagram for the first document and the second document, and displaying, in the second area of the target page, the content of the first document comprises:
creating the first area within the target page, displaying, in the first area, the relationship diagram for the first document and the second document, and As Smolyansky shows in the figure on page 2, the graph and content are displayed in two separate areas.
However, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of adjusting a display range of the second area based on a display range of the first area. In a similar field of endeavor, Shalit teaches of graphical user interfaces for browsing through information (see abstract). Shalit further shows in Figs. 2A through 2D, that the size of a display area is “adjusted” based upon a split control of the user.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the third pane of Smolyansky being created in response to user input of Shalit. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modifications because as Shalit teaches in column 1 lines 49-67, such multiple pane methods benefit users in navigating and viewing multiple documents at once, including higher level hierarchical organization.
As per claim 14, Smolyansky teaches the following:
determining a first document displayed on a target page in response to a document relationship query operation performed by a user on the target page, wherein content of the first document is displayed on the target page. As may be further seen in the figure of page 2, upon a user selecting “Build a graph”, a graph of related documents is generated in a second area (applicant’s “first area);
displaying, in a first area of the target page, a relationship diagram for the first document and a second document. As may be further seen in the figure of page 2, upon a user selecting “Build a graph”, a graph of related documents is generated in a second area (applicant’s “first area); and
displaying, in a second area of the target page, the content of the first document, wherein the first document is in a first association relationship or a second association relationship with the second document. See right side of figure on page 2.
While Smolyansky shows a third area on the left side of the figure on page 2, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of creating the third area in response to a click operation on a node. In a similar field of endeavor, Shalit teaches of graphical user interfaces for browsing through information (see abstract). Shalit further teaches the following:
wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform:
creating a third area in response to a click operation on a node of the first document in the relationship diagram, wherein first information of the first document and second information of a third document are displayed in the third area, and the first document is in the first association relationship or the second association relationship with the third document, and updating, based on a display range of the third area, a display range of the first area for displaying the relationship diagram in the target page; or
in response to a click operation on a node of the first document in the relationship diagram, updating a display range of the first area for displaying the relationship diagram and a display range of the second area, and updating display content in the second area to be first information of the first document and second information of a third document, wherein the first document is in the first association relationship or the second association relationship with the third document. As Shalit teaches in column 5, lines 1-33, and corresponding Figs. 2A-2D, upon a user selecting a file or document (click operation on node) and dragging the object to split bar box, a new pane is created with the selected object being presented in the new pane. As seen in Fig. 2D, a “display range”, i.e. size, of the original pane is updated based on the size of the newly created pane. As Shalit shows in Figs. 6 and 7, multiple panes may be created in this fashion. Shalit further shows in Fig. 10D, two separate objects may be placed within a single pane, thus first information and second information are displayed in a same pane (third area).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the third pane of Smolyansky being created in response to user input of Shalit. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modifications because as Shalit teaches in column 1 lines 49-67, such multiple pane methods benefit users in navigating and viewing multiple documents at once, including higher level hierarchical organization.
Furthermore, while Smolyansky teaches of a graphical user interface, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of a computing device. Shalit further teaches the following:
an electronic device, comprising:
one or more processors; a memory storing one or more programs. See Fig. 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have implemented the interface of Smolyansky on the computer of Shalit. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modifications because Smolyansky is directed to the interface for computer software and Shalit teaches of such a computer.
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smolyansky in view of Shalit in view of Huckey as applied to claims 1 and 7, and further in view of Iwayama et al. (US 2007/0288442), hereinafter Iwayama.
Regarding claim 9, modified Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 7 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
the displaying, in the first area of the target page, the relationship diagram for the first document and the second document further comprises: displaying a first association path connecting the node of the first document and the node of the second document in a first connection state, wherein the first connection state . As Smolyansky states on page 5, similar papers are connected by stronger lines (path display state).
However, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of the connection lines comprising a path direction. In a similar field of endeavor, Iwayama teaches a method of searching multiple related documents (see abstract). Iwayama further teaches in paragraph [0053] that connections between documents may comprise arrows showing the direction of a citation between documents.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the connections of Smolyansky with the citation arrows of Iwayama. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because such arrows would benefit users in better visualizing how documents are related.
Regarding claim 10, modified Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 7 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
after the displaying, in the first area of the target page, the relationship diagram for the first document and the second document, the method further comprising:
in response to a focus moving to a node of any second document other than the node of the first document, displaying the node of the second document in the second display state, and displaying a second association path connecting the node of the second document and a node of a fifth document in a second connection state, wherein the second document is in the first association relationship or the second association relationship with the fifth document, the second connection state As Smolyansky discusses on page 2, a user may select any paper (node) and select “Build a graph” to create a new graph with the selected node as the origin. As Smolyansky states on page 5, similar papers are connected by stronger lines (path display state).
However, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of the connection lines comprising a path direction. In a similar field of endeavor, Iwayama teaches a method of searching multiple related documents (see abstract). Iwayama further teaches in paragraph [0053] that connections between documents may comprise arrows showing the direction of a citation between documents.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the connections of Smolyansky with the citation arrows of Iwayama. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because such arrows would benefit users in better visualizing how documents are related.
Regarding claim 11, modifiedSmolyansky teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
the first association relationship or
the first association is a recommendation relationship, and the second association
As Smolyansky teaches in page 4, papers may be related even though they do not directly cite each other, i.e., a recommendation relationship.
However, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of a reference relationship. In a similar field of endeavor, Iwayama teaches a method of searching multiple related documents (see abstract). Iwayama further teaches in paragraph [0053] that connections between documents may comprise arrows showing the direction of a citation between documents. Therefore, upon the modification of Smolyansky in view of Iwayama, the graph may possess both Smolyansky’s similarity document connections (no arrows) and Iwayama’s citation connections (arrows).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the connections of Smolyansky with the citation arrows of Iwayama. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because such arrows would benefit users in better visualizing how documents are related.
Claim(s) 16, 17, 22, 29, 30, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smolyansky in view of Shalit in view of Vanderwende et al. (US 2012/0233151), hereinafter Vander, in view of Huckey.
As per claim 16, Smolyansky teaches the following:
a method for searching for a document, comprising:
displaying in a first area of a page, a relationship diagram, wherein the relationship diagram presents an association relationship among documents. See figure on page 2 of Smolyansky;
obtaining, . As Smolyansky teaches on page 1, an initial paper of interest is entered and a graph generated;
updating in the first area of the page, a display state of a node of at least one document in the relationship diagram based on the obtained first document, wherein the at least one document comprises at least one of the first document or a second document. As Smolyansky teaches on page 2, by selecting a node and a “build a graph” button, a new graph is created with the selected node as the origin. Changing a selected node from a branch/leaf node to an origin node in a new graph is interpreted as encompassing “updating…. a display state of a node”;
displaying, in a first area of a page, a relationship diagram for the first document and a second document. As may be further seen in the figure of page 2, upon a user selecting “Build a graph”, a graph of related documents is generated in a second area (applicant’s “first area); and
displaying, in a second area of the page, at least one of first information of the first document and second information of the second document. See right side of figure on page 2,
wherein the first document is in a first association relationship or a second association relationship with the second document. As Smolyansky teaches on page 1, a few dozen papers with the strongest connections (relationship} to the origin pager are graphed.
However, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of the first document being obtained from a search request. In a similar field of endeavor, Vander teaches of visualizing multiple documents (see abstract). Vander teaches in paragraph [0059], and corresponding Fig. 7, that a relationship graph may be generated in response to a search request.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the document selection of Smolyansky with the search function of Vander. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because as Vander teaches in paragraph [0001], locating a document of interest through conducting a search was a well known technique at the time.
Furthermore, Smolyansky does note explicitly teaches of a selected node being displayed. In a similar field of endeavor, Huckey teaches of a method of graphing relationships between documents (see abstract). Huckey further teaches the following:
wherein the updating in the first area of the page, the display state of the node of the at least one document in the relationship diagram based on the obtained first document comprises:
displaying, in the relationship diagram, a node of the first document in a first display state, a node of the second document in a second display state, and a node other than the node of the first document or the node of the second document in a third display state, wherein the first document is in the first association relationship with the second document. As Huckey shows in Fig. 3, and corresponding column 10, lines 33-41, a display may show a first document node 50 and related document nodes 52, which are documents that have been accessed from the first document. Huckey further teaches in column 11, lines 25-61, that other documents with different types of relationships may be displayed as being related to the first document. Furthermore, as Huckey shows in Figs. 4-6, selection of a node causes new relationship graphs to be displayed and in column 12, lines 1-17, documents represented by nodes may be view via selecting the corresponding nodes.
Upon the modification, the “build a graph” command of Smolyansky would create a new graph as taught by Huckey.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the graph display of Smolyansky with the affinity rose display of Huckey. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such further modification because as Huckey teaches in column 1, lines 15-32, such interfaces benefit users in recalling relevant search patterns performed in the past or by others.
Regarding claim 17, modified Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 16 as described above. However, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of a second association relationship. Huckey further teaches the following:
the node other than the node of the first document or the node of the second document comprises: a third document in a second association relationship with the first document. Huckey teaches in column 11, lines 25-61, that other documents with different types of relationships may be displayed as being related to the first document.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the graph display of Smolyansky with the affinity rose display of Huckey. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such further modification because as Huckey teaches in column 1, lines 15-32, such interfaces benefit users in recalling relevant search patterns performed in the past or by others.
Regarding claim 22, modified Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 16 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
wherein the second information of the second document is displayed in the second area of the page, and the method further comprises: switching a node of the second document to a fourth display state in response to a first trigger operation on the second information of the second document. As may be further seen in the figure of page 2, upon a user selecting “Build a graph”, a graph of related documents is generated in a second area (applicant’s “first area”). Therefore, the user may “Build a graph” of the second document, where the second document would be highlighted at the center, thus the node is switched.
Regarding claim 29, modified Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 16 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
at least one of the following:
generating a search request in response to a click operation on any node in the relationship diagram; and generating a search quest in response to a third trigger operation on a search control within a search field. As Smolyansky shows in the figure on page 2, a search is conducted upon a user selecting a “Build a graph” button, which is interpreted as encompassing a “search control within a search field”.
Regarding claim 30, modified Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 29 as described above. However, as described above, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of the first document being obtained from a search request. Bander teaches the following:
in response to a keyword input operation by a user, displaying, in the search field, a keyword inputted by the user, and displaying document identification information of a matched document that matches the keyword; and receiving a selection operation on document identification information of a target matched document, and switching a node of the target matched document to a fifth display state. As Vander teaches in paragraph [0061], and corresponding Figs. 5 and 7, upon a user entering a query, a document relationship graph is generated and displayed. Vander teaches in paragraph [0008] that nodes of the relationship graph are selectable “such that the graphical visualization provided to the user changes as the user selects nodes”, i.e. switching node states.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the document selection of Smolyansky with the search function of Vander. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because as Vander teaches in paragraph [0001], locating a document of interest through conducting a search was a well known technique at the time.
As per claim 32, while Smolyansky teaches of a graphical user interface, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of a computing device. Shalit teaches the following:
an electronic device, comprising:
one or more processors; a memory storing one or more programs. See Fig. 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have implemented the interface of Smolyansky on the computer of Shalit. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modifications because Smolyansky is directed to the interface for computer software and Shalit teaches of such a computer.
The remaining limitations of claim 32 are substantially similar to those of claim 17 and are rejected using the same reasoning.
Claim(s) 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smolyansky in view of Shalit in view of Vander in view of Huckey as applied to claim 16, and further in view of Iwayama.
Regarding claims 19-21, modified Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 16 as described above. The remaining limitations of claims 19-21 are substantially similar to those of claims 9-11 respectively, and are rejected using the same reasoning.
Claim(s) 23-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smolyansky in view of Shalit in view of Vander in view of Huckey as applied to claim 16, and further in view of Shalit.
Regarding claim 23, Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 16 as described above. While Smolyansky shows a third area on the left side of the figure on page 2, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of creating the third area in response to a click operation on a node. In a similar field of endeavor, Shalit teaches of graphical user interfaces for browsing through information (see abstract). Shalit further teaches the following:
creating a third area in response to a second trigger operation on the first document or the second document in the second area, wherein the third area is for displaying content of the first document or content of the second document and updating, based on a display range of the third area, a display range of the first area within the page; or
in response to a second trigger operation on the first document or the second document in the second area, updating a display range of the first area and a display range of the second area, and updating at least one of display content of the first area and display content of the second area. As Shalit teaches in column 5, lines 1-33, and corresponding Figs. 2A-2D, upon a user selecting a file or document (click operation on node) and dragging the object to split bar box, a new pane is created with the selected object being presented in the new pane. As seen in Fig. 2D, a “display range”, i.e. size, of the original pane is updated based on the size of the newly created pane. As Shalit shows in Figs. 6 and 7, multiple panes may be created in this fashion. Shalit further shows in Fig. 10D, two separate objects may be placed within a single pane.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the third pane of Smolyansky being created in response to user input of Shalit. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modifications because as Shalit teaches in column 1 lines 49-67, such multiple pane methods benefit users in navigating and viewing multiple documents at once, including higher level hierarchical organization.
Regarding claim 24, Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 23 as described above. As described above, Smolyansky does not explicitly teach of creating the third area in response to a click operation on a node. Shalit further teaches the following:
wherein the updating, based on the display range of the third area, the display range of the first area within the page comprises:
displaying both the first area and the third area in a display-allowed area of the page, wherein the display range of the first area is the same as the display range of the third area; or
the updating the display range of the first area and the display range of the second area comprises displaying both the first area and the second area in a display-allowed area of the page, wherein the display range of the first area is the same as the display range of the second area. As may be seen in Fig. 6, different display panes may be created as the same size, such as panes 84 and 85, or the same width, such as panes 85 and 87.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the third pane of Smolyansky being created in response to user input of Shalit. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modifications because as Shalit teaches in column 1 lines 49-67, such multiple pane methods benefit users in navigating and viewing multiple documents at once, including higher level hierarchical organization.
Regarding claim 25, Smolyansky teaches the method of claim 23 as described above. Smolyansky further teaches the following:
updating display content of the first area to be associated with display content of the third area; or the updating display content of the first area comprises updating the display content of the first area to be associated with the display content of the second area. As may be further seen in the figure of page 2, upon a user selecting “Build a graph”, a graph of related documents is generated in a second area (applicant’s “first area”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY A DISTEFANO whose telephone number is (571)270-1644. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9 am - 5 pm.
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 Bashore can be reached at 5712424088. 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.
/GREGORY A. DISTEFANO/
Examiner
Art Unit 2174
/WILLIAM L BASHORE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2174