DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The amendment filed on 10/29/2025 has been entered. Applicant amended claims 1, 8, and 15 in the amendment. Claims 2-3, 9-10, and 16-17 are canceled.
Claims 1, 4-8, 11-15, and 18-20 remain pending.
Terminal Disclaimer filed on 03/04/2025 has been approved.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1, 4-8, 11-15, and 18-20 filed on 10/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are deemed to be moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-8, 14-15, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Druck (US 10,410,180 B2) in view of Scott et al. (US 9,953,095 B1), hereinafter Scott.
Regarding claim 1, Druck discloses
A message transmission method performed at an electronic device that is logged in with a first user account (Bobbi), the method comprising:
displaying an avatar of a second user account (Andreas) in a first user interface of the electronic device (chat user interface)(Col. 8, lines 20-23: as currently provided by messaging applications, avatars, emoticons, or other images are displayed within the chat user interface);
detecting an interaction instruction on the avatar of the second user account by a user of the electronic device (Col. 8, lines 25-30: Bobbi can manipulate a displayed avatar to create an expression to be communicated to Andreas; for example, Bobbi can place her thumb on her touch screen in relation to Andreas’ displayed avatar, and wiggle her thumb);
in response to an interaction instruction triggered on the avatar of the second user account, generating an interaction message according to (i) a first field including a first user-customized text string entered by the first user corresponding to the first user account (Col. 30, lines 6-12: a unique username will be selected by the user that initially registers for use of a message account; a unique username selected by the user corresponds to user-customized text string entered by the first user), (ii) an action description field including a predefined action corresponding to the interaction instruction (Col. 2, lines 14-20: the event message comprising an action to be performed on the second computing device during the instant messaging session), and a (iii) a second field including a second user-customized text string entered by a second user corresponding to the second user account (Col. 30, lines 6-12: a unique username will be selected by the user that initially registers for use of a message account; a unique username selected by the user corresponds to user-customized text string entered by the second user) (FIG 9 & Col. 8, lines 29-39: a notification, such as an emoticon notice, can appear on Andreas’s device with an icon that says “you have been tickled.”; a notification or acknowledgement may also appear on Bobbi’s phone stating “you have tickled Andreas.” & Col. 26, lines 46-53: on the user’s device who has produced the input, an acknowledgement/notification is displayed; upon depressing on another user’s avatar, and triggering a “tickle”, the user receives an acknowledgement/notification stating “you tickled Roman” next to their respective avatar (Roman being the other user communicating with the sending user, Bobbi); & Col. 21, lines 10-23: the information contained in the event message, which includes data associated with Bobbi’s interaction with her touch screen interface, is identified (or parsed out) and compared against a library of events; using a database table, a list, or a file that associates one or more triggers with a type of animation for the avatar to identify a particular type of animation), wherein the interaction message indicates that the first user-customized text string performs the predefined action on the second user-customized text string (FIG. 10: Bobbi hugged Roman; FIG. 11: Roman shook Bobbi; & Col. 21, lines 54-Col. 22, line 4: Roman would receive a message that states “you have been hugged.”); and
transmitting the interaction message to a second device that is logged in by the second user with the second user account (FIG. 9 & Col. 8, lines 29-39: a notification, such as an emoticon notice, can appear on Andreas’s device with an icon that says “you have been tickled.”; & FIG. 11 & Col. 21, lines 1-3: the interaction with the avatar triggers the generation of an event trigger, signal, or event message, to be sent over the network to Roman; & Col. 27, lines 41-42: Bobbi’s mobile device vibrates, and she checks her phone and sees that Roman “shook” her).
Druck does not explicitly disclose
the first user-customized text string is different from the first user account’s username and the second user-customized text string is different from the second user account’s username.
However, Scott discloses
the first user-customized text string is different from the first user account’s username and the second user-customized text string is different from the second user account’s username (Col. 40, lines 31-35: generating the set of alias data attributes includes deidentifying a real first name and a real second name of the user to generate an alias first name and an alias second name that are distinct from the real first and the real second name).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate feature of Scott in Druck because Druck discloses user selects a unique username for message account (Col. 30, lines 6-12) and Scott further suggests generate alias name that are distinct from real name (Col. 40, lines 31-35).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Scott in Druck system in order to provide a secure system by deidentifying real names.
Regarding claim 7, Druck and Scott disclose the message transmission method as described in claim 1. Druck further discloses
the first user interface is a first chat window interface (FIG. 11 & Col. 27, lines 15-16: the user interface display shows an IM conversation between Bobbi and Roman); and the method further comprises:
displaying the interaction message in the first chat window interface in a manner that is visually distinctive from other messages in the first chat window interface (FIG. 11: Roman shook Bobbi; & Col. 27, lines 27-32: a message indicating the type of animation/haptic effect).
Regarding claims 8 and 15, the limitations of claims 8 and 15 are rejected in the analysis of claim 1 above and these claims are rejected on that basis.
Regarding claims 14 and 20, the limitations of claims 14 and 20 are rejected in the analysis of claim 7 above and this claim is rejected on that basis.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 11, 12, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Druck in view of Scott, and further in view of Robertson et al. (US 2009/0134982 A1), hereinafter Robertson.
Regarding claim 4, Druck and Scott disclose the message transmission method as described in claim 1. Druck and Scott do not explicitly disclose
displaying a first custom interface, distinct from the first user interface; and
obtaining a custom part in the first field through pre-editing as the first user-customized text string in response to a first pre-editing operation on the first custom interface.
However, Robertson discloses
displaying a first custom interface (message dispatch interface 500, FIG. 5), distinct from the first user interface ([0055]: the user selects the settings used by computer system to construct an alert notification consistent with alert notification architecture); and
obtaining a custom part in the first field through pre-editing as the first user-customized text string in response to a first pre-editing operation on the first custom interface ([0057]: message dispatch interface also allow the user to define addressing instruction via recipient selection field).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate feature of Robertson in Druck and Scott because Druck and Scott disclose display notification on user device (Druck: Col. 26, lines 46-51) and Robertson further suggests user define addressing instruction to deliver the message ([0057]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Robertson in Druck and Scott system in order to allow the system to deliver custom message to the proper users.
Regarding claim 5, Druck and Scott disclose the message transmission method as described in claim 1. Druck and Scott do not explicitly disclose
displaying a third custom interface; and
obtaining a custom part in the action description field through pre-editing as the predefined action in response to a third pre-editing operation on the third custom interface.
However, Robertson discloses
displaying a third custom interface (message dispatch interface 500, FIG. 5)([0055]: the user selects the settings used by computer system to construct an alert notification consistent with alert notification architecture); and
obtaining a custom part in the action description field through pre-editing as the predefined action in response to a third pre-editing operation on the third custom interface ([0056]: message dispatch interface include a preset message text selection field).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate feature of Robertson in Druck and Scott because Druck and Scott disclose display notification on user device (Druck: Col. 26, lines 46-51) and Robertson further suggests user define addressing instruction to deliver the message ([0057]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Robertson in Druck and Scott system in order to allow the system to deliver preset custom message.
Regarding claims 11 and 18, the limitations of claims 11 and 18 are rejected in the analysis of claim 4 above and these claims are rejected on that basis.
Regarding claim 12, the limitations of claim 12 are rejected in the analysis of claim 5 above and the claim is rejected on that basis.
Claim(s) 6, 13, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Druck in view of Scott, in view of Cuervo (US 8,843,573 B2), and further in view of Schemers et al. (US 10,897,370 B1), hereinafter Schemers.
Regarding claim 6, Druck and Scott disclose the message transmission method as described in claim 1. Druck and Scott do not explicitly disclose
the first user interface is a non-chat window interface, and the non-chat window interface comprises at least one of a personal attribute interface, an address book interface, a group member display interface, a single chat member display interface, or a social circle interaction interface.
However, Cuervo discloses
the first user interface is a non-chat window interface (FIG. 3 & Col. 6, lines 61-63: a user interface for lightweight messaging in the social networking system), and the non-chat window interface comprises at least one of a personal attribute interface, an address book interface, a group member display interface, a single chat member display interface, or a social circle interaction interface (Col. 7, lines 9-14: in this listing, user 302 is represented by a profile photo 302a and brief description 302b, user 04 is represented by a profile photo 304a and brief description 304b, user 306 is represented by a profile photo 306a and brief description 306b).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate feature of Cuervo in Druck and Scott because Druck and Scott disclose display notification on user device (Druck: Col. 26, lines 46-51) and Cuervo further suggests display user profile (Col. 7, lines 9-14).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Cuervo in Druck and Scott system in order to allow user to retrieve user profile easily.
Druck, Scott, and Cuervo do not explicitly disclose
displaying the interaction message in a target area adjacent the avatar of the second user account in the non-chat window interface.
However, Schemers discloses
displaying the interaction message in a target area adjacent the avatar of the second user account in the non-chat window interface (FIG 12 & Col. 49, line 49 – Col. 50, line 2: a user profile avatar is shown, such as an emoji, next to user’s name that indicates the user status avatar for the user; the user profile avatar includes the entire user status avatar next to the user’s name information).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate feature of Schemers in Druck, Scott, and Cuervo because Druck, Scott, and Cuervo disclose display notification on user device (Druck: Col. 26, lines 46-51) and Schemers further suggests user status avatar next to the user’s name information (Col. 49, line 49 – Col. 50, line 2).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Schemers in Druck, Scott, and Cuervo system in order to allow other users to retrieve status of the user easily.
Regarding claim 13 and 19, the limitations of claims 13 and 19 are rejected in the analysis of claim 6 above and this claim is rejected on that basis.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Khokhlov (US 2010/0203904 A1). The avatar is shown with a musical note next to it, indicating that the user is listening to music ([0110]).
Joyce et al. (US 2017/0201478 A1). The user device receives input from the user in the form of the user tapping on a recipient’s icon to bring up a recipient’s profile ([0173]).
McMichael (US 2017/0214651 A1). Stop displaying the private message after a predetermined period has elapsed ([0122]).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAYLEE J HUANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Joon H Hwang can be reached on 571-272-4036. 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.
Kaylee Huang
11/03/2025
/KAYLEE J HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2447
Prosecution Insights