DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the amendments filed 2/12/2026.
Claims 1-3, 5-16, 18 and 20-23 are pending. Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 14, 15, 18, 20 and 21 are currently amended; Claims 4 and 17 are canceled and Claims 22 and 23 are new.
All prior rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are withdrawn as necessitated by amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 21 recites the limitation "the duration threshold.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as the antecedent basis in the parent claim has been removed by amendment.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14-18, 20, 22 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2010/0070899 (“Hunt”), in view of Wang, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2017/0288887 (“Wang”), and in view of Wang, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2024/0053879 (“Wang2”).
With regard to Claim 1, Hunt teaches a data transmission method, performed by a terminal, the method comprising:
displaying a target message, the target message comprising a data resource ([0054] describes that sharable elements are identified, where shareable elements are particular content items such as images or videos)
outputting a resource transmission interface as a mask layer interface in response to a trigger operation on the target message, the resource transmission interface comprising an object display region and an icon display region ([0103] and Fig. 5C show that when a user drags a shareable element, the interface from which the element was selected is masked; the element being dragged is displayed as an icon in that region, and a set of targets are displayed graphically in a specific region); and
the object display region comprising an object identifier of at least one transmission object, and the icon display region comprising a message icon corresponding to the target message, the transmission object being an object capable of receiving the data resource corresponding to the target message ([0104] describes that a user can drag the icon corresponding to the shareable content item to one of the targets, where dropping the icon on a particular application graphic initiates sharing the item using the selected target application or mode)
moving the message icon from the icon display region to the object display region according to a moving operation on the message icon ([0104] describes the operation of dragging and dropping the content item icon on one of the displayed targets in the graphical region where targets are displayed, and [0118] describes a touch screen input); and
transmitting, in response to the message icon being moved to the object display region, the data resource corresponding to the target message to a target transmission object of the at least one transmission object in the object display region, the target transmission object being determined according to a position of an end point of a movement track of the message icon corresponding to the moving operation ([0084] that the content is shared to the target on which the content element is dropped, where one of skill in the art understands that “dropping” in the context of dragging and dropping a content element means indicating an endpoint of a movement track of the dragging operation).
Hunt does not teach that the target message is displayed in a dialog session interface, the dialog session interface being an interface displaying a dialog between a target user logged in the target terminal with a target social account and a conversation object, a mask layer interface set on top of the dialog session interface in response to a trigger operation on the target message, the transmission object being an object other than the conversation object.
Wang teaches at [0055] that a user can provide an input on a chat message in a chat interface to trigger an option prompt for sharing a target message. As shown at [0058] and Fig. 2B, the option prompt is provided as an interface layer over a dialog session interface, where Fig. 2D shows an additional interface along with a full screen mask that has additional selectable options for sharing the selected content. [0042] describes that the chat interface captures a chat between a first account and second account communicating using an instant messaging application.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Hunt to enable the content sharing described therein to be operable to share content received in a dialog session interface as was known in the art and taught by Wang. One of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by enabling the benefits of the simple multimodal content sharing of Hunt to be realized across additional types of applications, including a dialog interface as shown in Wang.
Hunt also does not teach wherein the at least one transmission object comprises an associated terminal associated with the target terminal and at least one other session where the target user is present, the associated terminal refers to an external terminal logging in to the same social account of the target user as the target terminal; and displaying a terminal identifier of the associated terminal in a first sub-region of the object display region and displaying a session identifier of the at least one other session in a second sub-region of the object display region.
Wang2 teaches at [0493] that when a user drags ab object in an interface, recommended devices as targets for the drag can be determined, and displayed in the interface as shown in Fig. 7. The displayed devices include identifiers and icons related to each device. [0679]-[0681] describe that devices to which an element can be shared can be determined by identifying other devices which are connected to the sharing device. The sharing terminal can identify the connection with the other device by an account logged in on the target device, where the logged in account can be a social account such as a WeChat account. [1088] describes that implementing data transmission through a drag by connecting devices can require that the account be logged in on both devices.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Hunt and Wang with Wang2. One of skill in the art would have sought the combination, to improve user experience by enabling a drag-and-drop interface that enables additional sharing options, such as other user devices, thereby providing a more comprehensive list of sharing targets, and enabling easy sharing of data by a user with other devices for their own personal use.
Claim 14 recites an apparatus which carries out the method of Claim 1, and is similarly rejected. Claim 20 recites a medium storing instructions which are executed to carry out the method of Claim 1, and is likewise rejected.
With regard to Claim 2, Hunt teaches the moving operation is an operation of continuously pressing and dragging the message icon; and that the message icon being moved to the object display region means that the end point of the movement track of the message icon is located in the object display region. [0083] describes that the content is selected and dragged by a user and [0118] describes a touch screen input device; Fig. 5L shows that the drop targets are displayed with a mask over the page from which the content was selected. [0084] describes that the object is shared to a selected location represented by the icon on which it is dropped.
Claim 15 recites an apparatus which carries out the method of Claim 2, and is similarly rejected.
With regard to Claim 3, Hunt teaches that an icon style of the message icon is determined according to a message parameter of the target message, and the message parameter comprises at least: a message type of the target message, wherein the message type of the target message is: a file type, a text type, a multimedia data type, or a link type; and the data resource corresponding to the target message is: a file, a text content, multimedia data, or a link. [0083] describes that a thumbnail of the dragged content is displayed; Fig. 5C shows a dragged thumbnail includes an image corresponding to the image in the content. [0103] describes that the thumbnail contains a miniaturized version of the image. [0078] describes that a type indication can include an image type. [0103] describes that the thumbnail can additionally include a title of the article of shared content.
Claim 16 recites an apparatus which carries out the method of Claim 3, and is similarly rejected.
With regard to Claim 5, Hunt, in view of Wang2 teaches that the message icon being moved to the object display region means that the end point of the movement track of the message icon is located in the object display region; and when the end point of the movement track is located in the first sub-region, the target transmission object is the associated terminal; when the end point of the movement track is located in the second sub-region, the target transmission object is a target session in the at least one other session; and the target session satisfies the following condition: a distance between a display position of a session identifier of the target session and a position of the end point of the movement track is less than or equal to a distance threshold.
Hunt at [0113] describes that the sharing to an IM buddy occurs when a user drops the dragged content onto the user identifier in the IM window, thereby indicating that a selected session created with a user is generated when the end point of the movement track occurs at a distance threshold where the dragged content is released over the selected target. [0083] describes that the content is selected and dragged by a user, and [0118] describes a touch screen input device. Wang2 teaches at [0493] and Fig. 7 that terminal devices can be determined and displayed as targets for a dragging operation; when combined with the teachings of Hunt, the sharing with a terminal can be carried out by the dragging operation ending at the terminal icon, as Hunt carries out sharing with drag and drop on a target icon.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Hunt and Wang with Wang2. One of skill in the art would have sought the combination, to improve user experience by enabling a drag-and-drop interface that enables additional sharing options, such as other user devices, thereby providing a more comprehensive list of sharing targets, and enabling easy sharing of data by a user with other devices for their own personal use.
Claim 18 recites an apparatus which carries out the method of Claim 5, and is similarly rejected.
With regard to Claim 7, Hunt teaches highlighting, when the message icon is moved to the object display region, the sub-region where the message icon is located. Fig. 5L shows that a particular user in the IM window is highlighted when the user drags over that user icon in the region.
With regard to Claim 8, Hunt suggests to one of skill in the art that the sub-region where the message icon is located is the second sub-region, and the method further comprises: synchronously updating, when the sub-region where the message icon is located is highlighted, a display state of the session identifier of each of the at least one other session in the second sub-region to a to-be-selected state; and switching, when the message icon is moved to a display position of the session identifier of one of the at least one other session, the display state of the session identifier of the one of the at least one other session from the to-be-selected state to a selected state. [0113] describes that hovering over a buddy causes the buddy to be highlighted; one of skill in the art would understand that the system will update indicators to add and remove highlighting as different identifiers are hovered over, and [0038] describes that share targets in IM applications can include active sessions.
With regard to Claim 12, Hunt does not specifically teach returning from the resource transmission interface to the session interface when the pressing operation on the message icon is canceled in the icon display region. Examiner takes official notice that it is well-known in the art that a user releasing a drag operation before a dragged icon reaches a destination prevents the system from moving content to the destination, such as occurs when dragging icons in a windowed operating system, which then returns the system to normal operation for receiving additional input. Therefore, this well-known feature in combination with Hunt would suggest to one of skill in the art that releasing dragged content prior to reaching a transmission destination would simply cancel a transmission operation and return the device to normal operation. As this Official notice has not been specifically challenged when made in prior actions, the noticed fact is considered Applicant-admitted prior art for the purposes of further examination.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine this well-known feature with Hunt, Wang and Wang2. Users intuitively understand that ending a drag gesture before dragging to a destination cancels the gesture, due to widespread familiarity with functions of windowed operating systems. Therefore, one of skill in the art would seek to combine this well-known function with the system described in Hunt, Wang and Wang2, to improve user experience by ensuring that drag operations function in this customary fashion.
With regard to Claim 22, Hunt, in view of Wang2 suggests that the first sub-region is non-adjacent to the second sub-region. Hunt at Fig. 5L shows sharing object areas that have space in between, i.e. are not adjacent to one another. Wang2 shows terminal sharing areas in an interface. Therefore, the combined references would suggest to one of skill in the art that a sub-region including terminals for sharing can be arranged in an interface so as to be non-adjacent to other interface areas.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Hunt and Wang with Wang2. One of skill in the art would have sought the combination, to improve user experience by enabling a drag-and-drop interface that enables additional sharing options, such as other user devices, thereby providing a more comprehensive list of sharing targets, and enabling easy sharing of data by a user with other devices for their own personal use.
With regard to Claim 23, Hunt, in view of Wang2 teaches that transmitting, in response to the message icon being moved to the object display region, the data resource corresponding to the target message to the target transmission object comprises: in response to the end point of the movement track of the message icon corresponding to the moving operation being located in the first sub-region, transmitting the data resource corresponding to the target message to the associated terminal.
Hunt at [0113] describes that the sharing to an IM buddy occurs when a user drops the dragged content onto the user identifier in the IM window, thereby indicating that a selected session created with a user is generated when the end point of the movement track occurs at a distance threshold where the dragged content is released over the selected target. [0083] describes that the content is selected and dragged by a user, and [0118] describes a touch screen input device. Wang2 teaches at [0493] and Fig. 7 that terminal devices can be determined and displayed as targets for a dragging operation; when combined with the teachings of Hunt, the sharing with a terminal can be carried out by the dragging operation ending at the terminal icon, as Hunt carries out sharing with drag and drop on a target icon.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Hunt and Wang with Wang2. One of skill in the art would have sought the combination, to improve user experience by enabling a drag-and-drop interface that enables additional sharing options, such as other user devices, thereby providing a more comprehensive list of sharing targets, and enabling easy sharing of data by a user with other devices for their own personal use.
Claims 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt, in view of Wang, in view of Wang2, and in view of He, U.S. PGPUB No. 2019/0222632 (“He”).
With regard to Claim 6, He teaches displaying a first prompt in the icon display region in a process of moving the message icon to the object display region, wherein the first prompt is used for prompting that when a pressing operation on the message icon is canceled in the icon display region, transmission of the data resource corresponding to the target message is canceled. Fig. 13 shows a prompt displayed in an icon area indicating that a user can drag a file to the particular area to initiate file uploading, thus prompting a user that releasing outside of that area will not cause the file to be shared.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine He with Hunt, Wang and Wang2. The prompts described in He provide useful feedback regarding user actions while dragging file icons. One of skill in the art would have sought at the time of filing to combine He with Hunt, Wang and Wang2, to improve user experience by providing real-time feedback regarding dragging and file sharing in a user interface.
With regard to Claim 13, He teaches playing a resource transmission animation in the object display region in a process of transmitting the data resource corresponding to the target message to the target transmission object, the resource transmission animation reflecting a transmission progress of the data resource corresponding to the target message; and outputting prompt information in the object display region after finishing the transmission of the data resource corresponding to the target message, the prompt information being used for prompting that the data resource is successfully transmitted to the target transmission object or the data resource fails to be transmitted to the target transmission object. [0163]-[0164] describe that a transmission progress bar is displayed indicating the amount of a file transmitted; the file can either be indicated as complete and a user able to close the interface, or the file can need to be uploaded again.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine He with Hunt, Wang and Wang2. The prompts described in He provide useful feedback regarding user actions while dragging file icons. One of skill in the art would have sought at the time of filing to combine He with Hunt, Wang and Wang2, to improve user experience by providing real-time feedback regarding dragging and file sharing in a user interface.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt, in view of Wang, in view of Wang2, and in view of Ledet, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0084689 (“Ledet”).
With regard to Claim 21, Ledet suggests after the message icon is moved to the object display region, in response to a pressing operation on the message icon being cancelled before reaching the duration threshold, cancelling transmission of the data resource corresponding to the target message and returning from the resource transmission interface to the dialog session interface.
Ledet at [0094] describes various implementations, one where the user does not have to wait for the selected items to change appearances to drop them in the target container, and others where the user does have to wait. This suggests to one of skill in the art that when the system requires the user to wait the threshold period to carry out the drop in the target container, the dropping is not carried out and the system returns to the previous view where the items are in their original location as typically occurs when a drag operation is canceled.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Hunt, Wang and Wang2 with Ledet. One of skill in the art would have sought the combination, to improve user experience by enabling a drag-and-drop interface that protects against unintended operations by ensuring users pause over a destination before a drop operation is carried out.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-11 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot, as the newly cited Wang2 reference cures the deficiencies with regard to the previously cited references teaching or suggesting the subject matter added by amendment.
Conclusion
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 KEITH D BLOOMQUIST whose telephone number is (571)270-7718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30-5 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, Kieu Vu can be reached at 571-272-4057. 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.
/KEITH D BLOOMQUIST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
4/9/2026
Prosecution Insights