DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 01/16/2026.
Claims 2-31 have been examined and are pending.
Claims 2, 10 and 11 are independent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 5-11, 14-18 and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Colavin (U.S. Publication 2005/0001848; hereinafter “Colavin”) in view of Katz et al. (U.S. Publication 2007/0150810; hereinafter “Katz”) further in view of Ronkainen et al. (U.S. Publication 2002/0175933; hereinafter “Ronkainen”).
In regard to independent claims 2, 10 and 11, An electronic device, comprising:
a display; one or more processors; memory; and one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for: (Colavin teaches a display, processor, memory – Colavin,; at least para [0054]).
displaying, via the display, a first page user interface of a multi-page user interface,
(Colavin teaches an extended desktop that can be scrolled either horizontally or vertically (i.e. via a mouse) – Colavin abstract; para [0029], [0030], [0093]). Colavin does not specifically teach a “multi-page” interface. However, Katz teaches a desktop navigation tool arranged in a horizontal loop whereby a desktop is scrolled horizontally, moving applications in and out of the display accordingly. It is noted that Katz’s loop is interpreted as a desktop separated into pages, each page with its own displayed application; Katz Figs. 1-4; para. [0050], [0051], [0071], [0072]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to apply Katz to Colavin, providing Colavin the benefit of a generic intuitive way to simultaneously see what is going on with multiple applications within a physically limited display screen – see Katz para. [0017]).
wherein the first page user interface includes a first set of application icons;
(Colavin does not specifically teach that its desktop comprises “application icons”. However, Ronkainen teaches an arrangement for providing an expanded desktop whereby a restricted visual desktop (202) expands into virtual desktop (204) – Ronkainen Fig. 2; para. [0052]. In addition, user interface elements, e.g. application icons – see Ronkainen para. [0026], can either be displayed in (202), or dragged outside of area (202) into virtual area (204) and still be in the desktop. In other words, icons can be grouped and placed anywhere on an extended desktop (see also Ronkainen para. [0019] to [0022]). Since Katz teaches a desktop separated into pages, with each page comprising a separate application, it would have been obvious to separate Colavin’s extended desktop into pages, each page comprising its own set of applications and icons. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to apply Ronkainen to Colavin, providing Colavin the benefit of increased organization that application icons provide on a display.)
while displaying the first page user interface of the multi-page user interface that includes the first set of applications icons, detecting an input that includes movement in a direction; (Colavin teaches an extended desktop that can be scrolled either horizontally or vertically (i.e. via a mouse) – Colavin abstract; para [0029], [0030], [0093]).
and in response to detecting the input that includes the movement in the direction:
in accordance with a determination that the direction of the movement is substantially horizonal, replacing display of the first page user interface of the multi-page user interface with a second page user interface of the multi-page user interface, wherein the second page user interface includes a second set of the application icons; (Colavin teaches an extended desktop that can be scrolled either horizontally or vertically, as per above. Colavin does not specifically teach replacing a first page with a second page comprising a second set of icons pursuant to “horizontal” scrolling. However, Katz teaches a desktop navigation tool arranged in a horizontal loop whereby a desktop is scrolled horizontally, moving applications in and out of the display accordingly; Katz Figs. 1-4; para. [0050], [0051], [0071], [0072], see also above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to apply Katz to Colavin, providing Colavin the benefit of a generic intuitive way to simultaneously see what is going on with multiple applications within a physically limited display screen – see Katz para. [0017]).
and in accordance with a determination that the direction of the movement is substantially vertical, scrolling the first set of the applications icons displayed in the first page user interface of the multi-page user interface. (The combination of Colavin and Ronkainen teach an extended desktop including application icons that can be scrolled vertically whereby new data is loaded in a buffer as the displayed data approaches the edge of the buffered data – Colavin abstract; Fig. 6; para [0029], [0030], [0093], [0134]).
In regard to dependent claims 5, 14 and 21, Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen as applied above teaches scrolling the first set of the applications icons (Ronkainen para. [0019-0022] and [0026]) includes scrolling the first set of the applications icons in the direction of the movement (Colavin, abstract; para [0029], [0030], [0093]; Colavin teaches an extended desktop that can be scrolled either horizontally or vertically. The skilled artisan is cognizant that moving (scrolling) an extended desktop will typically move the interface elements e.g. applications, icons, etc., along with it).
In regard to dependent claims 6, 15 and 22, Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen as applied above, teaches the second set of the application icons (Ronkainen para. [0019-0022] and [0026]) are different from the first set of application icons (Katz Figs. 1-4; para. [0050], [0051], [0071], [0072]; “Note: Katz teaches a desktop navigation tool arranged in a horizontal loop whereby a desktop is scrolled horizontally, moving applications in and out of the display accordingly wherein each virtual desktop in the loop is different”).
In regard to dependent claims 7, 16 and 23, Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen as applied above, teaches replacing display of the first page user interface of the multi-page user interface with the second page user interface of the multi-page user interface includes concurrently: moving the first page user interface of the multi-page user interface out of view on the display; and moving the second page user interface of the multi-page user interface into view on the display (Katz, para 0074; Note: doing animation in the loop of user interfaces implies first page user interface out of view and second page user interface into view on the display, see also item 410 of Katz’s figures, which shows the movement between applications 5 and 8 as a user scrolls horizontally).
In regard to dependent claims 8, 17 and 24, Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen as applied above, teaches while displaying the second page user interface of the multi-page user interface that includes the second set of applications icons, detecting a respective input that includes substantially horizontal movement in the direction; and in response to detecting the input that includes substantially horizontal movement in the direction, replacing display of the second page user interface of the multi-page user interface with a third page user interface of the multi-page user interface, wherein the third page user interface includes a third set of the application icons (Katz Figs. 1-4; para. [0074], [0050], [0051], [0071], [0072]; Note: Katz teaches a desktop navigation tool arranged in a horizontal loop whereby a desktop/user interface is scrolled horizontally, moving applications in and out of the display via animation. The plurality of user pages (i.e. desktop pages) in Katz’s loop supports a plurality of interface pages (3rd, 4th, 5th etc.), each with its own applications and icons as explained above.
In regard to dependent claims 9, 18 and 25, Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen as applied above, teaches the one or more programs further including instructions for: while displaying the first page user interface of the multi-page user interface, wherein the first page user interface includes the first set of application icons, detecting a respective input directed to a respective application icon of the first set of application icons; and in response to detecting the respective input directed to the respective application icon of the first set of application icons, launching an application corresponding to the respective application icon (Ronkainen para. [0019-0022] and especially [0026]; Ronkainen teaches that a user interface element (e.g. an icon) is a common term for executable applications. The skilled artisan is cognizant that activating an application icon will typically launch its respective application.
Claims 3-4, 12-13 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen as applied to claims 2, 10 and 11 above, and further in view of iPhone first generation user guide by Apple, Inc. (released on June 2007; hereinafter “Apple”).
In regard to dependent claims 3, 12 and 19, as applied above, Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen teaches scrolling the first set of the applications icons (Ronkainen para. [0019-0022] and [0026]) includes moving a respective set of applications icons of the first set of application icons under an information panel interface (Colavin, abstract; para [0029], [0030], [0093]; Colavin teaches an extended desktop that can be scrolled either horizontally or vertically. A typical virtual desktop, such as Colavin’s extended desktop, can be interpreted as a form of “information panel interface”).
Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen is silent on the information panel interface includes a time icon and/or a battery indicator. Apple teaches a system including a set of application icons displaying on an information panel interface wherein the information panel interface includes a time icon and/or battery indicator (see Apple, page 10). Colavin as modified by Katz, Ronkainen, and Apple are analogous art because they are same field of endeavor, that is, systems associated with information panel interfaces (desktops) including sets of application icons. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to apply the teaching of Apple, to include battery and/or time indicator in the information panel interface, to Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen. Motivation for doing so would have been to make sure frequently used information such as time should always display in the information panel interface and make the system more useful to the customer.
In regard to dependent claims 4, 13 and 20, Colavin as modified by Katz, Ronkainen and Apple as applied above, using the same motivation to combine, teaches the respective set of applications icons of the first set of application icons under the information panel interface are visible, the one or more programs further including instructions for: detecting an input directed to a respective application icon of the respective set of applications icons of the first set of application icons under the information panel; and in response to detecting the input directed to the respective application icon of the respective set of applications icons of the first set of application icons under the information panel, forgoing to select the respective application icon (Apple, page 15 bottom; flicking or dragging a finger to scroll (i.e. over the battery area) will not choose or activate anything).
Claims 26, 28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen as applied to claims 2, 10 and 11 above, and further in view of Lim et al. (US Pub 2008/0042984; hereinafter “Lim”).
In regard to dependent claims 26, 28 and 30, as applied above, Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen teaches scrolling the first set of the applications icons (Ronkainen para. [0019-0022] and [0026]).
Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen is silent on while scrolling, detecting a second input; and ceasing scrolling in response to the second input.
Lim teaches a system associated with scrolling gui items wherein while scrolling, detecting a second input; and ceasing scrolling in response to the second input (Lim, claim 7).
Colavin as modified by Katz, Ronkainen, and Lim are analogous art because they are same field of endeavor, that is, systems associated with scrolling gui item. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to apply the teaching of Lim, to include feature of stop scrolling using a second input, to Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen. Motivation for doing so would have been to make sure the system is functional and effective to present user gui elements that may have more priority to display in the midst of scrolling first application icons.
Claims 27, 29 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen as applied to claims 2, 10 and 11 above, and further in view of Freach et al. (US Patent 6,710788; hereinafter “Freach”).
In regard to dependent claims 27, 29 and 31, as applied above, Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen teaches first set of application and second set of application displayed in first page user interface [i.e. first desktop] and second page user interface [i.e. second desktop] respectively (Colavin abstract; Fig. 6; para [0029], [0030], [0093], [0134]); Katz Figs. 1-4; para. [0050], [0051], [0071], [0072]).
Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen is silent on docking tray and second set of application includes subset of application displayed in a docking tray.
Freach teaches a system associated with displaying first set of application icons and second set of application icons in first page user interface (i.e. first desktop) and second page user interface (i.e. second desktop) wherein said system display a docking tray including application icons (Freach, figure 1B, 2; element 20 being docking tray including application icons) wherein user is able to configure first set of icons displayed first page user interface and second set of application icons displayed in second page user interface based on user’s preference (Freach, col 3, lines 20-21; “Note: user able to configure second set of application icons implies that these second application icons can also be application icons displayed in the docking tray if user prefers”).
Colavin as modified by Katz, Ronkainen, and Lim are analogous art because they are same field of endeavor, that is, system associated with displaying first set of application icons and second set of application icons in first page user interface (i.e. first desktop) and second page user interface (i.e. second desktop). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to apply the teaching of Freach, allow user to configure second set of application icons including subset of frequency used icons displayed in docking tray, to Colavin as modified by Katz and Ronkainen. Motivation for doing so would have been to make frequently used application icons available in second page user interface which will result in saving user’s time.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding claims 2-25 have been considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument with respect to claims 26-31 are considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Applicant argues that “Moreover, even if a person of ordinary skill in the art were to be motivated to separate Colavin's extended desktop into separate pages and implement the desktop loop of Katz, as proposed by the Examiner, the combination would result in losing the ability to vertically scroll to access the offscreen portions of the extended desktop, as those portions would now be integrated into the desktop loop.”
In response, examiner respectfully clarifies that Colavin's includes two distinct input that perform two distinct tasks and render two distinct user interfaces wherein the two distinct task is independent from each other. For example, vertical scrolling input is different and distinct from horizontal scrolling input. Vertical scrolling moves contents from up to down which similar to user scroll list of items from top to bottom or bottom to top in real world. Horizontal scrolling moves content from sideways which is similar navigating pages of a book in real world. Based on the established practice of physical world (i.e. navigating pages of a book sideways similar to horizontal scrolling) as stated above, skilled artisan would be motivated to keep the task of horizontal input separate from vertical input as taught by Colavin. Thus, to keep the task of vertical input completely separate and distinct from task of horizontal input (as inspired by Colavin), a skilled artisan would be motivated to make changes only to the task of horizon input using Katz desktop loop which must not have any relationship with task of vertical input.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
HP, "hp iPAQ Pocket PC h4000 Series", released on August 2003, 143 pages. – An information panel interface including time icon and/or battery indicator.
Hotelling et al., U.S. Publication 2006/0026521 - Teaches plurality of gestures for touch sensitive devices wherein in response to swipe gesture first page is replaced with second page.
Gest, U.S. Publication 2003/0179240 - Teaches navigating plurality of desktop/pages in response to user input wherein icon corresponds to selected/active desktop or page is highlighted.
Anderson et al., U.S. Patent 7,010,755 - Teaches navigating plurality of desktop/pages in response to user input wherein icon corresponds to selected/active desktop or page is highlighted.
Working screenshot of Microsoft Office 2003 manufactured by Microsoft – Teaches well-known animation, replacing first page with second page wherein replacement includes the animation comprises first page move out of the screen and second page move into the screen.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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 REZA NABI whose telephone number is (571)270-7592. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
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 571-272-4088. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Reza Nabi/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174