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 .
Applicant’s response to the last Office Action dated 03/24/2026, as well as arguments and amendments made, filed 07/16/2026 have been entered and made of record.
Status of claims
Claims 1-11 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the interpretation of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) have been fully considered. Claim 10 has been amended to recite sufficient structure. Thus, the interpretation of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of independent claims 1, 10, and 11 have been fully considered. The arguments made regarding claims 1, 10, and 11 are merely directed to the amended portions of the claims, and the new analyses presented below render these arguments moot. Applicant’s amendments of independent claims 1, 10, and 11 have altered the scope of the claims, and therefore, has initiated the following new ground(s) of rejection.
In response to Applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the motivation for combination of the references are common knowledge in the art. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-6 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allyn (US 2005/0108620 A1), in view of Power UP! Computer Training (YouTube: “Resizing and Rescaling Objects in PowerPoint” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61_oP807kNE )
Regarding claim 1, Allyn teaches, “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium on which a computer program is recorded, wherein the computer program, when executed, causes a computer to perform an object resizing method comprising” (Allyn, Pg. 15, Claim 18 discloses; “A computer-readable medium having computer-executable instructions for selecting and manipulating multiple objects, comprising”). Allyn does not explicitly teach, “receiving an editing operation for simultaneously changing sizes of a plurality of objects in a state where the plurality of objects are selected on a screen, wherein the editing operation is an operation to move a predetermined object displayed at a rectangular outer frame of the plurality of objects; and changing the sizes of the plurality of objects in response to the editing operation that is received, without changing reference points that are set for the respective objects.” Since Allyn does not explicitly disclose these limitations, Examiner relies on Power UP! Computer Training in an analogous field of endeavor. Specifically, Power UP! Computer Training teaches, “receiving an editing operation for simultaneously changing sizes of a plurality of objects in a state where the plurality of objects are selected on a screen, wherein the editing operation is an operation to move a predetermined object displayed at a rectangular outer frame of the plurality of objects;” (Power UP! Computer Training, “Trick to Resize a Group” at timestamp 7:00 – 8:10 shows an editing operation that simultaneously changes the size of a plurality of images. All 3 images are selected, and the editing operation is displayed at a rectangular frame outside of the plurality of objects.
PNG
media_image1.png
743
1325
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The blue box shows the editing operation displayed at a rectangular frame outside of the plurality of image.) “and changing the sizes of the plurality of objects in response to the editing operation that is received, without changing reference points that are set for the respective objects.” (Power UP! Computer Training, “Trick to Resize a Group” at timestamp 7:00 – 8:10 shows an editing operation that changes the size of a plurality of images while keeping a reference point for each image the same (top left corner reference point of each image).)
Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of manipulating and resizing objects on a screen using a computer program. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Allyn to incorporate the teachings of Power UP! Computer Training in order to include a clear edit region in a computer program for editing and resizing objects for simultaneously manipulating objects. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the previously described storage medium of Allyn with the teachings of Power UP! Computer Training to quickly and easily manipulate the objects to make them the same size simultaneously. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to combine Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training to obtain claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Allyn in view of Power UP! Computer Training teaches, “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of objects are linked to one another by grouping of the plurality of objects” (Allyn, Pg. 1, Para. 4 discloses; “Some existing approaches provide the capability for a user to select multiple objects, in a document and then transform the multiple objects into a single object representation that can be manipulated (sometimes referred to as "grouping")).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Allyn in view of Power UP! Computer Training teaches, “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the reference points are center points of the respective objects” (Power UP! Computer Training, “Resizing and Rescaling Objects in PowerPoint” at timestamp 4:26 - 5:01 shows a computer program capable of resizing objects with respect to the center point of the object) (Allyn, Pg. 1, Para. 7 discloses; “These new approaches need to also provide the capability to manipulate multiple objects, for example by rotating or flipping them, with respect to an axis or reference point that can be adjusted to other positions besides the approximate center of the group of objects” Allyn teaches multiple objects with a reference point, and Power UP! Computer Training teaches using the center point of the objects). The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training references in the rejection of claim 1, apply to claim 3 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the storage medium recited in claim 3 is met by Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Allyn in view of Power UP! Computer Training teaches, “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of objects are linked to one another by positional alignment of the plurality of objects” (Power UP! Computer Training, “Resizing and Rescaling Objects in PowerPoint” at timestamp 8:14 – 9:29 shows a computer program capable of aligning a plurality objects/pictures being linked to each other by the position of their center points). The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training references in the rejection of claim 1, apply to claim 4 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the storage medium recited in claim 4 is met by Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Allyn in view of Power UP! Computer Training teaches, “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 4, wherein the reference points are each a point belonging to a corresponding one of the objects, the point being adjusted in position along with the corresponding object so as to belong to an array reference line for positional alignment of the plurality of objects as well” (Power UP! Computer Training, “Resizing and Rescaling Objects in PowerPoint” at timestamp 8:14 – 9:29 shows multiple reference points corresponding to the object/image, specifically at timestamp 8:22. Examiner interprets these points to be geometrically used to positionally align the objects and create a reference line through the middle of the objects, as shown later in the 8:14 – 9:29 time period.) The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training references in the rejection of claim 1, apply to claim 5 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the storage medium recited in claim 5 is met by Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Allyn in view of Power UP! Computer Training teaches, “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1, wherein in the changing the sizes, the plurality of objects are scaled up or down simultaneously” (Power UP! Computer Training, “Resizing and Rescaling Objects in PowerPoint” at timestamp 7:00 – 8:11 shows a computer program capable of changing the sizes of a plurality of objects/images simultaneously). The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training references in the rejection of claim 1, apply to claim 6 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the storage medium recited in claim 6 is met by Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Allyn in view of Power UP! Computer Training teaches, “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the object resizing method further comprises, in a case where a frame line of a certain one of the objects overlaps with a frame line of a prescribed region during continuation of the changing the sizes of the plurality of objects, changing the reference point of the certain object to a perpendicular point, wherein the perpendicular point belongs to the frame line of the prescribed region with which the frame line of the object overlaps, and wherein the perpendicular point corresponds to the reference point” (Power UP! Computer Training, “Resizing and Rescaling Objects in PowerPoint” at timestamp 7:48 – 7:58 shows a computer program with an object/image with reference points on all edges of the object/image. It also shows the ability resize an object/image while keeping a vertical side in the same horizontal position. Timestamp 7:00 – 7:09 shows the ability to translate the object/image to anywhere within the edit region.) It would have been obvious to use the translation feature of this program to move an object/image to overlap with the frame line of the edit region and resize the object/image while changing the reference point to one on the overlapping side. The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training references in the rejection of claim 1, apply to claim 8 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the storage medium recited in claim 8 is met by Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Allyn in view of Power UP! Computer Training teaches, “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 8, wherein the object resizing method further comprises, in a case where a certain one of the objects the reference point of which has been changed in the changing the reference point is resized back to the size that the certain object had when the changing the reference point was executed, changing the reference point of the certain object back to the reference point before the changing of the reference point” (Power UP! Computer Training, “Resizing and Rescaling Objects in PowerPoint” at timestamp 7:00 – 8:11 shows a computer program with the ability to resize and then be returned to its original size. It also shows multiple reference points for each of the objects.) It would have been obvious to choose a different or same reference point for each of the steps of resizing and returning to an original size. It would be obvious for a user to select these reference points by implementing a certain design choice. This program from Power UP! Computer Training is capable of performing the limitations of claim 9. The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training references in the rejection of claim 1, apply to claim 9 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the storage medium recited in claim 9 is met by Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training.
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 recites an apparatus with elements corresponding to the storage medium instructions recited in claim 1. Therefore, the recited elements of this claim are mapped to the proposed combination in the same manner as the corresponding steps in its corresponding storage medium instructions claim. Additionally, the rationale and motivation to combine the Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training references, presented in rejection of claim 1, apply to this claim. Finally, the combination of Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training references discloses “one or more processors” and “one or more memories” (Allyn, Pg. 4, Para. 42 discloses “Moreover, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the present invention may be implemented in other computer system configurations, including hand-held devices, multiprocessor systems, microprocessor based or programmable consumer electronics, network person computers, minicomputers, mainframe computers, and the like. The invention may also be practiced in distributed computing environments, where tasks are performed by remote processing devices that are linked through a communications network. In a distributed computing environment, program modules may be located in both local and remote memory storage devices.”)
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 recites a method with steps corresponding to the elements of the storage medium instructions recited in claim 1. Therefore, the recited steps of this claim are mapped to the proposed combination in the same manner as the corresponding elements in its corresponding storage medium claim. Additionally, the rationale and motivation to combine the Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training references, presented in rejection of claim 1, apply to this claim.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allyn, in view of Power UP! Computer Training, in further view of QA (YouTube: “Aligning Images in PowerPoint” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z9e_hZlFk8 )
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Allyn in view of Power UP! Computer Training teaches, “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1, wherein in the changing the sizes; (1) in scaling up of a first object included in the plurality of objects, (2) in scaling down of the first object included in the plurality of objects, (Power UP! Computer Training, “Resizing and Rescaling Objects in PowerPoint” at timestamp 7:40 – 8:00 shows a computer program with the ability to simultaneously scaling one object up and scaling another object down.) The combination of Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training does not teach “a certain length of empty space is maintained between the first object and a second object adjacent to the first object”. Since the combination of Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training does not explicitly disclose these limitations, Examiner relies on the teachings of QA, in an analogous field of endeavor. Specifically, QA discloses, “a certain length of empty space is maintained between the first object and a second object adjacent to the first object” (QA, “Aligning Images in PowerPoint” at timestamp 1:00 – 2:17 shows a computer program with the ability to maintain a certain distance between multiple objects even while manipulating and translating the objects.)
Allyn, Power UP! Computer Training, and QA are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of manipulating and resizing objects on a screen using a computer program. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Allyn and of Power UP! Computer Training to incorporate the teachings of QA in order to maintain a distance between multiple objects while manipulating the objects. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the previously described storage medium of Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training with the teachings of QA to provide a user with the option to maintain a certain distance between objects while they manipulate the objects. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to combine Allyn and Power UP! Computer Training with QA to obtain claim 7.
Conclusion
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 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 JUSTIN M. OAKES whose telephone number is (571)272-9379. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-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, Amandeep Saini can be reached at (571) 272-3382. 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.
/JUSTIN M OAKES/Examiner, Art Unit 2662
/Siamak Harandi/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2662
Prosecution Insights