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 .
Claims 1-18 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: The claim should presumably disclose: “… a storage section configured to store[age] an…”. Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “obtaining section” and “generation section” in claim 18.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 limitations “obtaining section” and “generation section” in claim 18 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 11-13, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kang (US 2015/0131121).
With respect to claim 1, Kang discloses: a first obtaining step of obtaining an image concerning a task being executed by the application program ([0077], lines 1-2, [0096], image operation is a printing operation which corresponds to image concerning a task); and
a generating step of generating a content based on the image obtained in the first obtaining step ([0084], [0185], pop-up corresponds to content, [0087]- [0089]), [0100], generation of a pop-up during operation), wherein
in a case where the application program is switched to a background state during the execution of the task, the content is displayed on a forefront side on a display unit of the information processing apparatus ([0105], [0106], Fig. 3, “no paper” corresponds to the pop-up/content that is displayed on the forefront of the display when the printing application is in the background state).
With respect to claim 5, Kang discloses: wherein the image is obtained at first time intervals in the first obtaining step ([0015]).
With respect to claim 11, Kang discloses: wherein the image concerning the task being executed by the application program is an image concerning a GUI, and the content is displayed on the forefront side of the display unit in response to a user's operation on an object included in the GUI (Fig. 3, the “no paper” is displayed at the forefront).
With respect to claim 12, Kang discloses: wherein the object is an object to instruct execution of the task ([0089]).
With respect to claim 13, Kang discloses: wherein display of the content is terminated in a case where the task is completed (inherent in Kang is that the popup will disappear once the paper tray is replenished).
With respect to claims 17 and 18, they recite similar limitations as claim 1 and are, therefore, rejected under the same citations and rationale.
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) 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (US 2015/0131121) in view of Einman et al. (US 2014/0084071).
With respect to claim 2, Kang does not specifically disclose: a continuing step of allowing the application program to continuously execute the task until the task is completed, even in the case where the application program is switched to the background state.
However, Einman discloses: a continuing step of allowing the application program to continuously execute the task until the task is completed, even in the case where the application program is switched to the background state ([0002]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Einman to ensure tasks and operations do not stop and continue executing even when a higher priority task is in the foreground state thereby allowing higher efficiency and lower latency.
With respect to claim 3, Kang discloses: wherein the information processing apparatus operates in a picture-in-picture mode, and the content is displayed on a picture-in-picture screen (Fig. 3, the “no paper” sign is in a window within a larger window).
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (US 2015/0131121) in view of Einman et al. (US 2014/0084071) further in view of Choi et al. (US 2023/0038036).
With respect to claim 4, Kang and Einman do not specifically disclose: wherein in response to detection of termination of the picture-in-picture mode, the application program in the background state is returned to a foreground state.
However, Choi discloses: wherein in response to detection of termination of the picture-in-picture mode, the application program in the background state is returned to a foreground state ([0126]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Choi to ensure the user’s attention is returned to the application whose view was blocked by the pop-up/picture in picture mode.
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (US 2015/0131121) in view of Perry et al. (US 9274894).
With respect to claim 16, Kang does not specifically disclose: wherein the application program operates on an operating system (OS) and the OS cancels processing of the application program in a case where the application program operates in the background state for a predetermined period of time.
However, Perry discloses: wherein the application program operates on an operating system (OS) and the OS cancels processing of the application program in a case where the application program operates in the background state for a predetermined period of time (col. 1, lines 5-22).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Perry to ensure resource starvation does not occur by not preoccupying a resource such as storage, processing, or networking resources on a process/application that is hung.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-10, 14 and 15 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art, for example Kang (US 2015/0131121) discloses system that includes mobile devices and a printer communicating with each other (see e.g. Fig. 3). Specifically, Kang discloses: a first obtaining step of obtaining an image concerning a task being executed by the application program ([0077], lines 1-2, [0096], image operation is a printing operation which corresponds to image concerning a task); and a generating step of generating a content based on the image obtained in the first obtaining step ([0084], [0185], pop-up corresponds to content, [0087]- [0089]), [0100], generation of a pop-up during operation), wherein in a case where the application program is switched to a background state during the execution of the task, the content is displayed on a forefront side on a display unit of the information processing apparatus ([0105], [0106], Fig. 3, “no paper” corresponds to the pop-up/content that is displayed on the forefront of the display when the printing application is in the background state). Kang or the prior art does not disclose in any reasonable combination a defined interval of 1 second and a video rate of one per second, as disclosed in claim 6, between a printer and a mobile device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WISSAM RASHID whose telephone number is (571)270-3758. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am-5:00 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, Aimee Li can be reached at (571)272-4169. 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.
/WISSAM RASHID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2195
Prosecution Insights