DETAILED ACTION
Notice of AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 16 March 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.321(c) or § 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804(I)(B)(1). For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 C.F.R. § 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 C.F.R. § 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,880,537. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present claims are generic to a species or sub-genus claimed in the aforementioned patent (i.e., the entire scope of the present claims fall within the scope of the corresponding claims of the aforementioned patent).
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mitchell et al., US 2002/0113816 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Mitchell discloses a device, comprising:
A memory. Mitchell teaches a computer system comprising a memory. Mitchell ¶ 17.
A processor, connected to the memory, to: receive electronic information; analyze the electronic information[; and] display, based on analyzing the electronic information, the electronic information on a graphical user interface. Mitchell teaches a computer system comprising a processing unit that executes an application. Mitchell ¶ 17. The application may receive hierarchical data. Id. ¶ 81, fig. 5 (step 500). The application may analyze the hierarchical data. Id. ¶ 82, fig. 5 (steps 501-503). The application may display the hierarchical data. Id. ¶ 86-88, fig. 5 (step 506).
Where: the displayed electronic information is shown as a first electronic formation, where the first electronic formation is located on a first electronic layer that is displayed and is visible on the graphical user interface. Mitchell teaches a GUI displaying first hierarchical data in a first electronic layer (“top level view”). Mitchell fig. 3, ¶¶ 45-46.
Where additional electronic information is within a second electronic formation, where: the second electronic formation is on a second electronic layer, where: the second electronic formation is not visible on the graphical user interface. Mitchell teaches a second electronic layer (“close-up or zoomed in view”) of second hierarchical data. Mitchell fig. 4, ¶¶ 48-49. The second electronic layer is not initially visible in the GUI. Id. ¶ 47.
The first electronic formation is electronically related to the second electronic formation in a hierarchical relationship. Mitchell teaches that the second hierarchical data descends from the first hierarchical data (e.g., it includes grand-child nodes of the top node). Mitchell ¶ 48.
Receive an electronic communication, based on selection of the first electronic formation; change the display on the graphical user interface, where: the changed display is visibly displaying the second electronic formation. Mitchell teaches receiving signals from a hand operated selection mechanism to change the GUI from displaying the first electronic layer to the second electronic layer. Mitchell ¶ 47.
Where: the first electronic layer and the second electronic layer both electronically move within an x-y-z electronic three-dimensional space, the second electronic layer is electronically located at a particular distance on the z-axis of the x-y-z electronic three-dimensional space, the second electronic layer visibly displays the second electronic formation and the first electronic formation is not visible on the second electronic layer. Mitchell teaches that “each object displayed is graphically scaled in size and proportion directly to the level of the hierarchy to which it relates and is positioned in relation to other objects within the hierarchy of the data.” Mitchell ¶ 17. Mitchell also teaches zooming-in and zooming-out. Id. ¶¶ 20-22 Accordingly, the first electronic layer (“top level view”) and second electronic layer (“close-up or zoomed in view”) exist in an x-y-z space and are located at a particular distance on the z-axis relative to each other. Mitchell teaches that the first electronic layer may display nodes (e.g., node 211). that are not visible in the second electronic layer. See id. figs. 3-4. Accordingly, hierarchical data visible in the first electronic layer may not be visible in the second electronic layer.
Where: the change in the display of the second electronic formation and the non-display of the first electronic formation occurs simultaneously, and the x-y-z electronic three-dimensional space is displayed as an electronic x-y two-dimensional space, and the first electronic layer and the second electronic layer results in displaying greater amounts of electronic information and reducing computer processing time and resources. Mitchell teaches an animated zoom-in effect whereby the transition GUI simultaneously transitions from displaying the first electronic layer to displaying the second electronic layer. Mitchell ¶¶ 53-54. The phrase “results in displaying greater amounts of electronic information and reducing computer processing time and resources” has been interpreted to recite an intended use or result. Therefore, the phrase has been afforded no limiting effect. Nevertheless, Mitchell teaches a process that allows for displaying a large amount of data with reduced management overhead. Id. ¶ 65.
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Mitchell discloses where the additional electronic information is not displayed within the first electronic formation. Mitchell teaches that the second electronic layer may display nodes (e.g., node 301) that are not visible in the first electronic layer. Mitchell ¶ 49; see also figs. 3-4.
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Mitchell discloses where the second electronic formation is a first node and the second electronic formation is a second node, where the first node is related to the second node within the hierarchical relationship. Mitchell ¶¶ 40-56.
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claim 3, Mitchell discloses where the first node is a parent node and the second node is a child node. Mitchell ¶ 49; see also figs. 3-4.
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 4, Mitchell discloses where the relationship of the first node and the second node permits the relationship of the first electronic layer and the second electronic layer within the x-y-z electronic three-dimensional space. Mitchell ¶¶ 40-56.
Regarding claim 6, Mitchell discloses a method, comprising:
Receiving, by a computing device, electronic information; analyzing, by the computing device, the electronic information [; and] displaying, by the computing device, based on analyzing the electronic information, a first electronic formation. Mitchell teaches a computer system that executes an application. Mitchell ¶ 17. The application may receive hierarchical data. Id. ¶ 81, fig. 5 (step 500). The application may analyze the hierarchical data. Id. ¶ 82, fig. 5 (steps 501-503). The application may display the hierarchical data. Id. ¶ 86-88, fig. 5 (step 506).
Where: the first electronic formation is located on a first electronic layer that is displayed and is visible on the graphical user interface. Mitchell teaches a GUI displaying first hierarchical data in a first electronic layer (“top level view”). Mitchell fig. 3, ¶¶ 45-46.
A second electronic formation is located on a second layer, where: the second electronic formation is not visible on the graphical user interface. Mitchell teaches a second electronic layer (“close-up or zoomed in view”) of second hierarchical data. Mitchell fig. 4, ¶¶ 48-49. The second electronic layer is not initially visible in the GUI. Id. ¶ 47.
The first electronic formation is electronically related to the second electronic formation in a hierarchical relationship. Mitchell teaches that the second hierarchical data descends from the first hierarchical data (e.g., it includes grand-child nodes of the top node). Mitchell ¶ 48.
Receiving, by the computing device, an electronic communication, based on selection of the first electronic formation; changing, by the computing device, the display on the graphical user interface, where: the changed display is visually displaying the second electronic formation. Mitchell teaches receiving signals from a hand operated selection mechanism to change the GUI from displaying the first electronic layer to the second electronic layer. Mitchell ¶ 47.
Where: the second electronic layer is electronically located at a particular distance on a z-axis of an x-y-z three-dimensional space, and the first electronic formation is not visible on the second electronic layer. Mitchell teaches that “each object displayed is graphically scaled in size and proportion directly to the level of the hierarchy to which it relates and is positioned in relation to other objects within the hierarchy of the data.” Mitchell ¶ 17. Mitchell also teaches zooming-in and zooming-out. Id. ¶¶ 20-22 Accordingly, the first electronic layer (“top level view”) and second electronic layer (“close-up or zoomed in view”) exist in an x-y-z space and are located at a particular distance on the z-axis relative to each other. Mitchell teaches that the first electronic layer may display nodes (e.g., node 211). that are not visible in the second electronic layer. See id. figs. 3-4. Accordingly, hierarchical data visible in the first electronic layer may not be visible in the second electronic layer.
Where: the change in the display of the second electronic formation and the non-display of the first electronic formation occurs simultaneously, and the x-y-z three-dimensional space is displayed as an electronic x-y two-dimensional space. Mitchell teaches an animated zoom-in effect whereby the transition GUI simultaneously transitions from displaying the first electronic layer to displaying the second electronic layer. Mitchell ¶¶ 53-54.
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 6, Mitchell discloses where the first electronic formation and the second electronic formation are located at different electronic locations when displayed on the graphic user interface. Mitchell teaches that the GUI may display a first electronic layer with nodes (e.g., node 205) that are in different locations than nodes in the second electronic layer. See Mitchell figs. 3-4.
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 7, Mitchell discloses where the change from displaying the first electronic formation to the second electronic formation is instantaneous and the electronic movement from the first electronic layer to the second electronic layer, on the z-axis, occurs automatically. The phrase “the change from displaying the first electronic formation to the second electronic formation is instantaneous” has been interpreted to encompass an animation that commences without delay. This interpretation is in accordance with paragraph 53 of the specification, which states “area 1204 may zoom and expand in an instantaneous fashion and appear as a larger area (area 1204B) and in the approximate center of the display.” Mitchell teaches that the animated change between views commences “[u]pon selection of [a] child node.” Mitchell ¶ 47. Accordingly, Mitchell suggests that the animation commences without delay.
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claim 8, Mitchell discloses where the first electronic formation and the second electronic formation are related to each other in a hierarchical relationship. Mitchell teaches that the second hierarchical data descends from the first hierarchical data (e.g., it includes grand-child nodes of the top node). Mitchell ¶ 48.
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claim 8, Mitchell discloses where the first electronic formation has a child relationship to the second electronic formation, and where the first electronic formation has a parent relationship to a third electronic formation. Mitchell ¶ 20-22.
Regarding claim 11, which depends on claim 8, Mitchell discloses where the first electronic formation is configured to be displayed as a first area shown on the first electronic layer and the first electronic formation is configured to be displayed as a second area shown on the second electronic layer. Mitchell teaches that the second electronic layer may display nodes (e.g., node 211) that are also visible in the first electronic layer. Mitchell ¶¶ 47-48; see also figs. 3-4.
Regarding claim 12, which depends on claim 11, Mitchell discloses: displaying, by the computing device, a third electronic formation, where the third electronic formation is part of a third electronic layer, and where: the first electronic formation, displayed as the first area, and the third electric formation, displayed as a third area, are displayed together even though the first electronic formation and the third electronic formation are on different electronic layers; selecting, by the computing device, the third electronic formation, where the selecting the third electronic formation results in the third electronic layer electronically moving on the z-axis and increasing the third area's size. Mitchell ¶¶ 40-56.
Regarding claim 13, which depends on claim 12, Mitchell discloses where the movement of the first electronic layer on the z-axis and the second electronic layer on the z-axis results in the computing device results in visually panning the x-y-z electronic three-dimensional space displayed on the graphical user interface. Mitchell ¶¶ 45, 48; see also figs. 3-5.
Regarding claim 14, which depends on claim 13, Mitchell discloses where the first area and the second area have a first spatial relationship displayed on the graphical user interface. Mitchell ¶¶ 40-56; see also figs. 3-5.
Regarding claim 15, which depends on claim 14, Mitchell discloses where the first spatial relationship is different than a second spatial relationship that is between the first area and the third area. Mitchell ¶¶ 40-56; see also figs. 3-5.
Conclusion
Although particular portions of the prior art may have been cited in support of the rejections, the specified citations are merely representative of the teachings. Other passages and figures in the cited prior art may apply. Accordingly, Applicant should consider the entirety of the cited prior art for potentially teaching all or part of the claims.
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Decombe, US 7,290,223 B2, discloses an interface for displaying and exploring hierarchical data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Asher D Kells whose telephone number is (571)270-7729. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri., 8 a.m. - 4 p.m..
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.
Asher D. Kells
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2171
/Asher D Kells/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171