DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the following communication: Amendment filed 07/31/2026. This action is made final.
Claims 1-8 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 7 and 8 are independent claims.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice as to Grounds of Rejection and Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Each of claims 4-6 is 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 its base claim and any intervening claims set forth in this action and if rewritten to overcome all the objection(s) and/or rejection(s) set forth below in this action.
The prior art cited in this Office Action and other prior art fails to disclose limitations of claims particularly in the combination of steps/features required by independent Claim 1.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-3, 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK et al (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0329475 A1 hereinafter Park) in view of Boyd et al (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0070129 A1 hereinafter Boyd) in view of SKALTSOUNIS et al (US Patent Application Publication 2023/0053198 A1 hereinafter Skaltsounis)
With regard to claims 1, 7 and 8, Park teaches a method, an electronic device, a non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising:
at an electronic device <para 0043> in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices <fig 2 item 250, 260, para 0062, input devices, display>:
displaying, via the display generation component, a first user interface <fig 13C>, including:
a list of suggested content items for inclusion in a journal entry of a journaling application, wherein suggested content items of the list of suggested content items are included in the list of suggested content items based at least in part on data detected by an application different from the journaling application <a photo is selected from a gallery using the gallery application and the user can write a note (journal) using the note application fig 13C, para 0213>; and
a respective user interface element that is selectable to cause concurrent display of the suggested content items of the list of suggested content items with a content entry region for journaling about the list of suggested content items <note interface is provided for providing a note when user when a flip indicator fig 13C item 1351 is selected, see fig 13C para 0212-0214>;
one or more processors (claim 7);
memory (claim 7); 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 (claim 7)
Park does not appear to explicitly disclose remaining limitations in combination.
In the same field of endeavor, Boyd teaches
while displaying the first user interface, receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input <fig 7, 8 show a user interface for providing comments para 0106-0109>; and
in response to receiving the input:
in accordance with a determination that the input is directed to the list of suggested content items, displaying, via the display generation component, a second user interface including first data of the suggested content items
in accordance with a determination that the input is directed to the respective user interface element, concurrently displaying, via the display generation component <see figs 6-8, where comment for the selected media can be provided para 0100-0110>:
a journal entry user interface including the suggested content items of the list of suggested content items <para 0105-0109>; and
the content entry region <figs 7 item 714 “add a comment” region for the suggested content para 0105-0109>.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Park, Boyd before him/her before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Park to include the teachings of Boyd, in order to obtain limitations taught by Boyd. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because it provides an effective way to receive comment and presenting the content.
Park and Boyd do not appear to explicitly disclose and a user interface element that is selectable to save the suggested content items in the journal entry.
In the same field of endeavor, Skaltsounis teaches a user interface element that is selectable to save the suggested content items in the journal entry <suggested content is provided for the user and user can save the entry into a journal, see fig 2C item 222, para 0020>.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Park, Boyd, Skaltsounis before him/her before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Park, Boyd to include the teachings of Skaltsounis, in order to obtain savin content in a journal. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because it provides a control to a user for desired content to be saved.
With regard to claim 2, this claim depends upon claim 1, which is rejected above. In addition, Park teaches wherein:
the second user interface includes first user interface elements including:
a first user interface element corresponding to a first type of content item in the list of suggested content items, wherein the first user interface element visually indicates the first type, a number of content items of the first type, or other metadata associated with content items of the first type <figs 5A, 5B show types of media such as contacts, map, music can be shown>; and
a second user interface element corresponding to a second type of content item in the list of suggested content items, wherein the second user interface element visually indicates the second type, a number of content items of the second type, or other metadata associated with content items of the second type <figs 5A, 5B show types of media such as contacts, map, music can be shown>.
With regard to claim 3, this claim depends upon claim 2, which is rejected above. In addition, Park teaches wherein:
the first user interface element includes a first selectable option for excluding or including content items of the first type on a per first content item type basis <any of contacts/music can be selected see figs 5A, 5B para 01133-0140> ; and
the second user interface element includes a second selectable option for excluding or including content items of the second type on a per second content item type basis <any of contacts/music can be selected see figs 5A, 5B para 0133-0140>.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on July 31, 2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection and arguments presented are not persuasive. It appears applicant arguments attempt to narrow the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed language, the examiner cannot make narrow interpretation per applicant’s remarks. Applicant is invited to amend the claims to reflect the distinctions pointed out in the remarks and to ensure that claims are interpreted in such intended fashion.
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 ANIL K BHARGAVA whose telephone number is (571)270-3278. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 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, Adam Queler can be reached at 571-272-4140. 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.
/ANIL K BHARGAVA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172
