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 .
1. This communication is responsive to the Amendment filed 12/23/2025.
2. Claims 1, 4-13 and 16-24 are pending in this application. Claims 1, 13 and 20 are independent claims. In the instant Amendment, claims 1, 12-13 and 20 were amended, claims 2-3 and 14-15 were canceled, and claims 21-24 were added. This action is made Final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
4. Claim(s) 1, 4-13 and 16-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qui et al (“Qui” CN 113204307) in view of Shah (US 2021/0048933).
Regarding claim 1, Qui discloses a method for object dragging, the method comprising:
establishing, at an electronic device with a first operating system and a second operating system running, a connection between the first operating system and the second operating system (see fig 1, S6; e.g., app manager on Linux side communicates with Android), wherein the first operating system comprises a first application (see paragraphs [0002]-[0006] and [0047]-[0050]; e.g., Android application window), and the second operating system comprises a desktop screen (e.g., Linux desktop);
in response to a drag operation by a user on a target object in the first application (see fig 1, S1; e.g., drag files from Android application window and drop onto Linux), obtaining position information corresponding to the drag operation (see fig 1, S2; e.g., detecting and acquiring dragging message);
in accordance with a determination that a desktop screen corresponding to the position information belongs to a desktop screen in the second operating system, and that a drag release operation by the user on the target object is received, controlling the first application to send drag data of the target object to the desktop screen (see fig 1, S3; e.g., detecting and acquiring mouse release message), wherein the drag data comprises access information for accessing the target object (see fig 1, S6/S7, storage path; e.g., “obtaining a file path”); and
performing, based on the drag data, a target operation on the target object in the desktop screen (see fig 1, S8; e.g., drag and drop files between operating systems to a share interface to share files with friends), comprising:
controlling the second application to obtain the target object based on the drag data; and performing the target operation on the target object in the second application (see fig 1, S7; e.g., each file in database has unique identifier; also see fig 1, S8; e.g., drag and drop files between operating systems to a share interface to share files with friends); or
controlling the second application to perform, based on a content of the target object comprised in the drag data, the target operation on the target object in the second application (see fig 1, S7; e.g., each file in database has unique identifier; also see fig 1, S8; e.g., drag and drop files between operating systems to a share interface to share files with friends).
wherein the second operating system runs in the first operating system in a containerized mode.
Qui does not expressly disclose wherein the second operating system comprises a second application.
However, Shah discloses disclose wherein the second operating system comprises a second application (see figs 5A and 5B; cross platform drag and drop functionality; also see paragraph [0017]; e.g., drag and drop objects between two applications with different operating systems). It would have been obvious to an artisan before the effective filing date of the present invention to include Shah’s teachings in Qui’s user interface in an effort to provide the ability to “remote access” one device from another device and interact with the native experience (e.g., remote desktop or visual network computing).
Regarding claim 4, Shah discloses after performing the target operation on the target object, further comprising: presenting a target icon in a window corresponding to the second application based on a window identifier of the second application comprised in the drag data, the target icon being generated based on the drag data (see figs 5A and 5B).
Regarding claim 5, Qui discloses wherein the controlling the second application to obtain the target object based on the drag data comprises one or more of:
in accordance with a determination that the drag data comprises a storage path of the target object, controlling the second application to obtain the target object based on the storage path;
in accordance with a determination that the drag data comprises an access identifier of a shared memory occupied by the target object, controlling the second application to obtain the target object from the shared memory based on the access identifier; or
in accordance with a determination that the drag data comprises a file descriptor of the target object, controlling the second application to obtain the target object based on the file descriptor (see fig 1, S7; e.g., each file in database has unique identifier).
Regarding claim 6, Qui and Shah disclose wherein the first operating system comprises a first window manager and the second operating system comprises a second window manager, further comprising:
establishing a connection between the first window manager and the second window manager, wherein the controlling the first application to send drag data of the target object to the second application comprises: controlling the first window manager to send the drag data to the second window manager, and controlling the second window manager to send the drag data to the second application based on a window identifier comprised in the drag data (see claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 7, Qui discloses wherein the first operating system comprises a first window manager and a first service proxy component, and the second operating system comprises a second window manager and a second service proxy component, further comprising:
establishing a connection between the first service proxy component and the second service proxy component, wherein the controlling the first application to send drag data of the target object to the second application comprises: controlling the first window manager to send the drag data to the first service proxy component, controlling the first service proxy component to send the drag data to the second service proxy component, controlling the second service proxy component to send the drag data to the second window manager, and controlling the second window manager to send the drag data to the second application based on a window identifier comprised in the drag data (see fig 1, S6 and S7 ; e.g., the Linux side stores the absolute path in the Android where the file to be loaded is located and the name of the Android application of the file to be loaded and send it to the component on the Android side for interacting through socket; Linux receives socket message).
Regarding claim 8, Qui and Shah disclose in accordance with a determination that a content of the target object is carried by a memory copy, before obtaining the target object, reading the content of the target object into a memory (see claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 9, Qui discloses wherein the drag data further comprises position information of an icon of the target object in the window corresponding to the second application, and the presenting a target icon in a window corresponding to the second application based on a window identifier of the second application contained in the drag data comprises: determining the second application corresponding to the window identifier; and presenting the target icon in the window corresponding to the second application based on the position information of the target object in the window corresponding to the second application (see fig 1, S7; e.g., each file in database has unique identifier).
Regarding claim 10, Qui discloses wherein before the controlling the first application to send drag data of the target object to the second application, the method further comprising: determining, based on a window state of the second application, whether the window of the second application is in an active state; and in accordance with a determination that the window of the second application is in the active state, performing an operation of controlling the first application to send the drag data of the target object to the second application (well-known feature in the art).
Regarding claim 11, Shah discloses in response to the drag operation by the user on the target object in the first application, presenting a drag effect view, wherein the drag effect view comprises at least one of a highlight effect, a shadow effect, a blur effect, and an overlap effect for the target object (see paragraph [0030]; e.g., indicate drag state; shadowed or highlighted).
Regarding claim 12, Qui discloses wherein before a drag release operation by the user on the target object is received, the method further comprising: controlling the first window manager to send a drag request to the second window manager; the drag request comprising metadata of the target object and a window identifier of the second application of the second operating system, wherein the performing, based on the drag data, the target operation on the target object in the second application comprises: determining whether the target object matches the second application based on the metadata of the target object, and in accordance with a determination that the target object matches the second application, performing the target operation on the target object in the second application based on the drag data (see fig 1, S5 and S8; e.g., detecting whether the type of the file to be loaded supports being loaded by an Android application).
Claim 13 and 16-19 are similar in scope to claims 1 and 4-7, respectively, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 20 is similar in scope to claim 1 and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 21, Qui discloses in accordance with a determination that a content of the target object is carried by a memory copy, before obtaining the target object, reading the content of the target object into a memory (see claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 22, Shah discloses wherein the drag data further comprises position information of an icon of the target object in the window corresponding to the second application, and the presenting a target icon in a window corresponding to the second application based on a window identifier of the second application contained in the drag data comprises: determining the second application corresponding to the window identifier; and presenting the target icon in the window corresponding to the second application based on the position information of the target object in the window corresponding to the second application (see figs 5A and 5B).
Regarding claim 23, Qui discloses wherein before the controlling the first application to send drag data of the target object to the second application, further comprising: determining, based on a window state of the second application, whether the window of the second application is in an active state; and in accordance with a determination that the window of the second application is in the active state, performing an operation of controlling the first application to send the drag data of the target object to the second application (see fig 1, S1/S2; e.g., active/inactive window).
Regarding claim 24, Qui discloses in response to the drag operation by the user on the target object in the first application, presenting a drag effect view, wherein the drag effect view comprises at least one of a highlight effect, a shadow effect, a blur effect, and an overlap effect for the target object (see fig 1, S1; e.g., “focus event”; active window displayed on top layer).
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant's arguments filed 12/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “dragging a target object in a first application directly into an interface of a second application without importing the target object into the second operating system in a copy mode firstly and then opening the target object with the second operating system”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant is claiming the “drag data comprises access information for accessing the target object (see claim 1).” Examiner notes that either a “storage path” or a “file descriptor,” as claimed in claim 5, could be interpreted as the claimed “access information” since they both could be interpreted as drag data/access information.
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sepulveda et al (US 2020/0333994).
7. 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.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASHAWN N TILLERY whose telephone number is (571)272-6480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00a - 5:30p.
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 L 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.
/RASHAWN N TILLERY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174