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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 6-7, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The disclosure as originally filed does not contain sufficient written description of the generic functionality of displaying, among the folders forming the classification structure, only the folder in which the document file is stored and not display rest of the folders which do not contain any of the document files. That is, the single disclosed embodiment, Specification ¶¶ [0042]-[0045], Fig. 2A, comprising specific steps for performing the function of displaying as claimed is not sufficient disclosure for the claimed generic result of displaying, among the folders forming the classification structure, only the folder in which the document file is stored and not display rest of the folders which do not contain any of the document files. MPEP § 2161.01; see LizardTech v. Earth Resource Mapping, Inc., 424 F.3d 1336, 1346, 76 USPQ2d 1731, 1733 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (““[T]he description of one method for creating a seamless DWT does not entitle the inventor . . . to claim any and all means for achieving that objective.”).
Prior Art
The prior art does not teach hiding empty folders in a display of a directory structure where the folders were formed on the basis of attribute items of document files classified by the directory structure. Although Oba, US 2012/0110046 A1, Fig. 5, teaches a display of a classification structure for classifying document files into folders that are hierarchically formed on the basis of attribute items of the document files, Oba does not teach displaying only the folder in which the document file is stored among the folders forming the classification structure. Even if one were to consider “a folder in which the document file is stored” to be the “Written entrustment agreement” folder, Oba teaches displaying a folder “Bill,” without any suggestion that any documents stored in the “Written entrustment agreement” folder are stored therein, thereby teaching displaying a folder that does not store a file stored in the folder in which the document file is not stored.
This addresses a specific problem arising in the technological field of a specific virtual folder system for classifying document files into folders that are hierarchically formed on the basis of attribute items of the document files. Specification ¶¶ [0046]-[0054]. Broadly speaking, the issue is that because the particular virtual folder system creates the subfolders for each folder based on the existence of attribute information for an attribute item being associated with any file of the files being classified. That is, the prior art virtual folder system will create a folder \User A\Product P\V1.0\A-2\ when it classifies a first file with attribute item/attribute information pairs User/A, Product Name/P, Version/V1.0, Function/A-1, and Development Phase/Test and a second file with pairs User/A, Product Name/P, Version/V2.0, Function/A-2, and Development Phase/Specification Development, even though no file exists with User/A, Product Name/P, Version/V1.0, and Function/A-2. By hiding this folder, the virtual folder system is improved.
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 WILLIAM SPIELER whose telephone number is (571)270-3883. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 11-3.
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, Ann Lo can be reached at 571-272-9767. 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.
WILLIAM SPIELER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2159
/WILLIAM SPIELER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2159
Prosecution Insights