DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the Request for Continued Examination filed on 09/08/2026. Claim 1 had been previously canceled. Claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-21 have been amended. Claims 2-21 are pending in the case. Claims 2, 9, and 16 are independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claims 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Zinn et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No. 2007/0264977, hereinafter “Zinn”) in view of Mathur et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No. 2015/0100580, hereinafter “Mathur”).
As to independent claims 2, 9, and 16, Zinn shows a non-transitory computer readable medium [¶¶ 22-24], a method [¶ 01], and a concomitant system [FIG. 1], comprising:
present a first instance of a graphical interface for a first contact comprising a plurality of communication type selectable representations, wherein each of the communication type selectable representations corresponds to a different communication type available for the first contact; receive, via the first instance of the graphical interface, a first selection corresponding to a first communication type selectable representation of the plurality of communication type selectable representations, wherein the first communication type selectable representation corresponds to a first communication type [“Referring now to FIGS. 5 and 6, when a specific contact name (ex. “John Smith”) is highlighted in the address list 76 and the device user selects the highlighted name by depressing the scrollwheel 28 a (or other predetermined input key), an options list or menu 106 of selectable functions that may be performed by the device 10 in respect of the highlighted name is displayed on the display screen 44 (see FIG. 6). In the illustrated embodiment, the options menu 106 includes a number of communication function options for initiating contact with the highlighted name, including, for example an “Email” function 120; a “PIN function” 122; a “Call” function 124; and an text messaging “SMS” function 126. {…} A selection indicator 118 can be scrolled through the options menu 106 (by rotating scrollwheel 28 a, for example) to selectively highlight the functions that are presented in the options menu 106. In the presently described embodiment, when generating the options menu 106 for a highlighted contact name, the processor 32 checks the historic communication information 312 associated with the highlighted name to determine the communication option that was last used when contacting that name, and automatically positions the selection indicator 118 to highlight the communication function in options menu 106 that corresponds to the last used communication option. For example, in the embodiment shown in FIG. 6, the last time “John Smith” was contacted through the device 10 email was used, and thus when the options menu 106 is generated, the selectable function “Email John Smith” 120 is automatically highlighted with selection indicator 118. In order to select the highlighted function, the device user depresses the scrollwheel 28 a (or in some embodiments, presses another predetermined input key). Alternatively, if desired the device user can rotate and then depress the scrollwheel 28 a (or use an alternative navigational input and selection mechanism, depending on the device 10) to highlight and then select an alternative communication function from the option list 106.” (¶ 39)];
display, in response to the first selection: a first address selectable representation for a first address associated with the first communication type, and a first communication application for the first address, and a second address selectable representation for a second address associated with the first communication type and a second communication application for the second address {…}; detect a second selection of the first address selectable representation; and in response to the second selection, cause the first communication application to initiate a communication to the first address [“{…} in the embodiment shown in FIG. 6, the last time “John Smith” was contacted through the device 10 email was used, and thus when the options menu 106 is generated, the selectable function “Email John Smith” 120 is automatically highlighted with selection indicator 118. In order to select the highlighted function, the device user depresses the scrollwheel 28 a (or in some embodiments, presses another predetermined input key). Alternatively, if desired the device user can rotate and then depress the scrollwheel 28 a (or use an alternative navigational input and selection mechanism, depending on the device 10) to highlight and then select an alternative communication function from the option list 106.” (¶ 39)
“{…} in some circumstances a selected contact will have multiple associated email addresses. In one example embodiment, the different email address options are presented as different selectable options in option menu 106, for example “Email1 John Smith”; “Email2 John Smith”, the last used email address is by default highlighted with selection indicator 118, and selection of the highlighted email option results in generation of the email compose interface of FIG. 7 with the appropriate email address. In alternative embodiments, where multiple email address options exist, only a single “Email Contact Name” option 120 will appear in the options menu 106, and user selection of the email option causes a further email option user interface window 150 to be generated on the display screen 44, as shown in FIG. 8. In the illustrated example, the email options window 150 displays, based on the stored contact information for John Smith in the address book information 310, two different email address options. A device user can, through rotation of scrollwheel 28 a (or other suitable navigational input) move a selection symbol 152 through the address options to selectively highlight one of the options so that it can then be selected by depressing the scrollwheel 28 a (or pressing another suitable option selection key) to cause the device 10 to generate a compose email interface 130 (FIG. 7) for sending an email to the selected address. {…}” (¶ 41)
“{…} in some circumstances there may be multiple phone numbers associated with a contact name that could be used to SMS text message the contact name. In example embodiments, when multiple SMS addresses for a contact name exist and the user selects the “SMS option” 126 from options menu 106 an SMS address option dialog window 160 is generated listing the available SMS addresses (which are typically telephone numbers) as selectable options (See FIG. 9). {…}
{…} once a user selects a highlighted “telephone call” function 224, the processor 38 immediately initiates a telephone call from the device and through the communications network to the telephone number stored in the address information for the contact. In some embodiments, a confirmation screen may be presented requesting the device user to confirm that the call is to be initiated. Often the address book entry for a particular contact will have more than one telephone possible number associated with that contact, including for example one or more work numbers, a cell number, and/or a pager number. Thus, as suggested above, in at least some example embodiments, the device 10 is configured to track in the historic communication information 312 the telephone number last used when initiating telephone contact with a contact.
By way of example, FIG. 10 shows a possible user interface call options window 230 displayed on device display screen 44 in response to user selection of the “Call John Smith” function 124 shown in FIG. 6. The call options window displays, based on the stored contact information for John Smith in the address book information 310, three different telephone number options, including a first work number option 232, a second work number option 234 a and a pager number option 236. Again, a device user can, through rotation of scrollwheel 28 a (or other suitable navigational input) move a selection symbol 238 through the options 232, 234 a and 236 to selectively highlight one of the options so that it can then be selected by depressing the scrollwheel 28 a (or pressing another suitable option selection key) to cause the device 10 to initiate a call through network 50 to the highlighted number. {…}
Thus, it will be appreciated that for each contact name in the address book 310, various different communication transport mechanisms or methods can exist as options for communicating between the device and that contact name (for example, telephone and various electronic messaging transport methods such as SMS messaging, PIN messaging, Email). Furthermore, associated with each of the communication transport method options there can be a number of different possible address options (example, multiple phone numbers for telephone calls or SMS messaging, multiple email address for email). In at least one example embodiment, when a contact name is selected from an address book list, an option menu 106 is generated listing different user selectable communications options (120, 122, 124, 126) for communicating with the selected contact name, with the communications transport method option that was last used being focused or highlighted with a selection indicator 118 as the default communication option. In at least some example embodiments, all or at least some of the communications options listed in the option menu 106 are communication transport method options, and at least some of the transport method options each have multiple associated address options. In order to facilitate user selection of the multiple address options, when a transport method option is selected from the options menu 106, an address option selection menu (see for example menus 150, 160, 230) is generated listing user selectable address options to be used for the selected transport method. {…}” (¶¶ 43-46) | See also ¶¶ 31 & 34.].
Zinn does not appear to explicitly recite “wherein the first communication application and the second communication application are different communication applications” as apparently intended. In an analogous art, Mathur shows:
display, in response to the first selection: a first address selectable representation for a first address associated with the first communication type, and a first communication application for the first address, and a second address selectable representation for a second address associated with the first communication type and a second communication application for the second address, wherein the first communication application and the second communication application are different communication applications [Mathur shows, after selecting a communication type, displaying a first plurality of addresses associated with a corresponding communication type for the first selectable representation, wherein the first plurality of addresses comprises a first address associated with a first communication application, and a second address associated with a second, different communication application (Mathur: ¶¶ 24, 35, & 43). See, for example, how Mathur shows that for a same text messaging communication type, a first/native messaging application and a different/third-party messaging application are shown (Mathur: ¶ 24), or how for a same phone calling communication type, either a first/conventional/native phone application and a different/third-party calling application are shown (or how different third-party applications are also a valid alternative (Mathur: ¶ 35)).];
One of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Zinn and Mathur before them prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to incorporate the Mathur’s operability to show different addresses of a same communication type being associated with different communication applications into Zinn. The rationale for doing so would have been that doing so “facilitates a user with accessing communication records corresponding to all communications made by the user using the communication device in a single window, irrespective of the communication mode used for the communication. The user thus does not need to switch between different windows for using different communication modes, such as audio calling, text messaging, emails, video calling, and video chatting.” (Mathur: ¶ 21). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zinn and Mathur (hereinafter, “the Zinn-Mathur combination”) in order to obtain the invention as recited in claims 2, 9, and 16.
As to dependent claims 3, 10, and 17, Zinn-Mathur further shows:
present a second instance of the graphical interface for a second contact comprising the plurality of communication type selectable representations; receive, via the second instance of the graphical interface, a third selection corresponding to a second selectable representation of the plurality of communication type selectable representations; and display, in response to the third selection, a second plurality of addresses associated with the corresponding communication type for the first address selectable representation, wherein the second plurality of addresses are associated with different communications than the first address and the second address [e.g. repeating the steps of the respective parent claims for a second contact to display their own/different addresses/communications (Zinn: ¶¶ 39-43 & 46)].
As to dependent claims 4, 11, and 18, Zinn-Mathur further shows:
wherein the first address selectable representation and the second address selectable representation are presented in an order based on a usage pattern of a local user, wherein the usage pattern is based on a frequency of use of a communication application associated with each of the first address and the second address [Zinn shows wherein the first plurality of addresses are presented in an order based on a usage pattern of a local user, wherein the usage pattern is based on a recency of use of a communication application associated with each of the first plurality of addresses (Zinn: ¶¶ 16-18, 41, & 47-49). Moreover, Mathur explicitly shows wherein the first plurality of addresses are presented in an order based on a usage pattern of a local user, wherein the usage pattern is based on a frequency of use of a communication application associated with each of the first plurality of addresses (Mathur: ¶¶ 25, 45-47, 55, & 62).].
As to dependent claims 5, 12, and 19, Zinn-Mathur further shows:
wherein the first address selectable representation and the second address selectable representation are presented in an order based on a most recent communication between the first contact and a local user [e.g. the first plurality of addresses are presented in an order based on a most recent/last used communication between the first contact and a local user (Zinn: ¶¶ 16-18, 41, & 47-49)].
As to dependent claims 6, 13, and 20, Zinn-Mathur further shows:
in response to the first selection: display a communication summary comprising communication events with the first address and the second address [e.g. a communication summary may be displayed for the first plurality of addresses in response to the first selection (Zinn: figs. 4-10)].
As to dependent claims 7, 14, and 21, Zinn-Mathur further shows:
wherein the communication summary comprises a plurality of representations of prior communications associated with the first address and the second address [e.g. the communication summary comprises a plurality of representations of prior communications associated with the first plurality of addresses (Zinn: ¶¶ 39-43)].
As to dependent claims 8 and 15, Zinn-Mathur further shows:
wherein the first instance of the graphical interface further comprises a graphical representation of the first contact [e.g. the first instance of the graphical interface further comprises a graphical representation of the first contact (Zinn: figs. 4-6)].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues:
“{…} Mathur is silent regarding presenting, for a user, a first selectable representation for a first address and a second selectable representation for a second address, both of which correspond to a same communication type.”
The Office respectfully disagrees. In response to Applicant’s arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 U.S.P.Q. 871 (C.C.P.A. 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 U.S.P.Q. 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, Zinn already showed selecting a first communication type, and then showing two different addresses associated with the same communication type, wherein each of the addresses was associated with a corresponding application of the first communication type (Zinn just did not appear to explicitly recite the scenario wherein these two existing applications were different from each other). In an analogous art, Mathur shows, after selecting a communication type, displaying a plurality of addresses associated with a same communication type for the first selectable representation, wherein the first plurality of addresses comprises a first address associated with a first communication application, and a second address associated with a second, different communication application (Mathur: ¶¶ 24, 35, & 43). See, for example, how Mathur shows that for a same text messaging communication type, a first/native messaging application and a different/third-party messaging application are shown (Mathur: ¶ 24), or how for a same phone calling communication type, either a first/conventional/native phone application and a different/third-party calling application are shown (or how different third-party applications are also a valid alternative (Mathur: ¶ 35)). Therefore, as shown above, the two references when combined would reasonably show Zinn’s different addresses of a same communication type being respectively associated with Mathur’s different communication application alternatives of a common/same communication type.
In conclusion, the Office respectfully asserts that the cited art sufficiently teaches the limitations recited in the amended claims.
Conclusion
It is noted that any citation to specific pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 U.S.P.Q. 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 U.S.P.Q. 275, 277 (C.C.P.A. 1968)).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVARO R CALDERON IV whose telephone number is (571)272-1818. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday (8:30am - 5:00pm).
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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALVARO R. CALDERON IV/
Examiner
Art Unit 2171
/KIEU D VU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights