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 § 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, 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by WARR (US 2016/0373905 A1, hereinafter Warr).
Regarding claim 1, Warr discloses, an electronic device (see e.g., Fig. 1, electronic devices 103, 104, or 106) comprising:
a display (see e.g., “mobile device may comprise a display screen”, [0007]);
a memory storing instructions for a contextual do-not-disturb module (see e.g., “mobile device may comprise…a memory including instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations…The one or more processors of the mobile device may be configured to detect whether the mobile device is in a stationary display screen face down state…that the mobile device is in a do-not-disturb mode”, [0007]);
a processor communicatively coupled to the display and the memory and that executes the instructions of the contextual do-not-disturb module (see e.g. “mobile device may comprise… one or more processors, and a memory including instructions that…The one or more processors of the mobile device may be configured to detect whether the mobile device is in a stationary display screen face down state...the mobile device is in a do-not-disturb mode”, [0007]), which cause the processor to:
detect a use context associated with a do-not-disturb (DnD) operating mode of the electronic device (see e.g., “a system of a mobile device (e.g., electronic device 103, 104, 106, or mobile device 203) may detect whether the mobile device is in first physical orientation…the first physical orientation of the mobile device may be an orientation where a display screen of the mobile device is substantially downwardly facing...the first physical orientation can be a stationary display screen face down state or a moving display screen face down state, and may be indicative if a do-not-disturb mode”, Fig. 3, [0047]);
in response to detecting the DnD use context, change a notification mode of the electronic device from an original setting to a restrictive setting (see e.g., “the mobile device 203 places the mobile device 203 in a do-not disturb mode as illustrated in the example of FIG. 1A, the mobile device 203 does not receive any or some) communications from various services (e.g., phone calls, emails, text messages, notifications) associated with the mobile device 203”, [0040] and/or “when the mobile device is in the do-not-disturb mode, at least one communications feature associated with the mobile device may be temporarily disabled. For example, incoming calls to the mobile device may be temporarily suspended…new email messages to the mobile device may be temporarily suspended”, Fig. 3, [0050] and/or “the mobile device 203 places the mobile device 203 in a do-not disturb mode as illustrated in the example of FIG. 1A, the mobile device 203 does not receive any or some) communications from various services (e.g., phone calls, emails, text messages, notifications) associated with the mobile device 203”, [0040]);
detect entry into a DnD inactive condition from among a completion of the DnD use context or a switch to another use context that does not require a DnD operating mode (see e.g., “a mobile device (e.g., electronic device 103, 104, 106, or mobile device 203) may detect that the mobile device is no longer in the first physical orientation…the second physical orientation may be indicative of an active mode (e.g., a mode opposite the do-not-disturb mode where communications features operate as configured on the mobile device…have switched from the do-not-disturb mode to the active mode and may now accept new communications messages)”, Fig. 4, [0061] and/or “detect that the mobile device is no-longer in the first physical orientation and has switched to a second physical orientation indicating an active mode”, Fig. 4, Step 402); and
restore the notification mode of the electronic device to the original setting, based on detecting the DnD inactive condition (see e.g., “When the mobile device is in the active mode, causing the at least one temporarily disabled communication feature associated with the mobile device to be enabled”, Fig. 4, step 406 and/or “a user may place his or her mobile device (e.g., mobile phone or tablet) on his or her desk or table with the screen facing up. Thus, it can be reasonably inferred that the user is willing to receive or even welcoming a communications event. In this regard, the user can see an incoming phone call, new notification, new email message, or like event”, [0020]).
Regarding claim 10, Warr discloses, a method comprising:
detecting, by a processor of an electronic device, a use context associated with a do-not- disturb (DnD) operating mode of the electronic device (see e.g., “mobile device may comprise… one or more processors, and a memory including instructions that…The one or more processors of the mobile device may be configured to detect whether the mobile device is in a stationary display screen face down state...the mobile device is in a do-not-disturb mode”, [0007] and/or “a system of a mobile device (e.g., electronic device 103, 104, 106, or mobile device 203) may detect whether the mobile device is in first physical orientation…the first physical orientation of the mobile device may be an orientation where a display screen of the mobile device is substantially downwardly facing...the first physical orientation can be a stationary display screen face down state or a moving display screen face down state, and may be indicative if a do-not-disturb mode”, Fig. 3, [0047]);
in response to detecting the DnD use context, changing a notification mode of the electronic device from an original setting to a restrictive setting (see e.g., “the mobile device 203 places the mobile device 203 in a do-not disturb mode as illustrated in the example of FIG. 1A, the mobile device 203 does not receive any or some) communications from various services (e.g., phone calls, emails, text messages, notifications) associated with the mobile device 203”, [0040] and/o “when the mobile device is in the do-not-disturb mode, at least one communications feature associated with the mobile device may be temporarily disabled. For example, incoming calls to the mobile device may be temporarily suspended…new email messages to the mobile device may be temporarily suspended”, Fig. 3, [0050]);
detecting entry into a DnD inactive condition from among a completion of the DnD use context or a switch to another use context that does not require a DnD operating mode (see e.g., “a mobile device (e.g., electronic device 103, 104, 106, or mobile device 203) may detect that the mobile device is no longer in the first physical orientation…the second physical orientation may be indicative of an active mode (e.g., a mode opposite the do-not-disturb mode where communications features operate as configured on the mobile device…have switched from the do-not-disturb mode to the active mode and may now accept new communications messages)”, Fig. 4, [0061] and/or “detect that the mobile device is no-longer in the first physical orientation and has switched to a second physical orientation indicating an active mode”, Fig. 4, Step 402); and
restoring the notification mode of the electronic device to the original setting, based on detecting the DnD inactive condition (see e.g., “When the mobile device is in the active mode, causing the at least one temporarily disabled communication feature associated with the mobile device to be enabled”, Fig. 4, step 406 and/or “a user may place his or her mobile device (e.g., mobile phone or tablet) on his or her desk or table with the screen facing up. Thus, it can be reasonably inferred that the user is willing to receive or even welcoming a communications event. In this regard, the user can see an incoming phone call, new notification, new email message, or like event”, [0020]).
Regarding claim 19, Warr discloses, a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium having program instructions that when executed by a processor of an electronic device (see e.g., “mobile device may comprise… one or more processors, and a memory including instructions that…The one or more processors of the mobile device may be configured to detect…the mobile device is in a do-not-disturb mode”, [0007]), configure the electronic device to perform functions comprising:
detecting, by a processor, a use context associated with a do-not- disturb (DnD) operating mode of the electronic device (see e.g., “mobile device may comprise… one or more processors, and a memory including instructions that…The one or more processors of the mobile device may be configured to detect whether the mobile device is in a stationary display screen face down state...the mobile device is in a do-not-disturb mode”, [0007] and/or “a system of a mobile device (e.g., electronic device 103, 104, 106, or mobile device 203) may detect whether the mobile device is in first physical orientation…the first physical orientation of the mobile device may be an orientation where a display screen of the mobile device is substantially downwardly facing...the first physical orientation can be a stationary display screen face down state or a moving display screen face down state, and may be indicative if a do-not-disturb mode”, Fig. 3, [0047]);
in response to detecting the DnD use context, changing a notification mode of the electronic device from an original setting to a restrictive setting (see e.g., “the mobile device 203 places the mobile device 203 in a do-not disturb mode as illustrated in the example of FIG. 1A, the mobile device 203 does not receive any or some) communications from various services (e.g., phone calls, emails, text messages, notifications) associated with the mobile device 203”, [0040] and/o “when the mobile device is in the do-not-disturb mode, at least one communications feature associated with the mobile device may be temporarily disabled. For example, incoming calls to the mobile device may be temporarily suspended…new email messages to the mobile device may be temporarily suspended”, Fig. 3, [0050]);
detecting entry into a DnD inactive condition from among a completion of the DnD use context or a switch to another use context that does not require a DnD operating mode (see e.g., “a mobile device (e.g., electronic device 103, 104, 106, or mobile device 203) may detect that the mobile device is no longer in the first physical orientation…the second physical orientation may be indicative of an active mode (e.g., a mode opposite the do-not-disturb mode where communications features operate as configured on the mobile device…have switched from the do-not-disturb mode to the active mode and may now accept new communications messages)”, Fig. 4, [0061] and/or “detect that the mobile device is no-longer in the first physical orientation and has switched to a second physical orientation indicating an active mode”, Fig. 4, Step 402); and
restoring the notification mode of the electronic device to the original setting, based on detecting the DnD inactive condition (see e.g., “When the mobile device is in the active mode, causing the at least one temporarily disabled communication feature associated with the mobile device to be enabled”, Fig. 4, step 406 and/or “a user may place his or her mobile device (e.g., mobile phone or tablet) on his or her desk or table with the screen facing up. Thus, it can be reasonably inferred that the user is willing to receive or even welcoming a communications event. In this regard, the user can see an incoming phone call, new notification, new email message, or like event”, [0020]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 2-5 and 11-14, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Warr, in view of Hamme et al. (US 2019/0014209 Al, hereinafter Hamme).
Regarding Claim 2, Warr fails to explicitly disclose, wherein to change the notification mode of the electronic device from the original setting to the restrictive setting, the processor: silences notifications; and blocks the notifications from appearing on the display of the electronic device.
In the same field of endeavor, Hamme discloses, wherein to change the notification mode of the electronic device from the original setting to the restrictive setting, the processor: silences notifications (see e.g., “DND is a feature, function and/or operation that may allow a user to set different levels for notification on a particular WTRU 102…the DND function may silence notifications (e.g., some or all notifications) such that the WTRU 102”, [0039]); and
blocks the notifications from appearing on the display of the electronic device (see e.g., “DND is a feature, function and/or operation that may allow a user to set different levels for notification on a particular WTRU 102…or other device…or may not display the notification,”, [0039]).
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 teachings of Warr with Hamme, in order to retrieve DND level adjustment information and to enable dynamic adjustment of DND levels in the WTRU (please see Hamme, paragraph [0037]).
Regarding Claim 3, Warr and Hamme combined discloses, the electronic device is a communication device that further comprises a communication subsystem that communicatively connects the communication device to one or more second devices via an associated network (see Warr e.g., “Network environment 100 may include a number of electronic devices 102, 103, 104, 106 communicably connected to one or more servers 110, such as by network 108. In other examples, electronic devices 102, 103, 104, 106 may be communicably connected to one another, such as by network 108, but not communicably connected to one or more servers 110”, Fig. 1, [0024]);
Warr fails to explicitly disclose, modifies a call notification setting to silence incoming voice calls as the restrictive setting; and
in response to receiving notification from the communication subsystem of an incoming voice call, while the communication device is in the DnD operating mode, records data pertaining to the call in a call log and suspends audio, visual, and haptic notification of the incoming voice call.
In the same field of endeavor, Hamme discloses, the processor (see Hamme e.g., Fig. 2, processor 118) modifies a call notification setting to silence incoming voice calls as the restrictive setting (see e.g., “the DND function may silence notifications (e.g., some or all notifications) such that the WTRU 102 or other device may or may not display the notification, may or may not vibrate, may or may not beep, may or may not ring and/or may or may not play a sound for the notification…Notifications may be for and/or associated with incoming phone calls, SMS messages…among others”, [0039]); and
in response to receiving notification from the communication subsystem of an incoming voice call, while the communication device is in the DnD operating mode, records data pertaining to the call in a call log and suspends audio, visual, and haptic notification of the incoming voice call (see e.g., ““the DND function may silence notifications (e.g., some or all notifications) such that the WTRU 102 or other device may or may not display the notification, may or may not vibrate, may or may not beep, may or may not ring and/or may or may not play a sound for the notification…Notifications may be for and/or associated with incoming phone calls, SMS messages…among others”, [0039] and/or “any notifications that were blocked and/or silenced during the meeting or meetings may then be provided (e.g., surface) on the WTRU 102 (e.g., the mobile device) to notify the user…the user may become accustom to look at blocked notifications…This may prevent the situation where a user receives a notification (e.g., an important notification) that was blocked…If a notification was not given later, the user may not be aware that the original notification was missed”, [0086]; Examiner’s note: notification on incoming calls that were silenced/blocked, and may then provide to the user corresponding to recording data pertaining to the call).
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 teachings of Warr with Hamme, in order to retrieve DND level adjustment information and to enable dynamic adjustment of DND levels in the WTRU (please see Hamme, paragraph [0037]).
Regarding Claim 4, Warr and Hamme combined discloses, modifies a message notification setting to silence incoming messages as the restrictive setting (see Hamme e.g., “the DND function may silence notifications (e.g., some or all notifications) such that the WTRU 102 or other device may or may not display the notification, may or may not vibrate, may or may not beep, may or may not ring and/or may or may not play a sound for the notification…Notifications may be for and/or associated with incoming phone calls, SMS messages…among others”, [0039]); and
in response to receiving notification from the communication subsystem of an incoming message, while the communication device is in the DnD operating mode, records data pertaining to the incoming message in a message log, and suspends audio, visual, and haptic notification of the incoming message (see Hamme e.g., “the DND function may silence notifications (e.g., some or all notifications) such that the WTRU 102 or other device may or may not display the notification, may or may not vibrate, may or may not beep, may or may not ring and/or may or may not play a sound for the notification…Notifications may be for and/or associated with incoming phone calls, SMS messages…among others”, [0039] and/or “any notifications that were blocked and/or silenced during the meeting or meetings may then be provided (e.g., surface) on the WTRU 102 (e.g., the mobile device) to notify the user…the user may become accustom to look at blocked notifications…This may prevent the situation where a user receives a notification (e.g., an important notification) that was blocked…If a notification was not given later, the user may not be aware that the original notification was missed”, [0086]; Examiner’s note: notification on incoming calls that were silenced/blocked, and may then provide to the user corresponding to recording data pertaining to the call).
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 teachings of Warr with Hamme, in order to retrieve DND level adjustment information and to enable dynamic adjustment of DND levels in the WTRU (please see Hamme, paragraph [0037]).
Regarding Claim 5, Warr and Hamme combined discloses, wherein the processor further sends a DnD active condition message to at least one remote device via the communication subsystem (see Warr e.g., “a do-not-disturb notification may be sent by the mobile device and received by a server (e.g., server 110). The do-not-disturb notification indicates to the server that the mobile device is in a do-not-disturb mode according to certain implementations”, Fig. 3, [0049]).
Regarding Claim 11, Warr fails to explicitly disclose, wherein changing the notification mode of the electronic device from the original setting to the restrictive setting comprises: silencing notifications; and blocks the notifications from appearing on the display of the electronic device.
In the same field of endeavor, Hamme discloses, wherein changing the notification mode of the electronic device from the original setting to the restrictive setting comprises: silencing notifications (see e.g., “DND is a feature, function and/or operation that may allow a user to set different levels for notification on a particular WTRU 102…the DND function may silence notifications (e.g., some or all notifications) such that the WTRU 102”, [0039]); and
blocking the notifications from appearing on the display of the electronic device (see e.g., “DND is a feature, function and/or operation that may allow a user to set different levels for notification on a particular WTRU 102…or other device…or may not display the notification,”, [0039]).
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 teachings of Warr with Hamme, in order to retrieve DND level adjustment information and to enable dynamic adjustment of DND levels in the WTRU (please see Hamme, paragraph [0037]).
Regarding Claim 12, Warr and Hamme combined discloses, wherein the electronic device is a communication device that further comprises a communication subsystem that communicatively connects the communication device to one or more second devices via an associated network (see Warr e.g., “Network environment 100 may include a number of electronic devices 102, 103, 104, 106 communicably connected to one or more servers 110, such as by network 108. In other examples, electronic devices 102, 103, 104, 106 may be communicably connected to one another, such as by network 108, but not communicably connected to one or more servers 110”, Fig. 1, [0024]), and the method further includes:
Warr fails to explicitly disclose, modifying a call notification setting to silence incoming voice calls as the restrictive setting; and
in response to receiving notification from the communication subsystem of an incoming voice call, while the communication device is in the DnD operating mode, recording data pertaining to the call in a call log and suspending audio, visual, and haptic notification of the incoming voice call.
In the same field of endeavor, Hamme discloses, modifying a call notification setting to silence incoming voice calls as the restrictive setting (see e.g., “the DND function may silence notifications (e.g., some or all notifications) such that the WTRU 102 or other device may or may not display the notification, may or may not vibrate, may or may not beep, may or may not ring and/or may or may not play a sound for the notification…Notifications may be for and/or associated with incoming phone calls, SMS messages…among others”, [0039]); and
in response to receiving notification from the communication subsystem of an incoming voice call, while the communication device is in the DnD operating mode, recording data pertaining to the call in a call log and suspends audio, visual, and haptic notification of the incoming voice call (see e.g., “the DND function may silence notifications (e.g., some or all notifications) such that the WTRU 102 or other device may or may not display the notification, may or may not vibrate, may or may not beep, may or may not ring and/or may or may not play a sound for the notification…Notifications may be for and/or associated with incoming phone calls, SMS messages…among others”, [0039] and/or “any notifications that were blocked and/or silenced during the meeting or meetings may then be provided (e.g., surface) on the WTRU 102 (e.g., the mobile device) to notify the user…the user may become accustom to look at blocked notifications…This may prevent the situation where a user receives a notification (e.g., an important notification) that was blocked…If a notification was not given later, the user may not be aware that the original notification was missed”, [0086]; Examiner’s note: notification on incoming calls that were silenced/blocked, and may then provide to the user corresponding to recording data pertaining to the call).
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 teachings of Warr with Hamme, in order to retrieve DND level adjustment information and to enable dynamic adjustment of DND levels in the WTRU (please see Hamme, paragraph [0037]).
Regarding Claim 13, Warr and Hamme combined discloses, modifying a message notification setting to silence incoming messages as the restrictive setting (see Hamme e.g., “the DND function may silence notifications (e.g., some or all notifications) such that the WTRU 102 or other device may or may not display the notification, may or may not vibrate, may or may not beep, may or may not ring and/or may or may not play a sound for the notification…Notifications may be for and/or associated with incoming phone calls, SMS messages…among others”, [0039]); and
in response to receiving notification from the communication subsystem of an incoming message, while the communication device is in the DnD operating mode, recording data pertaining to the incoming message in a message log, and suspends audio, visual, and haptic notification of the incoming message (see Hamme e.g., ““the DND function may silence notifications (e.g., some or all notifications) such that the WTRU 102 or other device may or may not display the notification, may or may not vibrate, may or may not beep, may or may not ring and/or may or may not play a sound for the notification…Notifications may be for and/or associated with incoming phone calls, SMS messages…among others”, [0039] and/or “any notifications that were blocked and/or silenced during the meeting or meetings may then be provided (e.g., surface) on the WTRU 102 (e.g., the mobile device) to notify the user…the user may become accustom to look at blocked notifications…This may prevent the situation where a user receives a notification (e.g., an important notification) that was blocked…If a notification was not given later, the user may not be aware that the original notification was missed”, [0086]; Examiner’s note: notification on incoming calls that were silenced/blocked, and may then provide to the user corresponding to recording data pertaining to the call).
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 teachings of Warr with Hamme, in order to retrieve DND level adjustment information and to enable dynamic adjustment of DND levels in the WTRU (please see Hamme, paragraph [0037]).
Regarding Claim 14, Warr and Hamme combined discloses, sending a DnD active condition message to at least one remote device via the communication subsystem (see Warr e.g., “a do-not-disturb notification may be sent by the mobile device and received by a server (e.g., server 110). The do-not-disturb notification indicates to the server that the mobile device is in a do-not-disturb mode according to certain implementations”, Fig. 3, [0049]).
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Warr, in view of Hamme, and further in view of Falardeau (US 20070019670 Al, hereinafter Hamme).
Regarding Claim 6, Warr and Hamme combined fails to explicitly disclose, while the electronic device is connected to a first wireless network and operating in the restrictive setting:
prevents the communication subsystem from disconnecting from the first wireless network in order to connect to a second wireless network having a higher network quality than the first wireless network; and
avoids connecting to the second wireless network, until the DnD inactive condition is detected.
In the same field of endeavor, Falardeau discloses, while the electronic device is connected to a first wireless network and operating in the restrictive setting (see e.g., “at step 216, to one of the located networks utilizing the selected resources. A determination is made at decision box 220 as to whether a connection is maintained to the network”, Fig. 4a-b, [0053] and/or “a determination is made at decision box 276 as to whether the connection is maintained…If the connection is maintained, the determination is made as to whether the session has ended at decision box 280.”, Fig. 4b, [0056]):
prevents the communication subsystem from disconnecting from the first wireless network in order to connect to a second wireless network having a higher network quality than the first wireless network (see e.g., “whether the alternative networks are better than the current connection by analyzing the current and available connections by applying rules using the rule-based candidate selector 136…If the connection is maintained, the determination is made as to whether the session has ended at decision box 280. Where the session has ended, the user device 14 is disconnected from the network by the mobile-connectivity application 10 at step 256. Where the session remains active, the connectivity manager 84 monitors the alternative networks and resources available to the user device 14 at step 224”, Fig. 4b, [0056]).; and
avoids connecting to the second wireless network, until the DnD inactive condition is detected (see e.g., “If the connection is maintained, the determination is made as to whether the session has ended at decision box 280. Where the session has ended, the user device 14 is disconnected from the network by the mobile-connectivity application 10 at step 256. Where the session remains active, the connectivity manager 84 monitors the alternative networks”, Fig. 4b, [0056]).
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 teachings of Warr and Hamme with Falardeau, in order to provide the plurality of mobile devices with up-to-date connection rules for connecting to the previously located plurality of networks. And further, connecting one or more of the plurality of mobile devices to one of the plurality of networks utilizing the connection rules distributed from the logically centralized database (please see Falardeau, paragraph [0011]).
Regarding Claim 15, Warr and Hamme combined fails to explicitly disclose, while the electronic device is connected to a first wireless network and operating in the restrictive setting:
preventing the communication subsystem from disconnecting from the first wireless network in order to connect to a second wireless network having a higher network quality than the first wireless network; and
avoiding connecting to the second wireless network, until the DnD inactive condition is detected.
In the same field of endeavor, Falardeau discloses, while the electronic device is connected to a first wireless network and operating in the restrictive setting (see e.g., “at step 216, to one of the located networks utilizing the selected resources. A determination is made at decision box 220 as to whether a connection is maintained to the network”, Fig. 4a-b, [0053] and/or “a determination is made at decision box 276 as to whether the connection is maintained…If the connection is maintained, the determination is made as to whether the session has ended at decision box 280.”, Fig. 4b, [0056]):
preventing the communication subsystem from disconnecting from the first wireless network in order to connect to a second wireless network having a higher network quality than the first wireless network (see e.g., “whether the alternative networks are better than the current connection by analyzing the current and available connections by applying rules using the rule-based candidate selector 136…If the connection is maintained, the determination is made as to whether the session has ended at decision box 280. Where the session has ended, the user device 14 is disconnected from the network by the mobile-connectivity application 10 at step 256. Where the session remains active, the connectivity manager 84 monitors the alternative networks and resources available to the user device 14 at step 224”, Fig. 4b, [0056]).; and
avoiding connecting to the second wireless network, until the DnD inactive condition is detected (see e.g., “If the connection is maintained, the determination is made as to whether the session has ended at decision box 280. Where the session has ended, the user device 14 is disconnected from the network by the mobile-connectivity application 10 at step 256. Where the session remains active, the connectivity manager 84 monitors the alternative networks”, Fig. 4b, [0056]).
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 teachings of Warr and Hamme with Falardeau, in order to provide the plurality of mobile devices with up-to-date connection rules for connecting to the previously located plurality of networks. And further, connecting one or more of the plurality of mobile devices to one of the plurality of networks utilizing the connection rules distributed from the logically centralized database (please see Falardeau, paragraph [0011]).
Claims 7 and 16, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Warr, in view of Hertzfeld et al. (US 8,385,884 B1, hereinafter Hertzfeld).
Regarding Claim 7, Warr fails to explicitly disclose, a geolocation module communicatively coupled to the processor, and wherein the processor:
determining, based on data received from the geolocation module, that a current location of the electronic device is a pre-established location in which DnD operations are completed by a user of the electronic device; and
activating the DnD operating mode in response to determining the electronic device is in the pre-established location.
In the same field of endeavor, Hertzfeld discloses, a geolocation module communicatively coupled to the processor (see e.g., Fig. 7, Navigation Module 717, and/or “The navigation module 721 may determine an absolute or relative position of the device, such as by using the Global Positioning System (GPS) signals…”, column 16, lines 4-8), and wherein the processor:
determines, based on data received from the geolocation module, that a current location of the electronic device is a pre-established location in which DnD operations are completed by a user of the electronic device (see e.g., “upon automatically determining that the callee is in a scheduled meeting, or is disposed in a physical location where it is inappropriate to receive telephone calls such as a hospital, movie theater, conference room, cemetery, library, or restaurant”, column 20, lines 4-8 and/or “As the mobile device 1006 moves through various places, a database of locations is accessed to determine whether the "location entry" event has occurred. This determination may be made continuously, such as every few seconds, or it may occur non-periodically, such as when a call is initially received. The database may be a static database, such as a populated database of the geographic coordinates (i.e. latitude and longitude) of movie theaters, hospitals, houses-of-worship, libraries, cemeteries, or other quiet zones, or the database may be populated by the user. For instance, if the user enjoys walking undisturbed in a particular park, they may select a control labeled "never receive calls at this location" while on their walk, to prevent the mobile device 1006 from receiving calls at that location in the future”, column 20, lines 33-46); and
activates the DnD operating mode in response to determining the electronic device is in the pre-established location (see e.g., “the DND mode may be activated upon the occurrence of an event other than a telephone call, such as upon automatically determining that the callee is in a scheduled meeting, or is disposed in a physical location where it is inappropriate to receive telephone calls such as a hospital, movie theater…”, column 20, lines 2-8).
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 teachings of Warr with Hertzfeld, in order to activate the DND mode based on determining that the callee is in a physical location where it is inappropriate to receive telephone calls (please see Herzfeld, column 20, lines 4-8).
Regarding Claim 16, Warr fails to explicitly disclose, determining, based on data received from the geolocation module, that a current location of the electronic device is a pre-established location in which DnD operations are completed by a user of the electronic device; and
activating the DnD operating mode in response to determining the electronic device is in the pre-established location.
In the same field of endeavor, Hertzfeld discloses, determining, based on data received from the geolocation module, that a current location of the electronic device is a pre-established location in which DnD operations are completed by a user of the electronic device (see e.g., “upon automatically determining that the callee is in a scheduled meeting, or is disposed in a physical location where it is inappropriate to receive telephone calls such as a hospital, movie theater, conference room, cemetery, library, or restaurant”, column 20, lines 4-8 and/or “As the mobile device 1006 moves through various places, a database of locations is accessed to determine whether the "location entry" event has occurred. This determination may be made continuously, such as every few seconds, or it may occur non-periodically, such as when a call is initially received. The database may be a static database, such as a populated database of the geographic coordinates (i.e. latitude and longitude) of movie theaters, hospitals, houses-of-worship, libraries, cemeteries, or other quiet zones, or the database may be populated by the user. For instance, if the user enjoys walking undisturbed in a particular park, they may select a control labeled "never receive calls at this location" while on their walk, to prevent the mobile device 1006 from receiving calls at that location in the future”, column 20, lines 33-46); and
activating the DnD operating mode in response to determining the electronic device is in the pre-established location (see e.g., “the DND mode may be activated upon the occurrence of an event other than a telephone call, such as upon automatically determining that the callee is in a scheduled meeting, or is disposed in a physical location where it is inappropriate to receive telephone calls such as a hospital, movie theater…”, column 20, lines 2-8).
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 teachings of Warr with Hertzfeld, in order to activate the DND mode based on determining that the callee is in a physical location where it is inappropriate to receive telephone calls (please see Herzfeld, column 20, lines 4-8).
Claims 8, 17and 20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Warr, in view of Yoon et al. (US 2018/0287986 A1, hereinafter Yoon).
Regarding Claim 8, Warr fails to explicitly disclose, determines if a notification contains at least one of a one-time-passcode (OTP) or a message for entry of an OTP to complete a feature of a currently executing application;
in response to determining that the notification contains an OTP, surfaces the notification, and
in response to determining that the notification does not contain an OTP, silences the notification.
In the same field of endeavor, Yoon discloses, determines if a notification contains at least one of a one-time-passcode (OTP) or a message for entry of an OTP to complete a feature of a currently executing application (see e.g., “the virtual reality device 108 may use a tag or code included in the message 412 to look up a notification event in a list or database. The list or database may include a plaintext notification that corresponds to the tag or code…”, Fig. 4, [0057] and/or “At decision block 636, the virtual reality device 108 checks whether the received notification…is identified as an emergency message or condition…a flag or other identifier in the message may indicate an emergency message, or an identifier associated with the sensed environmental condition may indicate an emergency condition”, Fig. 6, [0088]: Examiner’s note: using tag, flag or an identifier included in the notification message corresponding to one-time-passcode);
in response to determining that the notification contains an OTP, surfaces the notification (see e.g., “If the message or condition is identified as an emergency message or condition, the method 600 proceeds to block 630 the message is displayed”, Fig. 6, [0088]), and
in response to determining that the notification does not contain an OTP, silences the notification (see e.g., “If the message is not identified as an emergency message, the method 600 proceeds to block 638.”, Fig. 6, [0088] and/or “At block 638,…the virtual reality device 108 does not transmit this message, and simply does not respond to the received message”. Fig. 6, [0089]).
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 teachings of Warr with Yoon, in order to avoid missing important information, such as emergency notifications issued by, for example, a public address system (please see Yoon, paragraph [0002]).
Regarding Claim 17, Warr fails to explicitly disclose, determining if a notification contains at least one of a one-time-passcode (OTP) or a message for entry of an OTP to complete a feature of a currently executing application;
in response to determining that the notification contains an OTP, surfacing the notification, and
in response to determining that the notification does not contain an OTP, silencing the notification.
In the same field of endeavor, Yoon discloses, determining if a notification contains at least one of a one-time-passcode (OTP) or a message for entry of an OTP to complete a feature of a currently executing application (see e.g., “the virtual reality device 108 may use a tag or code included in the message 412 to look up a notification event in a list or database. The list or database may include a plaintext notification that corresponds to the tag or code…”, Fig. 4, [0057] and/or “At decision block 636, the virtual reality device 108 checks whether the received notification…is identified as an emergency message or condition…a flag or other identifier in the message may indicate an emergency message, or an identifier associated with the sensed environmental condition may indicate an emergency condition”, Fig. 6, [0088]: Examiner’s note: using tag, flag or an identifier included in the notification message corresponding to one-time-passcode);
in response to determining that the notification contains an OTP, surfaces the notification (see e.g., “If the message or condition is identified as an emergency message or condition, the method 600 proceeds to block 630 the message is displayed”, Fig. 6, [0088]), and
in response to determining that the notification does not contain an OTP, silences the notification (see e.g., “If the message is not identified as an emergency message, the method 600 proceeds to block 638.”, Fig. 6, [0088] and/or “At block 638,…the virtual reality device 108 does not transmit this message, and simply does not respond to the received message”. Fig. 6, [0089]).
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 teachings of Warr with Yoon, in order to avoid missing important information, such as emergency notifications issued by, for example, a public address system (please see Yoon, paragraph [0002]).
Regarding Claim 20, Warr fails to explicitly disclose, determining if a notification contains at least one of a one-time-passcode (OTP) or a message for entry of an OTP to complete a feature of a currently executing application;
in response to determining that the notification contains an OTP, surfacing the notification, and
in response to determining that the notification does not contain an OTP, silencing the notification.
In the same field of endeavor, Yoon discloses, determining if a notification contains at least one of a one-time-passcode (OTP) or a message for entry of an OTP to complete a feature of a currently executing application (see e.g., “the virtual reality device 108 may use a tag or code included in the message 412 to look up a notification event in a list or database. The list or database may include a plaintext notification that corresponds to the tag or code…”, Fig. 4, [0057] and/or “At decision block 636, the virtual reality device 108 checks whether the received notification…is identified as an emergency message or condition…a flag or other identifier in the message may indicate an emergency message, or an identifier associated with the sensed environmental condition may indicate an emergency condition”, Fig. 6, [0088]: Examiner’s note: using tag, flag or an identifier included in the notification message corresponding to one-time-passcode);
in response to determining that the notification contains an OTP, surfaces the notification (see e.g., “If the message or condition is identified as an emergency message or condition, the method 600 proceeds to block 630 the message is displayed”, Fig. 6, [0088]), and
in response to determining that the notification does not contain an OTP, silences the notification (see e.g., “If the message is not identified as an emergency message, the method 600 proceeds to block 638.”, Fig. 6, [0088] and/or “At block 638,…the virtual reality device 108 does not transmit this message, and simply does not respond to the received message”. Fig. 6, [0089]).
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 teachings of Warr with Yoon, in order to avoid missing important information, such as emergency notifications issued by, for example, a public address system (please see Yoon, paragraph [0002]).
Claims 9 and 18, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Warr, in view of GRUBER et al. (US 2014/0282003 A1, hereinafter Gruber).
Regarding Claim 9, Warr fails to explicitly disclose, wherein the use context associated with a do-not-disturb (DnD) operating mode of the electronic device comprises a use context associated with at least one of banking transactions and ecommerce transactions.
In the same field of endeavor, Gruber discloses, wherein the use context associated with a do-not-disturb (DnD) operating mode of the electronic device comprises a use context associated with at least one of banking transactions and ecommerce transactions (see e.g., “the digital assistant can prevent a user from being unnecessarily bothered by notifications with low urgency…As a specific example, if a user is in an important work meeting, the digital assistant determines that a notification is of low urgency (e.g., a notification from a banking application indicating that a session has timed out), and delays or foregoes providing an audio prompt to the user for that notification item”, [0107] and/or “the digital assistant establishes the predetermined threshold in accordance with a user setting of the device. For example, a high urgency threshold can be used if the user has activated a "do-not-disturb" mode”, [0147]).
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 teachings of Warr with Gruber, in order to intelligently handle notifications based on the current context using a digital assistant (please see Gruber, paragraph [0002]).
Regarding Claim 18, Warr fails to explicitly disclose, wherein detecting the use context comprises detecting a use context associated with at least one of banking transactions and ecommerce transactions.
In the same field of endeavor, Gruber discloses, wherein detecting the use context comprises detecting a use context associated with at least one of banking transactions and ecommerce transactions (see e.g., “the digital assistant can prevent a user from being unnecessarily bothered by notifications with low urgency…As a specific example, if a user is in an important work meeting, the digital assistant determines that a notification is of low urgency (e.g., a notification from a banking application indicating that a session has timed out), and delays or foregoes providing an audio prompt to the user for that notification item”, [0107] and/or “the digital assistant establishes the predetermined threshold in accordance with a user setting of the device. For example, a high urgency threshold can be used if the user has activated a "do-not-disturb" mode”, [0147]).
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 teachings of Warr with Gruber, in order to intelligently handle notifications based on the current context using a digital assistant (please see Gruber, paragraph [0002]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARID SEYEDVOSOGHI whose telephone number is (571)272-9679. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Anthony S. Addy can be reached on 5712727795. 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.
/FARID SEYEDVOSOGHI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2645