DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the amendment filed 1/30/2026.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17-19, 22-23, and 25-27 are currently pending.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/30/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10 of amendment, filed 1/30/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Karunamuni et al. (US 2018/0335939), hereinafter Karu.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 11-13 of amendment, filed 1/30/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 18, 22, 23, 25, and 26 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of these claims have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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.
Claim(s) 1, 19, and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sandler et al. (US 8,473,871), hereinafter Sandler, in view of Karu.
As per claim 1, Sandler teaches the following:
a control method, applied to an electronic device having a touchscreen, (see column 3, lines 20-34, “resistive touchscreen”), wherein the method comprises:
displaying a first interface on the touchscreen. As Sandler teaches in column 5, lines 51-58, prior to receiving a gesture, user interface 14 is presented without information panels;
in response to the touchscreen receives receiving a first operation, switching the first interface to a second interface, wherein the first operation is a first sliding operation on the touchscreen in a first direction when a first start position at which a touch body touches the touchscreen is located in a first area of the touchscreen. As Sandler teaches in column 15, lines 48-59, and corresponding Fig. 4A, as a user performs gesture 410A (sliding gesture with start position at top of screen), information panel 418A is presented;
after the touch body completes the first operation and leaves the touchscreen, in response to the touchscreen receiving a second operation, switching the second interface to a third interface, wherein the second operation is an operation of a second sliding operation on the touchscreen in a second direction when a second start position at which the touch body re touches the touchscreen is located in a second area of the touchscreen. As Sandler teaches in column 15, line 60 – column 16, line 2, and corresponding Fig. 4B, upon a user performing a second sliding gesture 410B (slide gesture with start position at top of screen), a second information panel 419B is presented, replacing information panel 418A. Sandler teaches in column 5, lines 16-37, that as “lift up” event ends a gesture input, i.e., the touch body leaves the screen; and
after the touch body completes the second operation and leaves the touchscreen, in response to the touchscreen receives receiving a third operation, switching the third interface to the first interface, wherein the third operation is an operation of a third sliding operation on the touchscreen in a third direction when a third start position at which the touch body re-touches the touchscreen is located in a third area of the touchscreen. As Sandler teaches in column 12, lines 45-65, after presenting the two panels, a command may be provided by the user to remove the panels from view, such as an indication of a third gesture, and wherein:
the second interface is a display interface of a notification center, and the third interface is a display interface of a control center; or the second interface is a display interface of a control center, and the third interface is a display interface of a notification center. As Sandler shows in Figs. 4A, a first panel 419A is that of a notification panel and second panel 419B is that of a control center.
However, Sandler does not explicitly teach of blur processing. In a similar field of endeavor, Karu teaches of utilizing gestures similar to Sandler for revealing control panels (see Figs. 5C8 and 5C9). Karu further teaches the following:
and wherein switching the first interface to the second interface comprises performing blur processing on the first interface and covering the blurred first interface with the second interface. As Karu teaches in paragraph [0028], and corresponding Figs. 5A57-5A59, a newly displayed control panel may appear over a blurred view of a previous interface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the panel displays of Sandler with the blurring of Karu. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because Sandler shows a clear desire to bring a previous panel out of focus as taught in column 14, line 59 – column 15, line 9, where a previous panel is “greyed out”, providing benefit to the user in bringing more attention to a recently opened, and thus more desirable, panel.
As per claim 19, Sandler teaches the following:
an electronic device, comprising: a touchscreen; one or more processors; and a memory, wherein one or more computer programs are stored in the memory, the one or more computer programs comprise instructions. See Fig. 2.
The remaining limitations of claim 19 are substantially similar to those of claim 1 and are rejected using the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 27, modified Sandler teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. Sandler further teaches the following:
wherein after the second interface is displayed on the touchscreen, the displayed second interface moves in the first direction as the first sliding operation on the touchscreen continuous in the first direction. As Sandler teaches in column 15, lines 48-59, and corresponding Fig. 4A, as a user performs gesture 410A (sliding gesture with start position at top of screen), information panel 418A is presented. As Sandler teaches of the panel opening “proportionate” to the gesture, this is interpreted as encompassing Applicant’s limitation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 18, 22-23, 25, and 26 are allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY A DISTEFANO whose telephone number is (571)270-1644. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9 am - 5 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Bashore can be reached at 5712424088. 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.
/GREGORY A. DISTEFANO/
Examiner
Art Unit 2174
/WILLIAM L BASHORE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights