DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the application filed 12/20/2023.
Claims 1-15 and 19-23 have been submitted for examination.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/20/2023, with response to currently amended claim 1 and the Wilson reference, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant cites Fig. 1A and column 3 of Wilson, and expresses the opinion that as Wilson teaches of selecting an identifier via a “long pressing”, this fails to teach or suggest Applicant’s amended limitation of “the sub-category of the first display content to be displayed in the second display interface is determined based on a corresponding relation between the first dragging for the first movable control and the N sub-regions in the first display interface”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant appears to overlook an alternative embodiment taught by Wilson. Wilson teaches in column 3, line 60 through column 4, line 7 (partially cited by Applicant) the following:
PNG
media_image1.png
98
279
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
87
281
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As may be clearly seen within this paragraph of Wilson, while Wilson teaches of a “long press” being a possible input, Wilson also provides the possibility of a selection being made via “the user may”…..”slide their finger along the display to one of the action identifiers and select an action identifier by”….”removing their finger from the display to select the action identifier upon which their finger was positioned”. Thus Wilson teaches Applicant’s amended limitations as follows:
“wherein the first display content comprises N sub-categories, and the N sub-categories of the first display content correspond to N sub-regions in the first display interface respectively, wherein N is an integer greater than 1”
As Wilson shows in Fig. 1A (reproduced below), upon a user selecting a first object 123, a series of “N sub-categories” 122A-D are presented, where each sub-category correspond to “N sub-regions” with the regions being the locations of the action items themselves. In Wilson’s Fig. 1A, there are four sub-categories, thus giving a value of N=4 (greater than 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
602
421
media_image3.png
Greyscale
“wherein the sub-category of the first display content to be displayed in the second display interface is determined based on a corresponding relation between the first dragging for the first movable control and the N sub-regions in the first display interface”
As described above, Wilson teaches in column 3, line 60 through column 4, line 7, that a user may select a sub-region via dragging the user’s finger from an initial location 123 to a desired action region 122A-D and removing the finger at the action region location. Thus, the selection is made “based on a corresponding relation between the first dragging for the movable control (location 123 of Wilson Fig. 1A) and the N sub-regions (target action item finger is drug to) in the first display interface”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The previous rejections of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, are hereby withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment filed 12/11/2025.
Claim Interpretation
The previous limitation interpretations under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, are hereby withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment filed 12/11/2025.
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) 1-3, 5, 6, 10-14, and 19-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2014/0164991), hereinafter Kim, in view of Wilson et al. (US 10,152,199), hereinafter Wilson.
As per claim 1, Kim teaches the following:
an interface displaying method, wherein a first movable control is displayed in a first display interface, (see Fig. 8A with movable control 811 being displayed on a first interface), and the method comprises:
acquiring a first dragging for the first movable control. As Kim teaches in paragraph [0158], and corresponding Figs. 8B and 8C, a user may touch icon 811 and drag the icon to menu screen 817;
determining first display content to be displayed in response to the first dragging. As Kim further teaches in paragraph [0158], and corresponding Fig. 8C, a ghost view is shown which refers to a preview of the size and shape of a window in which the first application A will be executed; and
displaying first target display content in a second display interface for replacing the displaying of the first display interface. As Kim shows in Fig. 8D, an interface of application A replaces the first interface.
However, Kim does not explicitly teach of displaying N sub-category regions and selecting a category based upon a relation of a dragging of the control. In a similar field of endeavor, Wilson teaches of taking actions on displayed icons (see abstract). Wilson further teaches the following:
wherein the first display content comprises N sub-categories, and the N sub-categories of the first display content correspond to N sub-regions in the first display interface respectively, wherein N is an integer greater than 1. As Wilson shows in Fig. 1A, selection of point 123 causes display of sub-category regions 122A-122D, and
wherein the sub-category of the first display content to be displayed in the second display interface is determined based on a corresponding relation between the first dragging for the first movable control and the N sub-regions in the first display interface. Wilson teaches in column 3, line 60 through column 4, line 7, that the user may select an action item through dragging a finger from an initial point 123 to the desired item and releasing the touch.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the dragging icons to targets of Kim with the contextual angle dragging of Wilson. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because the in place menus of Wilson benefit users in decreasing the distance required in dragging an object for a desired action.
Regarding claim 2, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
wherein the determining first display content to be displayed in response to the first dragging comprises:
in response to the first dragging corresponding to dragging the first movable control to a first area in the first display interface, determining to perform an interface switching action and determining the first display content. As Kim teaches in paragraph [0158], the display is “switched” to an execution screen of an user selected icon. As the icon corresponds to a specific application, this is interpreted as encompassing determining to switch to the selected icon and determining the content as corresponding with the selected icon.
Regarding claim 3, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 2 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
further comprising: displaying transitional content in the first display interface after the first dragging for the first movable control is detected, wherein the transitional content comprises the first movable control, the first movable control being displayed in a mobile manner along with touch coordinates of the first dragging. As Kim shows in Figs. 6A – 6C, and corresponding paragraphs [0150] and [0151], a touch and dragged icon follows the user’s touch coordinates. This is interpreted as encompassing Applicant’s “transitional content” as Applicant describes “transitional content” as including the control being displayed in a mobile manner along with the touch coordinates in paragraph [0022] of the specification.
Regarding claim 5, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 3 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
the transitional content further comprises a background image obtained based on a second display content picture in the first display interface; and/or the transitional content further comprises a foreground image obtained based on an interface color attribute of the second display interface. As Kim teaches in paragraph [0158], and corresponding Fig. 8C, as the icon 811 is dragged over an interface, a ghost view 818 is presented. This is interpreted as encompassing applicant’s limitation as the ghost view appears as a shading of the currently displayed interface, where the currently displayed interface is seen as that of a “background image” to said shading and the shaded background is interpreted as being obtained based on second display content.
Regarding claim 6, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 3 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
the displaying transitional content in the first display interface comprises: displaying a shape of the first area in the first display interface; and determining to perform the interface switching action in response to the touch coordinates of the first dragging being within the shape of the first area. As Kim shows in Fig. 6A, target area 620 has a “shape” of a rectangle. Kim further teaches in paragraph [0150] that the display is switched based upon a selected icon being dragged into the “shape” of said rectangular interface.
Regarding claim 10, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. However, Kim does not explicitly teach of dragging angles. Wilson further teaches the following:
wherein the first display interface is divided into N dragging angle ranges with a position of the first movable control displayed in the first display interface as a dragging starting position, and the N dragging angle ranges respectively correspond to the N sub-regions. As Wilson shows in Fig. 1A, and corresponding column 3, lines 46-67, upon a user touching a selected object, action identifiers 122A-122D are presented at different angles from the selection.
the determining first display content to be displayed in response to the first dragging comprises:
determining a dragging angle range to which a dragging angle of the first dragging belongs among the N dragging angle ranges, and determining the sub-category of the first display content to be displayed in the second display interface based on the dragging angle range to which the dragging angle belongs. As Wilson teaches in column 3, line 60 – column 4, line 18, the user may select an object through sliding their finger from the original selection to a desired action identifier. As the finger is slid to the identifier, this is interpreted as encompassing the dragging “belonging to the dragging angle range” of the dragging identifier.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the dragging icons to targets of Kim with the contextual angle dragging of Wilson. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because the in place menus of Wilson benefit users in decreasing the distance required in dragging an object for a desired action.
Regarding claim 11, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 10 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
displaying transitional content in the first display interface after the first dragging for the first movable control is detected, wherein the transitional content is associated with the dragging angle range to which the dragging angle of the first dragging belongs among the N dragging angle ranges. As Kim shows in Figs. 6A – 6C, and corresponding paragraphs [0150] and [0151], a touch and dragged icon follows the user’s touch coordinates. This is interpreted as encompassing Applicant’s “transitional content” as Applicant describes “transitional content” as including the control being displayed in a mobile manner along with the touch coordinates in paragraph [0022] of the specification. As the icon would be dragged to the contextually angled options of Wilson, this is interpreted as encompassing being “associated with the dragging angle”.
Regarding claim 12, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. However, Kim does not explicitly teach of N dragging areas as recited in claim 12. Wilson further teaches the following:
the first display interface is divided into N dragging areas, and the N dragging areas respectively correspond to the N sub-regions. As Wilson shows in Fig. 1A, and corresponding column 3, lines 46-67, upon a user touching a selected object, action identifiers 122A-122D are presented at different angles from the selection,
the determining first display content to be displayed in response to the first dragging comprises:
determining a dragging area to which a dragging arrival position of the first dragging in the first display interface belongs among the N dragging areas, and determining the sub-category of the first display content to be displayed in the second display interface based on the dragging area to which the dragging arrival position belongs. As Wilson teaches in column 3, line 60 – column 4, line 18, the user may select an object through sliding their finger from the original selection to a desired action identifier and removing the finger while over the identifier.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the dragging icons to targets of Kim with the contextual dragging areas of Wilson. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because the in place menus of Wilson benefit users in decreasing the distance required in dragging an object for a desired action.
Regarding claim 13, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 12 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
displaying transitional content in the first display interface after the first dragging for the first movable control is detected, wherein the transitional content is associated with the dragging area to which the dragging arrival position of the first dragging in the first display interface belongs among the N dragging areas. As Kim shows in Figs. 6A – 6C, and corresponding paragraphs [0150] and [0151], a touch and dragged icon follows the user’s touch coordinates. This is interpreted as encompassing Applicant’s “transitional content” as Applicant describes “transitional content” as including the control being displayed in a mobile manner along with the touch coordinates in paragraph [0022] of the specification. As the icon would be dragged to the contextually angled options of Wilson, this is interpreted as encompassing being “associated with the dragging angle”.
Regarding claim 14, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
wherein before switching to the second display interface is performed, second display content is displayed in the first display interface, and the method further comprises:
acquiring a second dragging for a second movable control in the second display interface after displaying the first display content in the second display interface; and
in response to the second dragging corresponding to dragging the second movable control to a predetermined area, switching to the first display interface and displaying the second display content in the first display interface. As Kim shows in Figs. 10A -10D and 11A-11D, selected display areas may replace previously selected display areas. Therefore, given the examples in Figs. 10 and 11, the user has set the bottom display area to F (first display interface) and subsequently replaced F with E (second display interface). The user may then select to replace E with F, thus resulting in switching to the first display interface.
As per claim 16, Kim teaches the following:
an interface displaying apparatus, comprising:
a display unit configured to: display a first movable control in a first display interface. See Fig. 8A with movable control 811 being displayed on a first interface;
a touch response unit configured to: acquire a first dragging for the first movable control. As Kim teaches in paragraph [0158], and corresponding Figs. 8B and 8C, a user may touch icon 811 and drag the icon to menu screen 817; and
a processing unit configured to: determine target display content to be displayed in response to the first dragging and control the display unit to display the target display content in the second display interface for replacing the displaying of the first display interface. As Kim further teaches in paragraph [0158], and corresponding Fig. 8C, a ghost view is shown which refers to a preview of the size and shape of a window in which the first application A will be executed. As Kim shows in Fig. 8D, an interface of application A replaces the first interface.
See Fig. 1 for different “units”.
Regarding claim 17, modified Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 16 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
the determining target display content to be displayed in response to the first dragging by the processing unit comprises:
in response to the first dragging corresponding to dragging the first movable control to a target area in the first display interface, determining to perform an interface switching action and determining the target display content. As Kim teaches in paragraph [0158], the display is “switched” to an execution screen of an user selected icon. As the icon corresponds to a specific application, this is interpreted as encompassing determining to switch to the selected icon and determining the content as corresponding with the selected icon.
Regarding claim 18, modified Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 17 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
the processing unit is further configured to: control the display unit to display transitional content in the first display interface after the first dragging for the first movable control is detected, wherein the transitional content comprises the first movable control, and the first movable control is displayed in a mobile manner along with touch coordinates of the first dragging. As Kim shows in Figs. 6A – 6C, and corresponding paragraphs [0150] and [0151], a touch and dragged icon follows the user’s touch coordinates. This is interpreted as encompassing Applicant’s “transitional content” as Applicant describes “transitional content” as including the control being displayed in a mobile manner along with the touch coordinates in paragraph [0022] of the specification.
As per claim 19, Kim teaches the following:
an electronic device, comprising a memory, a processor and a computer program stored in the memory, (see Fig. 1).
The remaining limitations of claim 19 are substantially similar to those of claim 1 as described above, and are rejected using the same reasoning.
As per claim 20, Kim teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
a nonvolatile computer-readable storage medium. See Fig. 1.
The remaining limitations of claim 20 are substantially similar to those of claim 1 as described above, and are rejected using the same reasoning.
Regarding claims 21 and 22, modified Kim teaches the medium of claim 20 as described above. The remaining limitations of claims 21 and 22 are substantially similar to those of claims 2 and 3 respectively, and are rejected using the same reasoning.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Wilson as applied to claims 1-3, and further in view of Lee (US 2013/0174069).
Regarding claim 4, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 3 as described above. However, Kim does not explicitly teach of changing the control when the control is dragged. In a similar field of endeavor, Lee teaches of a method of managing icons (see abstract). Lee further teaches the following:
the first movable control being displayed in a mobile manner along with touch coordinates of the first dragging comprises: when the first movable control is displayed in the mobile manner along with touch coordinates of the first dragging, the first movable control changes. As Lee teaches in paragraph [0043], while a user touches and drags a specific icon, an animation effect is applied to show that the icon is in a management mode. Further see Figs. 3A-3D where the icon is displayed “along with the touch coordinates of the first dragging”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the icon dragging of Kim with the animation effect of Lee. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because as Lee teaches in paragraph [0043], such effects benefit a user in allowing the user to manage icons more intuitively.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Wilson as applied to claims 1-3 and 6, and further in view of He (US 2019/0222632).
Regarding claim 7, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 6 as described above. While Kim teaches of dragging an icon onto a target interface (see Fig. 6), Kim does not explicitly teach of displaying text information within the shape of the target area. He teaches the following:
displaying text information associated with the first dragging within the shape of the first area. As He teaches in paragraphs [0158] – [0161], and corresponding Figs. 12 and 13, upon a user dragging an icon, a pop-up window 450 (shape) is displayed with text describing an action taken. He further teaches in paragraph [0162] and corresponding Fig. 14, that this pop-up window acts as a target area for a drag operation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the target interface of Kim with the text of He. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because the text of He would benefit a user of Kim in allowing a user to better understand an action to be taken based upon an icon drop location.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Wilson as applied to claims 1-3, and further in view of Yokoyama et al. (US 2012/0026189), hereinafter Yokoyama.
Regarding claim 8, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 3 as described above. However, Kim does not explicitly teach of two shaped being associated. In a similar field of endeavor, Yokoyama teaches of dragging icons to display windows (see Fig. 8). Yokoyama further teaches the following:
the first movable control is displayed in a first predetermined shape, the first area is displayed in a second predetermined shape, and the first predetermined shape is associated with the second predetermined shape. Yokoyama teaches in paragraph [0044], and corresponding Fig. 8, icons may have the same shape as target display areas.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the icons of Kim to have the same shape as display areas of Yokoyama. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because the same shapes would benefit users in visually relaying to the user where a specific target for a specific icon may be.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Wilson in view of Yokoyama as applied to claims 1-3 and 8, and further in view of Pallakoff et al. (US 2013/0125016), hereinafter Pallakoff.
Regarding claim 9, modified Kim teaches the method of claim 8 as described above. However, neither Kim nor Lee explicitly teach of changing a display effect of a shape in association with a dragging reaching a target. In a similar field of endeavor, Pallakoff teaches of dragging visual objects across a display (see abstract). Pallakoff further teaches the following:
the first movable control being displayed in a mobile manner along with touch coordinates of the first dragging comprises: changing a display effect of the first predetermined shape in a process when the first movable control is displayed in a mobile manner along with touch coordinates of the first dragging, and associating the display effect of the first predetermined shape with the second predetermined shape in a case that the touch coordinates of the first dragging reach the first area. As Pallakoff teaches in paragraph [0026], and corresponding Fig. 5, upon an item 230 being dragged to a target display, the size of the icon is altered in an animated fashion after a user’s fingers are lifted in the target area.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have further modified the icons of Kim in view of Yokoyama with the animated resizing of Pallakoff. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because the animations would benefit users in visually confirming that a target has been reached.
Claim(s) 15 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Wilson as applied to claims 1, 14, and 20, and further in view of Amir et al. (US 2002/0140719), hereinafter Amir.
Regarding claim 15, Kim teaches the method of claim 14 as described above. However, Kim does not explicitly teach that the switched to contents are that of visual content and auditory content. Amir teaches the following:
the second display content is one of a data stream corresponding to visual content and a data stream corresponding to auditory content, and the first display content is the other one of the data stream corresponding to the visual content and the data stream corresponding to the auditory content. As Amir teaches in the abstract, a user may switch from a first media stream to a second media stream. Amir teaches in paragraph [0020] that different media streams switched between may be directed to different senses, such as an audio stream and a video stream.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the switching content of Kim with the video and audio streams of Amir. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because such content would benefit a user of Kim in allowing quick selection in a desired playback context. Such as, for example, when the user may pay full attention to a display, a video may be desired, where when the user’s attention is elsewhere, audio may be preferable.
Regarding claim 23, modified Kim teaches the medium of claim 20 as described above. Kim further teaches the following:
wherein before switching to the second display interface is performed, second display content is displayed in the first display interface, and the processor is further configured to:
acquire a second dragging for a second movable control in the second display interface after displaying the first display content in the second display interface; and
in response to the second dragging corresponding to dragging the second movable control to a predetermined area, switching to the first display interface and displaying the second display content in the first display interface. As Kim shows in Figs. 10A -10D and 11A-11D, selected display areas may replace previously selected display areas. Therefore, given the examples in Figs. 10 and 11, the user has set the bottom display area to F (first display interface) and subsequently replaced F with E (second display interface). The user may then select to replace E with F, thus resulting in switching to the first display interface,
However, Kim does not explicitly teach that the switched to contents are that of visual content and auditory content. Amir teaches the following:
wherein the second display content is one of a data stream corresponding to visual content and a data stream corresponding to auditory content, and the first display content is the other one of the data stream corresponding to the visual content and the data stream corresponding to the auditory content. As Amir teaches in the abstract, a user may switch from a first media stream to a second media stream. Amir teaches in paragraph [0020] that different media streams switched between may be directed to different senses, such as an audio stream and a video stream.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the switching content of Kim with the video and audio streams of Amir. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because such content would benefit a user of Kim in allowing quick selection in a desired playback context. Such as, for example, when the user may pay full attention to a display, a video may be desired, where when the user’s attention is elsewhere, audio may be preferable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Aaltonen et al. (US 2006/0020904), see Fig. 18.
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 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