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 .
The previous Non-Final rejection filed 12/18/2025 is withdrawn to be superseded by this secondary Non-Final rejection. Rejections are updated to reflect the preliminary amendment filed 12/27/2023 to claims filed 12/27/2023.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 202111232529.2, filed on October 22, 2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/04/2024 and 12/27/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 18-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over iGeeksBlog. (2016, June 29). How to React, Change, Remove Emoji Tapbacks in iMessage in iOS 10. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Cz0oRo6-o, hereinafter “iGeeksBlog” and further in light of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20200013076 “Rinzler”.
Claim 1:
iGeeksBlog teaches a method of message processing, comprising: displaying a received predetermined message in a conversation interface page (i.e. [0:33], “just tap and hold the message There are six options, Choose the one you like”, wherein it is noted that the BRI for a predetermined message encompasses how a second user has predetermined a message to send to a first user in a chat interface); and in response to interface jumping (i.e. [0:34], “just tap and hold the message There are six options, Choose the one you like”, wherein it is noted that the BRI for a jumping encompasses in which the user selects a message content to display additional options related to the message), displaying at least one shortcut operation control corresponding to the predetermined message in the conversation interface (i.e. [0:34], wherein it is noted that the BRI for displaying a shortcut operation control encompasses displaying a menu for reacting to the corresponding message when an intent to view a message is detected),
While iGeeksBlog lays the groundwork for checking for a condition to display a control corresponding to a message when a user triggers jumping into more a more detailed view of a message, iGeeksBlog may not explicitly teach
the interface jumping comprising jumping to a detail page of the predetermined message and returning to the conversation interface, triggered by the current user in the conversation interface.
However, Rinzler also teaches
interface jumping (i.e. para. [0015], Fig. 1, “In some scenarios the video player 14 may pop up on the display screen 12 of the mobile communication device 10 (e.g., smartphones) of a survey participant (e.g., a member of the instant response system)”, wherein the BRI for interface jumping encompasses how survey interface may jump display to a new pop up video player. It should be noted the applicant’s specification cites serval examples of jumping such as in para. [0086-0087], “a predetermined viewing operation for the video message is received, the video viewing interface is entered, and the video is played … For example, the video viewing interface may be understood as a detail interface of the video message, and the predetermined viewing operation may be understood as an operation that triggers jumping to the detail interface, which may be, for example, a click on the playback logo”. When viewing the limitation in light of applicant’s specification, the BRI for the limitation “interface jumping” would encompass survey interface jumping to playing a predetermined pop-up video).
Rinzler further teaches,
the interface jumping comprising jumping to a detail page of the predetermined message (i.e. para. [0026], “The member may be asked to turn on the video player, or the system may remotely force on the video player viewer (i.e., the survey participant or member) watches and pays attention to the video before answering the survey question”, wherein the BRI for the detail page encompasses the pop up interface for displaying the detail information of the predetermined video survey message) and returning to the conversation interface (i.e. para. [0021], “In some cases, the video can be deleted after a single watch in a Snapchat like format. With the member's permission, other control items 11a and touch-screen control may be disabled during the video so that other operations are unavailable and/or the member cannot exit the video until the video has run to completion”, wherein it is noted that the BRI for returning to the conversation interface encompasses embodiments where a pop up video player is exited once the video has run to completing and a user is returned to the survey conversation interface. It should be noted that while Applicant’s specification cites in, para. [0037], “After viewing the message details on the detail interface, the user may exit the detail interface and return to the conversation interface by, for example, triggering a detail interface closing button”, the claim language of “returning” does not explicitly require the exit or closure of a detail page and the BRI for the above claims would even encompass a current user returning to the conversation interface by returning to looking at a conversation interface section), triggered by the current user in the conversation interface (i.e. para. [0030], “the system determines whether the complete video has played. If the complete video has played the “yes” branch is followed from step 28 to step 29, in which the system activates the survey to receive one or more answers from the viewer. In other words, the viewer is allowed to answer the survey question only after the complete video has played”, wherein when a user triggers viewing a video page of a predetermined video message and exits the video at completion to return to the online survey user interface page, It is noted that Rinzler also teaches determining a predetermined condition as Rinzler teaches checking for conditions such as video status viewing conditions in which the system tracks which percentage of the video was viewed by the user and subsequently controlling the activation display of certain controls, such as a review survey page corresponding to the viewed video, based on the video status viewing conditions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to add the interface jumping comprising jumping to a detail page of the predetermined message and returning to the conversation interface, triggered by the current user in the conversation interface, with the jumping display of a shortcut operation control in a chat sessions of iGeeksBlog, with how a user interface jumps from a survey display to a pop-up of a video and returns to a survey interface after watching to completion and exiting the video, as taught by Rinzler. One would have been motivated to combine the attention metrics of Rinzler with the interface jumping within a chat session of iGeeksBlog as the combination ensures a viewing user has greater comprehension of content before initiation a subsequent action related to the viewed content.
Claim 2:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 1.
iGeeksBlog teaches wherein the at least one shortcut operation control comprises at least one of a shortcut processing control or a shortcut reply control, the shortcut processing control is configured to process the predetermined message with a predetermined function, the shortcut reply control is configured to reply to the predetermined message (i.e. [0:34], wherein it is noted that the BRI for a shortcut processing control or a shortcut reply control encompasses how a reaction is a predetermined function that may be construed as a reply to the message).
Claim 18:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 1.
Rinzler teaches further comprising: determining whether a predetermined condition is satisfied (i.e. para. [0030], “the system determines whether the complete video has played. If the complete video has played the “yes” branch is followed from step 28 to step 29, in which the system activates the survey to receive one or more answers from the viewer).
Claim 19:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 18.
wherein determining whether the predetermined condition is satisfied comprises: determining, based on target data, whether the predetermined condition is satisfied, wherein the target data comprises at least one of first data and second data, the first data comprises data generated from a message content of the predetermined message while the detail interface is viewed by the current user (i.e. para. [0030], “Step 27 is followed by step 28, in which the system determines whether the complete video has played. If the complete video has played the “yes” branch is followed from step 28 to step 29, in which the system activates the survey to receive one or more answers from the viewer”, wherein the BRI for first data encompasses how much message content is viewed completely by a user), and the second data comprises data corresponding to the message content of the predetermined message (i.e. para. [0015], “For example, an informational or promotional video about a particular airline may play in connection with a survey question 16 asking the member about how many times they have flown that specific airline”, wherein the BRI for a second data comprises that the video being viewed is an advertisement content video).
Claim 20:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 19.
Rinzler further teaches wherein determining, based on the target data, whether the predetermined condition is satisfied comprises: inputting the target data into a predetermined model, wherein the predetermined model is configured to determine an attention value of the current user for the present message (i.e. para. [0023], “In instances where the displayed text or video might be small, the member may have to enlarge certain sections of the screen to actually read or see relevant portions. Very large or Tiny print may also be used as a verification technique. For example, the member may be prompted to enlarge or decrease the size of the screen, and then enter a verification character only visible at the new display size, as a verification method. Enlarging or decreasing the display itself in response to the prompt may also be used as a verification technique. Any of these techniques can be used individually or in combination with other mechanisms for encouraging or ensuring that the member is paying attention to and, if desired, continuously engaging with the survey video”, wherein the BRI for a model encompasses a series of verification techniques that are used to determine if a user if paying attention to a video ); and determining, based on an output result of the predetermined model, whether the attention value is in a predetermined range, and in response to a determining result that the attention value falls into the predetermined range, determining that the predetermined condition is satisfied (i.e. para. [0030], “the system determines whether the viewer has exited the video or the associated survey before completion. For example, this may be an active exit where the viewer manually exits the video, or a passive exit where the system exits the video in response to the viewer failing a viewer verification”, wherein the BRI for a predetermined range encompasses a pass or fail range. Wherein a user fails a verification technique has an attention value of fail and will not be shown an exit survey).
Claim 21:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 1,
Rinzler wherein a message type of the predetermined message comprises at least one of a picture and a video (i.e. para. [0037], “If the viewer does consent, the “yes” branch is followed from step 44 to step 45, in which the system to play the video while recording the viewer”, wherein it is noted that the BRI for one of a picture and a video encompasses the video advertisement and picture frames that make up the video).
Claim 22:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 19.
Rinzler further teaches wherein the first data comprises at least one of: a display duration, a number of times of display and a displayed proportion of the message content of the predetermined message on the detail interface (i.e. para. [0030], “Step 27 is followed by step 28, in which the system determines whether the complete video has played. If the complete video has played the “yes” branch is followed from step 28 to step 29, in which the system activates the survey to receive one or more answers from the viewer. In other words, the viewer is allowed to answer the survey question only after the complete video has played”, wherein a pop-up survey question corresponding to the video content may only be displayed when a whole video has been displayed and viewed at least once by a user); at least one of an operation type and an operation result of a display controlling operation performed by the current user for the message content of the predetermined message on the detail interface (i.e. para. [0030], “Step 27 is followed by step 28, in which the system determines whether the complete video has played. If the complete video has played the “yes” branch is followed from step 28 to step 29”, wherein the BRI for an operation type and result for a display controlling operation encompasses playing a video by a user and how much of the video has been played); and at least one of an operation type and an operation result of an interactive operation, performed by the current user, based on the message content of the predetermined message on the detail interface (i.e. para. [0015], “certain video control items 15, such as fast-forward, rewind and mute, may be disabled until the video has been completed”, wherein the BRI for an operation type and result of an interactive operation encompasses any type of control that such as a user interaction and attention to a duration and content of a video).
Claim 23:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 22.
Rinzler further teaches wherein the message type of the predetermined message comprises a picture (i.e. para. [0037], “If the viewer does consent, the “yes” branch is followed from step 44 to step 45, in which the system to play the video while recording the viewer”, wherein it is noted that a video type of message comprises at least one picture) and the operation type of the display controlling operation comprises at least one of zooming in, zooming out, and dragging (i.e. para. [0023], “In instances where the displayed text or video might be small, the member may have to enlarge certain sections of the screen to actually read or see relevant portions. Very large or Tiny print may also be used as a verification technique. For example, the member may be prompted to enlarge or decrease the size of the screen, and then enter a verification character only visible at the new display size, as a verification method. Enlarging or decreasing the display itself in response to the prompt may also be used as a verification technique. Any of these techniques can be used individually or in combination with other mechanisms for encouraging or ensuring that the member is paying attention to and, if desired, continuously engaging with the survey video”, wherein the system may check for an attention metric by seeing if a user is engaging with an operation type of zooming in or zooming out a display in order to enter a verification character).
Claim 24:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 22.
Rinzler teaches wherein the message type of the predetermined message comprises a video, and the operation type of the display controlling operation comprises at least one of pause, playback and progress adjustment (i.e. para. [0032], “the survey video begins, typically in response to the survey participant (member or viewer)”, wherein it is noted that a user may play a predetermined video and the BRI for the operation type encompasses a user beginning the playback of a video).
Claim 25:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 22.
iGeeksBlog teaches wherein the predetermined message comprises interactable content, and the interactive operation based on the message content of the predetermined message comprises at least one of interactive operations directed to the interactable content and a creator of the interactable content (i.e. [0:34], wherein it is noted that in a test message chain between at least two users a receiving user may tapback and interact with a message based on the content of the message sent by a sending user).
Claim 26:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 1.
iGeeksBlog further teaches wherein displaying at least one shortcut operation control corresponding to the predetermined message in the conversation page comprises: displaying, in the conversation page, at least one shortcut operation control corresponding to the predetermined message and associated with the current user (i.e. [0:34], wherein it is noted that the BRI for at least one shortcut operation control encompasses the tapback reaction page that is associated with the viewing user).
Claim 27:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 2.
iGeeksBlog teaches wherein the shortcut reply control comprises at least one of an emoticon control, a text control, a picture control, and an audio/video control (i.e. [0:34], wherein it is noted that the BRI for an emoticon control encompasses a reaction reply).
Claim 28:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 19.
Rinzler further teaches wherein the second data comprises: a target content type corresponding to the message content of the predetermined message, and data generated by historical content matching the target content type in a process of being viewed by the current user (i.e. para. [0013], “Video viewing candidates may be qualified for viewing certain videos and selected in a priority order, for example by meeting certain demographic conditions, having certain topics of interest identified in their social media profiles”, wherein it is noted that a user may be sent a certain premeditated survey video to be opened based on their historical topics of interest).
Claim 29:
iGeeksBlog and Rinzler teach the method according to claim 19.
Rinzler further teaches wherein the conversation interface is a group conversation interface with a predetermined topic (i.e. para. [0012], “The video survey requester may be charged (e.g., $2 per response), and the users of the participating mobile communication devices may be compensated (e.g., $1 per response) on a per-response basis”, wherein it is noted that the BRI for a conversation page encompasses how a survey requestion formulates a survey video and a surveying users send back responses to the survey video), and wherein the target data further comprises third data, and the third data comprises data generated while the predetermined message is viewed by a predetermined user within a group, the predetermined user excluding the current user (i.e. para. [0017]. “Additionally, video status information regarding other members usage can also be sent to members as well. For example, the pop-up message window 17 may display a ping informing members that X amount of members are currently watching the video out of Y amount of members that need to be polled as per the customer’s request. This information may also include, for example, how many (or what percentage of) members are at a specific point of the video (e.g., 25% complete, 50% complete, 75% complete, etc.)”, wherein the BRI for third data encompasses viewing data about other users than a viewing user).
Claim 30:
Claim 30 is the device claim reciting similar limitations to Claim 1 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 31:
Claim 31 is the device claim reciting similar limitations to claim 2 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 32:
Claim 32 is the device claim reciting similar limitations to claim 18 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 33:
Claim 33 is the device claim reciting similar limitations to claim 19 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 34:
Claim 34 is the device claim reciting similar limitations to claim 20 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 35:
Claim 35 is the medium claim reciting similar limitations to claim 1 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 10782852 “Al Majid” teaches in Col. 7, lines 57-65, Fig. 3A-B, that the preview area 360 includes a preview of the message content of the selected chat cell 315c, in the example embodiment of FIG. 3B comprising a preview thumbnail 369. As will be described at length below, the disclosure provides for displaying the preview area 360 in a variable position and/or at a variable size, depending on one or more attributes of the selected chat cell 315.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID H TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7433. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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, Cesar Paula can be reached at (571) 272-4128. 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.
/D.T./ Examiner, Art Unit 2145
/CESAR B PAULA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2145