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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/30/2025 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-5 and 8-12 are pending in the instant patent application. Claims 1-2 and 8-9 are amended. Claims 6-7 have been canceled. Claims 11-12 are new.
Response to Claim Amendments
Applicant’s amendments to the claims are insufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. §101 rejections. The rejections remain pending and are updated and addressed below in light of the amendments and per guidelines for 101 analysis (PEG 2019).
Applicant’s amendments to the claims are sufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. §102 rejections. The rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims are sufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. §112 rejections. The rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims are insufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. §103 rejections. The rejections remain pending and are updated and addressed below in light of the amendments and newly cited art.
Response to 35 U.S.C. §101 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding 35 U.S.C. §101 rejection of the claims have been fully considered, but are not persuasive.
Regarding the current 101 rejection and in light of the proposed amendments, Examiner maintains that the claim with the proposed amendments still recite abstract ideas for the same reasons as presented in the previous Office Action. Applicant refers to the MPEP for examples that fall under Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity and how they are not analogous to the presented claims. However, Examiner respectfully reminds Applicant, the important issue is whether the concept (e.g., the idea of providing compliance functionality for facilities) is abstract (e.g., certain methods of organizing human activity, e.g. managing personal behavior) - not whether the exact fact-pattern matches the particulars of previous court decisions. For example, in Planet Bingo, which dealt with the abstract idea of managing a game of bingo, the Federal circuit used Bilski and Alice to support the asserted abstract idea. Specifically, the aspect of bingo game management which includes “solv[ing] a tampering problem and also minimiz[ing] other security risks” during bingo ticket purchases was determined to be similar to the abstract ideas of “risk hedging” during “ consumer transactions,” (Bilski) and “mitigating settlement risk” in “financial transactions,” (Alice) that the Supreme Court found ineligible. Clearly, the fact patterns in Planet Bingo compared to Bilski and Alice were different, but the abstract concepts were similar. Examiner maintains that the claims recite abstract ideas, specifically Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity. Applicant further asserts that the claims are similar to Example 23, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claim 1 of Example 23 was found eligible because the claim did not set forth or describe an abstract idea and recited an improvement to an in. However, the claims as presently proposed still recite abstract ideas, for in at least the reason that the invention is solely dependent on user actions and what was previously stated. Furthermore, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Regarding Applicant’s argument that the claims as currently written are closely correlated to Example 37, Examiner respectfully disagrees. In Example 37, the claim as a whole integrated the mental process because the additional elements recited a specific manner of automatically displaying icons to the user based on usage which provided a specific improvement over prior system, resulting in an improved user interface for electronic devices. The claims as presently do not recite any improvements to the user interface other than performing a command based on user input.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Regarding Claims 1-5 and 10-12, they are directed to a device, however the claims are directed to a judicial exception without significantly more. Claims 1-5 and 10-12 are directed to the abstract idea of scheduling appointments.
Performing the Step 2A Prong 1 analysis while referring specifically to independent Claim 1, claim 1 recites displaying, a first calendar, wherein displaying the first calendar includes: in accordance with a determination that a user has not responded to a first appointment, displaying, the first appointment in the first calendar; and in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment, forgoing display of the first appointment in the first calendar; while displaying the first calendar, detecting, a request to display a second calendar that is different from the first calendar; and in response to the request to display the second calendar, displaying, the second calendar, wherein displaying the second calendar includes: in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment by accepting the first appointment, displaying, the first appointment in the second calendar; in accordance that the user has responded to the first appointment by declining the first appointment, displaying the first appointment in the second calendar; and in accordance with a determination that the user has not responded to the first appointment, forgoing display of the first appointment in the second calendar.
These claim limitations fall within the Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping of abstract ideas due to the managing personal behavior (including following rules/instructions) based on user actions.
Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea and dependent claims 2-5 and 10-12 further recite the abstract idea.
Regarding Step 2A Prong 2 analysis, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular the claim recites the elements of one or more processors, a memory, a first calendar user interface, one or more input devices, a second calendar interface and a display. The one or more processors, a memory, a first calendar user interface, one or more input devices, a second calendar interface and a display are merely just generic computing devices.
With respect to 2B, the claims do not include additional elements amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Claims 1-5 and 10 includes various elements that are not directed to the abstract idea under 2A. These elements include one or more processors, a memory, a first calendar user interface, one or more input devices, a second calendar interface, a display and the generic computing elements described in the Applicant's specification in at least Section VI of the specification. These elements do not amount to more than the abstract idea because it is a generic computer performing generic functions.
Therefore, Claims 1-5 and 10, alone or in combination, are not drawn to eligible subject matter as they are directed to abstract ideas without significantly more.
Regarding Claim 8, it is directed to a non-transitory computer readable storage medium, however the claims are directed to a judicial exception without significantly more. Claim 8 is directed to the abstract idea of scheduling appointments.
Performing the Step 2A Prong 1 analysis while referring specifically to independent Claim 8, claim 8 recites displaying, a first calendar, wherein displaying the first calendar includes: in accordance with a determination that a user has not responded to a first appointment, displaying, the first appointment in the first calendar; and in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment, forgoing display of the first appointment in the first calendar; while displaying the first calendar, detecting, a request to display a second calendar that is different from the first calendar; and in response to the request to display the second calendar, displaying, the second calendar, wherein displaying the second calendar includes: in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment by accepting the first appointment, displaying, the first appointment in the second calendar; in accordance that the user has responded to the first appointment by declining the first appointment, displaying the first appointment in the second calendar; and in accordance with a determination that the user has not responded to the first appointment, forgoing display of the first appointment in the second calendar.
These claim limitations fall within the Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping of abstract ideas due to the managing personal behavior (including following rules/instructions) based on user actions.
Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Regarding Step 2A Prong 2 analysis, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular the claim recites the elements of one or more processors, an electronic device, a first calendar user interface, one or more input devices, a second calendar interface and a display. The one or more processors, an electronic device, a first calendar user interface, one or more input devices, a second calendar interface and a display are merely just generic computing devices.
With respect to 2B, the claims do not include additional elements amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Claim 8 includes various elements that are not directed to the abstract idea under 2A. These elements include one or more processors, an electronic device, a first calendar user interface, one or more input devices, a second calendar interface, a display and the generic computing elements described in the Applicant's specification in at least Section VI of the specification. These elements do not amount to more than the abstract idea because it is a generic computer performing generic functions.
Therefore, Claim 8 is not drawn to eligible subject matter as it is directed to abstract ideas without significantly more.
Regarding Claim 9, it is directed to a method, however the claims are directed to a judicial exception without significantly more. Claim 9 is directed to the abstract idea of scheduling appointments.
Performing the Step 2A Prong 1 analysis while referring specifically to independent Claim 9, claim 9 recites displaying, a first calendar, wherein displaying the first calendar includes: in accordance with a determination that a user has not responded to a first appointment, displaying, the first appointment in the first calendar; and in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment, forgoing display of the first appointment in the first calendar; while displaying the first calendar, detecting, a request to display a second calendar that is different from the first calendar; and in response to the request to display the second calendar, displaying, the second calendar, wherein displaying the second calendar includes: in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment by accepting the first appointment, displaying, the first appointment in the second calendar; in accordance that the user has responded to the first appointment by declining the first appointment, displaying the first appointment in the second calendar; and in accordance with a determination that the user has not responded to the first appointment, forgoing display of the first appointment in the second calendar.
These claim limitations fall within the Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping of abstract ideas due to the managing personal behavior (including following rules/instructions) based on user actions.
Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Regarding Step 2A Prong 2 analysis, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular the claim recites the elements of an electronic device, a display, a first calendar user interface, a second calendar user interface and one or more input devices. The electronic device, a display, a first calendar user interface, a second calendar user interface and one or more input devices are merely just generic computing devices.
With respect to 2B, the claims do not include additional elements amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Claim 9 includes various elements that are not directed to the abstract idea under 2A. These elements include an electronic device, a display, a first calendar user interface, a second calendar user interface one or more input devices and the generic computing elements described in the Applicant's specification in at least Section VI of the specification. These elements do not amount to more than the abstract idea because it is a generic computer performing generic functions.
Therefore, Claim 9 is not drawn to eligible subject matter as it is directed to abstract ideas without significantly more.
Response to 35 U.S.C. §103 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding 35 U.S.C. §103 rejection of the claims have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Furthermore, Applicant’s arguments are moot in light of newly amended language.
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.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5 and 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Anzures et al. (US 2009/0174680 A1) in view of Bostick et al. (US 7,519,663 B1).
The applied reference has a common inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). Teaching, suggestions, or motivations in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Regarding Claim 1, Anzures teaches the limitations of Claim 1 which state
one or more processors (Anzures: Para 0009);
and memory storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for (Anzures: Para 0009):
displaying, via the display, a first calendar user interface, wherein displaying the first calendar user interface includes: in accordance with a determination that a user has not responded to a first appointment, displaying, via the display, the first appointment in the first calendar user interface; and in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment, forgoing display of the first appointment in the first calendar user interface (Anzures: Para 0214-0216, Fig 7C via FIG. 7B shows a device held in a portrait orientation (with a substantially vertical orientation of a long axis of the touch screen) displaying a list view of daily events for a multiplicity of days. The list is vertically scrollable to permit a user to see events on earlier or later days. A set of icons are provided to initiate display of "Today" events, and to initiate display of events in a list view, day view or month view, in response to detecting a user gesture on the corresponding icon. An icon 7040 is provided for accessing an invitation inbox and for displaying of a number of unread calendar invitations. In some embodiments, a contact gesture 7004 is detected on the invitation inbox icon 7040, which initiates display of an invitation inbox (e.g., as shown on FIG. 7C). FIG. 7C shows a device held in a portrait orientation, displaying an exemplary list (inbox) of calendar invitations received by the device. In this list, there are two exemplary calendar invitations, first a design review invitation 7062-1, and second a patent meeting invitation 7062-2. In the present example, both invitations are marked as unread, as indicated by the dot 7070 to the left side of each calendar invitation. In response to detecting a user gesture on the "Done" button 7008 in the title bar, the device exits from the calendar invitation inbox. In FIG. 7C, in response to detecting a user selection gesture 7007 on the design review invitation 7062-1, the device displays details of the invitation, as shown in FIG. 7D. FIG. 7D shows a device displaying information details of an exemplary invitation, the design review invitation 7062-1. These details include the title of the meeting, location (Diplomacy room), date, time, sender of the invitation (Christie), attendees, and notes regarding the meeting. The calendar invitation also includes a "Show in calendar" icon 7082 which if activated by the user (e.g., by finger gesture 7009) initiates display of the invitation in the user's calendar (e.g., as shown in FIG. 7E). The calendar invitation also includes icons for the user to accept (7091) the meeting, to indicate that the user may attend (7093), and to decline (7095) the meeting. In some embodiments, the accept icon 7091 is green, the maybe icon 7093 is orange, and the decline 7095 icon is red);
while displaying the first calendar user interface, detecting, via the one or more input devices, a request to display a second calendar user interface that is different from the first calendar user interface (Anzures: Para 0215-0216, Fig 7C ele 7007 via FIG. 7C shows a device held in a portrait orientation, displaying an exemplary list (inbox) of calendar invitations received by the device. In this list, there are two exemplary calendar invitations, first a design review invitation 7062- 1, and second a patent meeting invitation 7062-2. In the present example, both invitations are marked as unread, as indicated by the dot 7070 to the left side of each calendar invitation. In response to detecting a user gesture on the "Done" button 7008 in the title bar, the device exits from the calendar invitation inbox. In FIG. 7C, in response to detecting a user selection gesture 7007 on the design review invitation 7062-1, the device displays details of the invitation, as shown in FIG. 7D. FIG. 7D shows a device displaying information details of an exemplary invitation, the design review invitation 7062-1. These details include the title of the meeting, location (Diplomacy room), date, time, sender of the invitation (Christie), attendees, and notes regarding the meeting. The calendar invitation also includes a "Show in calendar" icon 7082 which if activated by the user (e.g., by finger gesture 7009) initiates display of the invitation in the user's calendar (e.g., as shown in FIG. 7E). The calendar invitation also includes icons for the user to accept (7091) the meeting, to indicate that the user may attend (7093), and to decline (7095) the meeting. In some embodiments, the accept icon 7091 is green, the maybe icon 7093 is orange, and the decline 7095 icon is red);
in response to the request to display the second calendar user interface, displaying, via the display, the second calendar user interface, wherein displaying the second calendar user interface includes: in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment by accepting the first appointment, displaying, via the display, the first appointment in the second calendar user interface (Anzures: Para 0215, 0248-0260 via In FIG. 7C, in response to detecting a user selection gesture 7007 on the design review invitation 7062-1, the device displays details of the invitation, as shown in FIG. 7D…In some embodiments, UI 7000D (FIG. 7D) includes the following elements, or a subset or superset thereof: [0248] 402, 404, 406, and 7062, as described above; [0249] a "show in calendar" icon 7082 that when activated (e.g., by finger gesture 7009) initiates display of the invitation in a calendar (e.g., as shown in FIG. 7E); [0250] a "return to calendar invitation inbox" icon 7084 that when activated (e.g., by finger gesture) initiates display of the calendar invitation inbox (e.g., FIG. 7C); [0251] a "previous invitation" icon 7086 that when activated (e.g., by finger gesture) initiates display of the previous calendar invitation in the calendar invitation inbox; [0252] a "next invitation" icon 7088 that when activated (e.g., by finger gesture) initiates display of the next calendar invitation in the calendar invitation inbox; [0253] an "accept invitation" icon 7091 that when activated (e.g., by finger gesture) initiates acceptance of calendar invitation (e.g., 7062-1); [0254] a "maybe" icon 7093 that when activated (e.g., by finger gesture) initiates tentative acceptance of calendar invitation (e.g., 7062-1); and [0255] a "decline invitation" icon 7095 that when activated (e.g., by finger gesture) initiates rejection of calendar invitation (e.g., 7062-1)… UI 7000E (FIG. 7E) includes the following elements, or a subset or superset thereof: [0257] 402, 404, 406, 4902, 4904,4910, 4912, and 7040, as described above; [0258] a calendar day view 7090; and [0259] a calendar invitation (e.g., 7062-1 from UI 7000C, FIG. 7C) shown as a tentative calendar event 7092-1, where a dotted border, the word "Invitation," or other visual indicator shows the tentative nature of event 7092; and [0260] a scheduled calendar event 7094-1, which may conflict with a tentative calendar event (e.g., event 7094-1 overlaps with event 7092-1 between 2-3 pm)).
However, Anzures does not explicitly disclose the limitation of Claim 1 which states in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment by declining the first appointment, displaying, via the display, the first appointment in the second calendar user interface.
Bostick though, with the teachings of Anzures, teaches of
in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment by declining the first appointment, displaying, via the display, the first appointment in the second calendar user interface (Bostick: Col 3 line 62 - Col 4 line 49 via An electronic calendar application for use in a computer or network system displays the meetings/events schedule of the end user. With reference to FIG. 1, when the end user receives invitations from senders, also Known as chairs, a screen 10 shows the received invitations to the user. The user may then decide whether to accept or decline the invitations. In FIG. 1, screen 10 shows three meeting invites sent by Jim to the end user. All three meetings are for the same day and time slot, Apr. 29, 2009 at 11:30 AM. FIG. 2 references a screen view 20 when the end user opens the FIG. 1 bottom meeting invite received at 11:21 AM. Using a Respond pulldown 30, the user marks the event notice for the meeting as accepted. The calendar application sends the accepted status back to the chair (sender), and displays the accepted invitation on the end user's calendar as an accepted event in the appropriate time slot. Besides accepting or declining, the calendar application may include other responses in Respond pulldown 30, such as delegate, propose new time, or tentatively accept. The calendar application then fills in further received invitations for events in appropriate calendar time slots. When the user decides to decline a received invitation, the user selects the declined option using the Respond pulldown 30. In response, the calendar application marks the invitation as declined, sends the declined status back to the chair (sender), and displays the declined invitation on the calendar as a declined event in the appropriate time slot and with a look as pre- defined by the user. All declined events stay in Notes or calendar memory (e.g., hard drive) and show up on the user's calendar as declined events. By having declined entries displayed on the calendar, the end user can easily go back at any time and manually accept those entries. At any time, the user can also delete the declined event notice from the calendar entry without it notifying the chair, since the calendar system notified the chair of that decision when the event was first declined. Using the calendar application, the user can respond back to the chair (sender) to accept or tentatively accept an invitation, or forward and send comments, without having to delete the other event notices that the user had previously accepted for the same time slot. With reference to FIG. 3, a specific time slot on the calendar 40 may display more than one event. The calendar 40 displays three different events for the 11:30 am time slot: a meeting notice sent out by the user, seen in the first 11:30 am time slot; an accepted invite to a meeting received from Jim, seen in the next 11:30 am time slot; and a tentatively accepted invite to a meeting from Jim, seen in the third 11:30 am time slot. Events shown in calendar 40 have unique icons to differentiate them. For example, the calendar application displays tentatively accepted events with a down arrow icon, private events with a prohibited symbol icon, and accepted events with a split arrow icon, but many other icon options could be used. For example, the calendar application could display tentatively accepted events with a pencil icon, private events with a key icon, and accepted events with a handshake icon. Declined invites appear on calendar 40 in a format preconfigured by the end user. With reference to FIG. 4, to differentiate the declined events from accepted events on the calendar, the calendar application may display the declined events in a different color, such as red; display a keyword, such as "DECLINED," which would be automatically inserted as a Type Subject identifier in the subject line; display an indented subject line showing differently than normally accepted events in the same time slot; display a different icon in front of the calendar event time slot when the event has been declined; and/or configure various font formats, such as using strike-through, bold, italics, etc. The end user configures the default options for a Declined Invite look. The user may enhance the default options for the Declined Invite look via any of the configurable options mentioned above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Anzures with the teachings of Bostick, in order to have in accordance with a determination that the user has responded to the first appointment by declining the first appointment, displaying, via the display, the first appointment in the second calendar user interface. The motivations behind this being to incorporate the teachings of an electronic calendar application that enables the user to display declined invitations to events. Furthermore, in addition to being in the same CPC class, the teachings, suggestions, and motivations in this prior art would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
The combination of Anzures/Bostick further teaches the limitations of Claim 1 which state
and in accordance with a determination that the user has not responded to the first appointment, forgoing display of the first appointment in the second calendar user interface (Anzures: Para 0216, Fig 7D via FIG. 7D shows a device displaying information details of an exemplary invitation, the design review invitation 7062-1. These details include the title of the meeting, location (Diplomacy room), date, time, sender of the invitation (Christie), attendees, and notes regarding the meeting. The calendar invitation also includes a "Show in calendar" icon 7082 which if activated by the user (e.g., by finger gesture 7009) initiates display of the invitation in the user's calendar (e.g., as shown in FIG. 7E). The calendar invitation also includes icons for the user to accept (7091) the meeting, to indicate that the user may attend (7093), and to decline (7095) the meeting. In some embodiments, the accept icon 7091 is green, the maybe icon 7093 is orange, and the decline 7095 icon is red).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Anzures/Bostick teaches the limitations of Claim 2 which state
displaying, via the display, a title for the second appointment, wherein displaying the title for the second appointment includes: in accordance with a determination that the second appointment has been accepted, displaying, via the display, the title for the second appointment with the first visual characteristic; and in accordance with a determination that the second appointment has been declined, displaying, via the display, the title for the second appointment with a second visual characteristic that is different from the first visual characteristic (Bostick: Col 3 line 62 - Col 4 line 49 via An electronic calendar application for use in a computer or network system displays the meetings/events schedule of the end user. With reference to FIG. 1, when the end user receives invitations from senders, also Known as chairs, a screen 10 shows the received invitations to the user. The user may then decide whether to accept or decline the invitations. In FIG. 1, screen 10 shows three meeting invites sent by Jim to the end user. All three meetings are for the same day and time slot, Apr. 29, 2009 at 11:30 AM. FIG. 2 references a screen view 20 when the end user opens the FIG. 1 bottom meeting invite received at 11:21 AM. Using a Respond pulldown 30, the user marks the event notice for the meeting as accepted. The calendar application sends the accepted status back to the chair (sender), and displays the accepted invitation on the end user's calendar as an accepted event in the appropriate time slot. Besides accepting or declining, the calendar application may include other responses in Respond pulldown 30, such as delegate, propose new time, or tentatively accept. The calendar application then fills in further received invitations for events in appropriate calendar time slots. When the user decides to decline a received invitation, the user selects the declined option using the Respond pulldown 30. In response, the calendar application marks the invitation as declined, sends the declined status back to the chair (sender), and displays the declined invitation on the calendar as a declined event in the appropriate time slot and with a look as pre- defined by the user. All declined events stay in Notes or calendar memory (e.g., hard drive) and show up on the user's calendar as declined events. By having declined entries displayed on the calendar, the end user can easily go back at any time and manually accept those entries. At any time, the user can also delete the declined event notice from the calendar entry without it notifying the chair, since the calendar system notified the chair of that decision when the event was first declined. Using the calendar application, the user can respond back to the chair (sender) to accept or tentatively accept an invitation, or forward and send comments, without having to delete the other event notices that the user had previously accepted for the same time slot. With reference to FIG. 3, a specific time slot on the calendar 40 may display more than one event. The calendar 40 displays three different events for the 11:30 am time slot: a meeting notice sent out by the user, seen in the first 11:30 am time slot; an accepted invite to a meeting received from Jim, seen in the next 11:30 am time slot; and a tentatively accepted invite to a meeting from Jim, seen in the third 11:30 am time slot. Events shown in calendar 40 have unique icons to differentiate them. For example, the calendar application displays tentatively accepted events with a down arrow icon, private events with a prohibited symbol icon, and accepted events with a split arrow icon, but many other icon options could be used. For example, the calendar application could display tentatively accepted events with a pencil icon, private events with a key icon, and accepted events with a handshake icon. Declined invites appear on calendar 40 in a format preconfigured by the end user. With reference to FIG. 4, to differentiate the declined events from accepted events on the calendar, the calendar application may display the declined events in a different color, such as red; display a keyword, such as "DECLINED," which would be automatically inserted as a Type Subject identifier in the subject line; display an indented subject line showing differently than normally accepted events in the same time slot; display a different icon in front of the calendar event time slot when the event has been declined; and/or configure various font formats, such as using strike-through, bold, italics, etc. The end user configures the default options for a Declined Invite look. The user may enhance the default options for the Declined Invite look via any of the configurable options mentioned above).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Anzures/Bostick teaches the limitations of Claim 4 which state
displaying, via the display, the first appointment in the second calendar user interface, wherein displaying the first appointment includes: displaying, via the display, an accept option that, when selected, accepts the first appointment and a decline option that, when selected, declines the first appointment (Anzures: Para 0216, Fig 7D via FIG. 7D shows a device displaying information details of an exemplary invitation, the design review invitation 7062-1. These details include the title of the meeting, location (Diplomacy room), date, time, sender of the invitation (Christie), attendees, and notes regarding the meeting. The calendar invitation also includes a "Show in calendar" icon 7082 which if activated by the user (e.g., by finger gesture 7009) initiates display of the invitation in the user's calendar (e.g., as shown in FIG. 7E). The calendar invitation also includes icons for the user to accept (7091) the meeting, to indicate that the user may attend (7093), and to decline (7095) the meeting. In some embodiments, the accept icon 7091 is green, the maybe icon 7093 is orange, and the decline 7095 icon is red).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Anzures/Bostick teaches the limitations of Claim 5 which state
in accordance with the determination that the first appointment has been accepted, displaying, via the display, the accept option with a third visual characteristic while the decline option is displayed with a fourth visual characteristic, different from the third visual characteristic; and in accordance with a determination that the first appointment has been declined, displaying, via the display, the decline option with the third visual characteristic while the accept option is displayed with the fourth visual characteristic (Bostick: Col 4 line 34 - 64 via With reference to FIG. 3, a specific time slot on the calendar 40 may display more than one event. The calendar 40 displays three different events for the 11:30 am time slot: a meeting notice sent out by the user, seen in the first 11:30 am time slot; an accepted invite to a meeting received from Jim, seen in the next 11:30 am time slot; and a tentatively accepted invite to a meeting from Jim, seen in the third 11:30 am time slot. Events shown in calendar 40 have unique icons to differentiate them. For example, the calendar application displays tentatively accepted events with a down arrow icon, private events with a prohibited symbol icon, and accepted events with a split arrow icon, but many other icon options could be used. For example, the calendar application could display tentatively accepted events with a pencil icon, private events with a key icon, and accepted events with a handshake icon. Declined invites appear on calendar 40 in a format preconfigured by the end user. With reference to FIG. 4, to differentiate the declined events from accepted events on the calendar, the calendar application may display the declined events in a different color, such as red; display a keyword, such as "DECLINED," which would be automatically inserted as a Type Subject identifier in the subject line; display an indented subject line showing differently than normally accepted events in the same time slot; display a different icon in front of the calendar event time slot when the event has been declined; and/or configure various font formats, such as using strike-through, bold, italics, etc. The end user configures the default options for a Declined Invite look. The user may enhance the default options for the Declined Invite look via any of the configurable options mentioned above).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Anzures/Bostick teaches the limitations of Claim 10 which state
in accordance with the determination that the first appointment has been accepted, displaying, via the display, the accept option with a third visual characteristic while the decline option is displayed with a fourth visual characteristic, different from the third visual characteristic; and in accordance with a determination that the first appointment has been declined, displaying, via the display, the decline option with the third visual characteristic while the accept option is displayed with the fourth visual characteristic (Bostick: Col 4 line 34 - 64 via With reference to FIG. 3, a specific time slot on the calendar 40 may display more than one event. The calendar 40 displays three different events for the 11:30 am time slot: a meeting notice sent out by the user, seen in the first 11:30 am time slot; an accepted invite to a meeting received from Jim, seen in the next 11:30 am time slot; and a tentatively accepted invite to a meeting from Jim, seen in the third 11:30 am time slot. Events shown in calendar 40 have unique icons to differentiate them. For example, the calendar application displays tentatively accepted events with a down arrow icon, private events with a prohibited symbol icon, and accepted events with a split arrow icon, but many other icon options could be used. For example, the calendar application could display tentatively accepted events with a pencil icon, private events with a key icon, and accepted events with a handshake icon. Declined invites appear on calendar 40 in a format preconfigured by the end user. With reference to FIG. 4, to differentiate the declined events from accepted events on the calendar, the calendar application may display the declined events in a different color, such as red; display a keyword, such as "DECLINED," which would be automatically inserted as a Type Subject identifier in the subject line; display an indented subject line showing differently than normally accepted events in the same time slot; display a different icon in front of the calendar event time slot when the event has been declined; and/or configure various font formats, such as using strike-through, bold, italics, etc. The end user configures the default options for a Declined Invite look. The user may enhance the default options for the Declined Invite look via any of the configurable options mentioned above).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Anzures/Bostick teaches the limitations of Claim 11 which state
the determination that the user has responded to the first appointment by accepting the first appointment is based on a criterion that an application has sent a message that accepts the first appointment (Anzures: Para 0253 via an "accept invitation" icon 7091 that when activated (e.g., by finger gesture) initiates acceptance of calendar invitation (e.g., 7062-1));
the determination that the user has responded to the first appointment by declining the first appointment is based on a criterion that the application has sent a message that declines the first appointment (Anzures: Para 0255 via a "decline invitation" icon 7095 that when activated (e.g., by finger gesture) initiates rejection of calendar invitation (e.g., 7062-1));
and the determination that the user has not responded to the first appointment is based on a criterion that the application has not sent a message that responds to the first appointment (Anzures: Para 0214-0216, Fig 7C via FIG. 7B shows a device held in a portrait orientation (with a substantially vertical orientation of a long axis of the touch screen) displaying a list view of daily events for a multiplicity of days. The list is vertically scrollable to permit a user to see events on earlier or later days. A set of icons are provided to initiate display of "Today" events, and to initiate display of events in a list view, day view or month view, in response to detecting a user gesture on the corresponding icon. An icon 7040 is provided for accessing an invitation inbox and for displaying of a number of unread calendar invitations. In some embodiments, a contact gesture 7004 is detected on the invitation inbox icon 7040, which initiates display of an invitation inbox (e.g., as shown on FIG. 7C). FIG. 7C shows a device held in a portrait orientation, displaying an exemplary list (inbox) of calendar invitations received by the device. In this list, there are two exemplary calendar invitations, first a design review invitation 7062-1, and second a patent meeting invitation 7062-2. In the present example, both invitations are marked as unread, as indicated by the dot 7070 to the left side of each calendar invitation. In response to detecting a user gesture on the "Done" button 7008 in the title bar, the device exits from the calendar invitation inbox…).
Regarding Claims 8 and 9, they are similar to Claim 1 and are rejected for the same reasons.
Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Anzures et al. (US 2009/0174680 A1) in view of Bostick et al. (US 7,519,663 B1) further in view of Benzatti et al. (US 2014/0171129 A1).
The applied reference has a common inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). Teaching, suggestions, or motivations in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Regarding Claim 3, while Anzures/Bostick teaches the limitations of Claim 3 which state
displaying, via the display, the first appointment in the second calendar user interface, wherein displaying the first appointment in the second calendar user interface includes displaying a title for the first appointment, including (Anzures: Para 0216 via FIG. 7D shows a device displaying information details of an exemplary invitation, the design review invitation 7062-1. These details include the title of the meeting, location (Diplomacy room), date, time, sender of the invitation (Christie), attendees, and notes regarding the meeting. The calendar invitation also includes a "Show in calendar" icon 7082 which if activated by the user (e.g., by finger gesture 7009) initiates display of the invitation in the user's calendar (e.g., as shown in FIG. 7E). The calendar invitation also includes icons for the user to accept (7091) the meeting, to indicate that the user may attend (7093), and to decline (7095) the meeting. In some embodiments, the accept icon 7091 is green, the maybe icon 7093 is orange, and the decline 7095 icon is red): in accordance with a determination that the first appointment has been accepted, displaying, via the display, the title for the first appointment with a first visual characteristic (Anzures: Para 0218 via FIG. 7F shows an exemplary list of calendar invitations received by the device. In this list, as described above, there are two calendar invitations 7062, first a design review invitation, and second a patent meeting invitation. In FIG. 7F, the design review invitation is marked as read (there is no dot 7070-1 for this invitation) and the word * Accepted” is displayed, which indicates that the user has accepted this invitation. The patent meeting calendar invitation is marked as unread, as indicated by the dot 7070-2. The number of outstanding invitations has decreased from two in FIG. 7C to one in FIG. 7F, as the design review meeting has been read and accepted (FIG. 7D)).
in accordance with a determination that the first appointment has been declined, displaying, via the display, the title for the first appointment with a second visual characteristic that is different from the first visual characteristic (Bostick: Col 4 lines 50-64 via Declined invites appear on calendar 40 in a format preconfigured by the end user. With reference to FIG. 4, to differentiate the declined events from accepted events on the calendar, the calendar application may display the declined events in a different color, such as red; display a keyword, such as "DECLINED," which would be automatically inserted as a Type Subject identifier in the subject line; display an indented subject line showing differently than normally accepted events in the same time slot; display a different icon in front of the calendar event time slot when the event has been declined; and/or configure various font formats, such as using strike-through, bold, italics, etc. The end user configures the default options for a Declined Invite look. The user may enhance the default options for the Declined Invite look via any of the configurable options mentioned above).
However, Anzures/Bostick does not explicitly disclose the limitation of Claim 3 which states wherein displaying, via the display, the title for the first appointment with the second visual characteristic includes displaying a virtual object overlaid on a portion of the title for the first appointment.
Benzatti though, with the teachings of Anzures/Bostick, teaches of
wherein displaying, via the display, the title for the first appointment with the second visual characteristic includes displaying a virtual object overlaid on a portion of the title for the first appointment (Benzatti: Para 0092 via According to certain embodiments, the suggestions can be in the form of an autocomplete feature that displays within the input field or as a dropdown list of suggestions. Some embodiments provide real-time suggestions of locations related to the text that a user is currently typing on a meeting request,