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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The present invention application contains 14 claims. Claims 1 and 8 are independent. Claims 1-5, 7-12 and 14 are examined and rejected by the following detail action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 8 recite the conjunction “if” when reciting steps in conjunction with a conditional step. In view of the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims as required by MPEP 2111, these limitations may be interpreted in the sense that the limitations occur when the condition step occurs, but also introduces the possibility that the conditional step may not occur, thereby rendering the limitation to be not positively recited. Since the claim fails to recite any specific limitations regarding the possibility that the conditional step may not occur, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim allows for the possibility wherein no functionality is achieved when the conditional step is not achieved. Therefore, the above interpretation has been considered during the examination of the claims. If the Applicant wishes the limitations to be positively recited, the claims must be amended to either recite limitation in the case wherein the conditional step does not occur or remove such a case from consideration.
Claims 1, 2, 8 and 9 are objected because of the following informalities: claims 1 and 8 recite the bold claim language “the object is predicted to extend outside of the partial area” in a claim limitation as "…an object updating unit that changes shape or size of the object so that the object fits within the partial area if the object is predicted to extend outside of the partial area updated by the area updating unit..." that needs to clarify because the object itself cannot be predicted to extend outside but being moved outside by the scrolling operation event executed by user as described in the claim invention. Thus, the claim language “predicted to extend” is suggested to amend to “being moved” or similar language in claims 1, 2, 8 and 9. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 5 and 12 are objected because of the following informalities: claims 5 and 12 are depended on claims 1 and 8, respectively, and they recite “the area” subject matter in the claims as "…wherein the symbol display unit displays the symbols respectively representing the plurality of objects … and distinguishably displays the symbols representing the objects positioned within the area and the symbols representing the objects outside the area ..." that lacks antecedent support of the subject matter “a partial area” representing the visible area/window of the display introduced in the parent claims. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter “System/apparatus/device that doesn’t include at least one computer hardware component”.
Claim 1 recites a “display control device” without comprising any hardware component. Accordingly, the recited “device” is a computer software per se and is not a “process”, a “manufacture” or a “composition of matter” as defined in 35 U.S.C. 101. Therefore, claims 2-7 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because they are depended on the rejected independent claim 1.
Examiner Notes
The prior art rejections below cite particular paragraphs, columns, and/or line numbers in the references for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tyler et al. (“Tyler”, US PG-Pub. 2021/0286510 A1).
Re-claim 1,
Tyler teaches a display control device, comprising:
an operation reception unit that receives scrolling operations on a screen in which a partial area of a virtual space is displayed, a plurality of objects is arranged in the virtual space and some of the plurality of objects in the partial area are displayed on the screen (Figs. 5E11-5E13, [0363, 0668]. Tyler describes the list of widgets 5022 in widget stack 5024b is scrolled and some of the widgets 5022 are concurrently displayed in the visible area of the user interface 5026 at a time and a portion of the list of widgets 5022 is dynamically changed based on the scroll amount during scrolling);
an area updating unit that updates the partial area within the virtual space displayed on the screen in response to a scroll amount received by the operation reception unit (Figs. 5E11-5E13, [0363, 0668]. Tyler describes the list of widgets 5022 in widget stack 5024b is scrolled and some of the widgets 5022 are concurrently displayed in the visible area of the user interface 5026 at a time and a portion of the list of widgets 5022 is dynamically changed based on the scroll amount during scrolling); and
an object updating unit that changes shape or size of the object so that the object fits within the partial area if the object is predicted to extend outside of the partial area updated by the area updating unit (Figs. 5E11-5E13, [0363]. Tyler describes the widget representation 5022l’s shape and size is changed when it is scrolled partially outside of the visible area of the user interface 5026 shown in Figures 5E11-5E12 (i.e. widget 5022l’ in full size and square shape (Fig. 5E11) is changed to partial lessen size and rectangular shape (Fig. 5E12)).
Re-claim 2,
in addition to what Tyler teaches the device in claim 1, Tyler also teaches the device, wherein the object updating unit updates the object predicted to extend outside of the updated partial area to a largest shape and size accommodated by the updated partial area (Figs. 5E11-5E13, [0363]. Tyler describes the widget representation 5022g’s shape and size is changed or updated when it is scrolled to display within the visible area of the user interface 5026 shown in Figures 5E11-5E12 (i.e. widget representation 5022g’ in partial size and rectangular shape (Fig. 5E11) is updated to full size and square shape (Fig. 5E12)).
Re-claim 3,
in addition to what Tyler teaches the device in claim 2, Tyler also teaches the device, wherein the object updating unit changes the size of the object in increments of predetermined units between a preset size and a size corresponding to the minimum unit of the scroll amount, and does not fit the object within the area if the object does not fit in the area unless the object is smaller than the size corresponding to the minimum unit (Figs. 5E11-5E13, [0363]. Tyler describes the widget representation 5022g’s shape and size is changed or updated when it is scrolled to display within the visible area of the user interface 5026 shown in Figures 5E11-5E12 (i.e. widget representation 5022g’ in partial size and rectangular shape (Fig. 5E11) is updated to full size and square shape (Fig. 5E12). In the example shown by Figs. 5E11-5E13, the minimum unit of the scroll amount may be 2 full widget size and the widget represent 5022g’ in 1 full widget size is fit completely inside the visible area of the user interface 5026).
Re-claim 4,
in addition to what Tyler teaches the device in claim 1, Tyler also teaches the device, wherein the object updating unit returns the object to a preset shape and size when the object changed from the preset shape and size becomes able to fit in the updated area even in the preset shape and size (Figs. 5E11-5E13, [0363]. Tyler describes the widget representation 5022g’s shape and size is changed or updated when it is scrolled to display within the visible area of the user interface 5026 shown in Figures 5E11-5E12 (i.e. widget representation 5022g’ in partial size and rectangular shape (Fig. 5E11) is updated to full size and square shape (Fig. 5E12) as it is fit completely inside the visible area of the user interface 5026).
Re-claim 5,
in addition to what Tyler teaches the device in claim 1, Tyler also teaches the device, further comprising a symbol display unit that displays symbols respectively representing the plurality of objects on the screen, wherein the symbol display unit displays the symbols respectively representing the plurality of objects according to the alignment positions of the plurality of objects in the virtual space, and distinguishably displays the symbols representing the objects positioned within the area and the symbols representing the objects outside the area (Figs. 5E11-5E13, [0363]. Tyler describes the widget indicator icons 5330d, 5330e, 5330f are respectively representing and highlighting for the widgets 5022l, 5022g, 5022k when the widgets are currently displayed fully in the visible area of the user interface 5026).
Re-claim 7,
in addition to what Tyler teaches the device in claim 5, Tyler also teaches the device, wherein the symbol display unit displays the symbols representing the objects that have changed at least in its shape or size by the object updating unit distinguishably from symbols representing other objects (Figs. 5E11-5E13, [0363]. Tyler describes the widget indicator icons 5330d, 5330e, 5330f are respectively representing for the widgets 5022l, 5022g, 5022k when each widget is currently displayed fully inside the visible area of the user interface 5026 by highlighting it and when each widget is currently displayed partially inside and partially hidden outside (i.e. its shape and size changed) the visible area of the user interface 5026 by clear color or un-highlight it).
Re-claim 8,
it is a method claim having similar limitations in scope of claim 1; therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Re-claim 9,
in addition to what Tyler teaches in claim 8, claim 9 is a method claim having similar limitations in scope of claim 2; therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Re-claim 10,
in addition to what Tyler teaches in claim 9, claim 10 is a method claim having similar limitations in scope of claim 3; therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Re-claim 11,
in addition to what Tyler teaches in claim 8, claim 11 is a method claim having similar limitations in scope of claim 4; therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Re-claim 12,
in addition to what Tyler teaches in claim 8, claim 12 is a method claim having similar limitations in scope of claim 5; therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Re-claim 14,
in addition to what Tyler teaches in claim 12, claim 14 is a method claim having similar limitations in scope of claim 7; therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure including Clark et al. (US 2016/0070434 A1), Mandryk et al. (US 2011/0202834 A1) and Satake et al. (US 2020/0059568 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUAN S NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7612. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5).
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, Fred Ehichioya can be reached at 571-272-4034. 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.
/TUAN S NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2179