Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to application filed 02/05/2026.
Claims 1-8, 10-20 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/05/2026 has been placed in record and considered by the examiner.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/05/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, 10-12, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 2024/0212635 A1) in view of Dong et al. (US 2025/0149009 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses an intra-device communication method, comprising:
receiving, by an agent module of a first device having a display screen, a to-be-forwarded message ([0099]: transferring the display screen brightness in the third brightness range and the corresponding display brightness to the hardware abstraction layer. In the hardware abstraction layer, the light service sets the determined display screen brightness in the third brightness range to backlight brightness of the display screen in the kernel layer);
in response to the to-be-forwarded message being a first message forwarded by a framework module of the first device ([0099]: in the framework layer, obtaining maximum display brightness supported by the display screen, establishing a mapping relationship between a brightness value in the third brightness range and display brightness of the display screen based on the maximum display brightness, determining display brightness corresponding to the display screen brightness in the third brightness range based on the mapping relationship, and transferring the display screen brightness in the third brightness range and the corresponding display brightness to the hardware abstraction layer), sending, by the agent module, the first message to a corresponding function module related to screen brightness, wherein the first message is used to request to adjust a brightness of the display screen to a first brightness ([0099]: In the hardware abstraction layer, the light service sets the determined display screen brightness in the third brightness range to backlight brightness of the display screen in the kernel layer. In the kernel layer, the display driving circuit drives the display screen (e.g. function module) to perform display based on the set backlight brightness, so that actual display brightness of the display screen reaches the display brightness corresponding to the display screen brightness), the framework module is connected with a plurality of user interface (UI) modules of the first device ([0062]: The application layer may include a series of application packages. For example, the application package may include Camera, Gallery, Calendar, Call, Map, Navigation, WLAN, Bluetooth, Music, Video, SMS message, Device control service, and another application. [0063]: The framework layer provides an application programming interface (API) and a programming framework for the applications at the application layer. The application framework layer includes some predefined functions), and the agent module is connected with a plurality of function modules of the first device (fig. 3, [0070]-[0071]: The kernel layer is a layer between hardware and software. The kernel layer includes at least a display drive, a camera drive, an audio drive, and a sensor drive. The kernel layer provides a most basic function of the operating system, is a basis of the operating system, and is responsible for managing a system process, a memory, a device driver, a file, and a network system, and determines performance and stability of the system [0130]: In the hardware abstraction layer, the light service (LightsService) sets the adjusted display screen brightness in the third brightness range to backlight brightness of the display screen in the kernel layer. In the kernel layer, the display driving circuit drives the display screen to perform display based on the set backlight brightness), different UI modules are configured to implement different UI functions ([0063]: The framework layer provides an application programming interface (API) and a programming framework for the applications at the application layer. The application framework layer includes some predefined functions), the framework module is an application framework installed in the first device ([0099]: in the framework layer, obtaining maximum display brightness supported by the display screen, establishing a mapping relationship between a brightness value in the third brightness range and display brightness of the display screen based on the maximum display brightness), and the agent module is a program module installed in the first device, at least one of the function modules is a hardware module involving an underlying layer ([0130]: In the hardware abstraction layer, the light service (LightsService) sets the adjusted display screen brightness in the third brightness range to backlight brightness of the display screen in the kernel layer. In the kernel layer, the display driving circuit drives the display screen), and the framework module and the function modules are located at different layers (fig. 3, [0061]: a software architecture of an electronic device. A layered architecture divides software into several layers. Layers communicate with each other through a software interface. For example, the Android system is divided into four layers: an application layer 101, a framework layer 102, Android runtime and system library 103, a hardware abstraction layer 104, a kernel layer 105, and a hardware layer 106);
in response to the to-be-forwarded message being a second message from the corresponding function module related to screen brightness, sending the second message to the framework module for the framework module to forward the second, by the agent module, message to a corresponding UI module, wherein the second message is used to indicate an adjust result of brightness of the display screen ([0106]: the kernel layer transfers the ambient light brightness sensed by the ambient light sensor to the framework layer, and in the framework layer, the power framework determines the preset ambient light brightness interval within which the ambient light brightness falls. [0118]: the setting the display screen brightness based on the automatic brightness setting instruction generated based on a use scenario of the electronic device further includes: setting brightness setting animation of the display screen based on the determined display screen brightness, and displaying the brightness setting animation when the display screen is driven to perform display based on the display screen brightness in the third brightness range).
However, Li does not wherein the corresponding function module related to screen brightness sends a fourth message to a second device connected with the first device, wherein the fourth message is configured for the second device to record a current brightness of the display screen of the first device.
In an analogous art, Dong wherein the corresponding function module related to screen brightness sends a fourth message to a second device connected with the first device, wherein the fourth message is configured for the second device to record a current brightness of the display screen of the first device ([0119]: After the M screen brightness parameters are obtained, the M screen brightness parameters may be stored in the first electronic device, or stored in a server, a cloud, or the like, so that the first electronic device invokes the M screen brightness parameters when performing the screen brightness adjustment method).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filed date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Li to comprise “wherein the corresponding function module related to screen brightness sends a fourth message to a second device connected with the first device, wherein the fourth message is configured for the second device to record a current brightness of the display screen of the first device” taught by Dong.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled the set of screen brightness parameters to be stored, so that the electronic device performs invoking when performing the screen brightness adjustment method (Dong, [0090]).
Regarding claim 10, Li-Dong discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the agent module is an agent service process installed in the first device (Li, [0099]: In the hardware abstraction layer, the light service sets the determined display screen brightness in the third brightness range to backlight brightness of the display screen in the kernel layer. In the kernel layer, the display driving circuit drives the display screen (e.g. function module) to perform display based on the set backlight brightness, so that actual display brightness of the display screen reaches the display brightness corresponding to the display screen brightness).
Regarding claim 11, Li-Dong discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the framework module is a quick application framework installed in the first device (Li, [0063]: The framework layer provides an application programming interface (API) and a programming framework for the applications at the application layer. The application framework layer includes some predefined functions).
Regarding claims 12 and 20; the claims are interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1.
Claims 2-3, 6-7, 13-14, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Dong, as applied to claim 1, in view of Quinn et al. (US 2004/0006616 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Li-Dong discloses the method according to claim 1.
However, Li-Dong does not disclose wherein sending the first message to the corresponding function module comprises: in response to the first message being in a first format, converting the first message in the first format into a second format and sending the first message to the corresponding function module, wherein the first format is a data format recognizable by the framework module, and the second format is a data format recognizable by the corresponding function module.
In an analogous art, Quinn discloses wherein sending the first message to the corresponding function module comprises: in response to the first message being in a first format, converting the first message in the first format into a second format and sending the first message to the corresponding function module, wherein the first format is a data format recognizable by the framework module, and the second format is a data format recognizable by the corresponding function module ([0050]-[0051]: translation layer 504 also comprises a translation interface 514 (e.g. agent module) that is configured to convert or translate the command requests received from client applications 212…The translated command request is then forwarded to agents layer 506.. For each translated command request received from translation layer 504, agent dispatcher 516 is configured to select and invoke one or more agents 518 (e.g. function modules) for processing the command request).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filed date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Li-Dong to comprise “wherein sending the first message to the corresponding function module comprises: in response to the first message being in a first format, converting the first message in the first format into a second format and sending the first message to the corresponding function module, wherein the first format is a data format recognizable by the framework module, and the second format is a data format recognizable by the corresponding function module” taught by Quinn.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled to convert or translate the command requests received from client applications into a standard message format with a standard interface (Quinn, [0050]).
Regarding claim 3, Li-Dong-Quinn discloses the method according to claim 2, wherein sending the second message to the framework module comprises: in response to the second message being in the second format, converting the second message into the first format and sending the second message to the framework module (Quinn, [0048]: Each module 510 may be configured to handle command requests and response for a particular protocol. For example, translation layer 504 may include a HTTP/XML client interface module for communicating with a client application using the HTTP/XML protocol, a command line interface (CLI) module for communicating with CLI applications, and the like. [0065]: agent layer 506 generates a result/response that is communicated to translation layer 504. Translation layer 504 then communicates the response to ERM application 212). The same rationale applies as in claim 2.
Regarding claim 6, Li-Dong discloses the method according to claim 1.
However, Li-Dong does not disclose wherein the agent module comprises a plurality of first interfaces, wherein one of the plurality of first interfaces is configured to forward the second message from the corresponding function module.
In an analogous art, Quinn discloses wherein the agent module comprises a plurality of first interfaces ([0048]: Communication modules 510 may use various protocols and formats for interfacing with client applications 212. [0050]: translation layer 504 also comprises a translation interface 514 that is configured to convert or translate the command requests received from client applications 212 into a standard message format with a standard interface. The translated command request is then forwarded to agents layer 506 for further processing), wherein one of the plurality of first interfaces is configured to forward the second message from the corresponding function module ([0065]: agent layer 506 generates a result/response that is communicated to translation layer 504. Translation layer 504 then communicates the response to ERM application 212).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filed date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Li-Dong to comprise “wherein the agent module comprises a plurality of first interfaces, wherein one of the plurality of first interfaces is configured to forward the second message from the corresponding function module” taught by Quinn.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled to convert or translate the command requests received from client applications into a standard message format with a standard interface (Quinn, [0050]).
Regarding claim 7, Li-Dong-Quinn discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein sending the second message to the framework module, comprises: in response to the to-be-forwarded message being the second message from the corresponding function module, sending the second message to the framework module through a first interface corresponding to the corresponding function module (Quinn, [0048]: Communication modules 510 may use various protocols and formats for interfacing with client applications 212. Each module 510 may be configured to handle command requests and response for a particular protocol. [0065]: Translation layer 504 then communicates the response to ERM application 212). The same rationale applies as in claim 6.
Regarding claim 13; the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 2.
Regarding claim 14; the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 3.
Regarding claim 17; the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 6.
Regarding claim 18; the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 7.
Claims 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Dong, as applied to claim 1, in further view of Bermundo et al. (US 2023/0068519 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Li-Dong discloses the method according to claim 1.
However, Li-Dong does not disclose wherein sending the first message to the corresponding function module comprises: obtaining a first identity in the first message; and based on the first identity, sending the first message to the corresponding function module identified by the first identity.
In an analogous art, Bermundo discloses wherein sending the first message to the corresponding function module comprises: obtaining a first identity in the first message; and based on the first identity, sending the first message to the corresponding function module identified by the first identity (fig. 5, [0045]: The relay plug-in command 500 or library command may be a type of message or data that the universal message service 102 may forward/relay/transmit to the plug-in library 316 as in the relay plug-in command request 514 to plug-in module for special command message type B (e.g. message identity)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filed date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Li-Dong to comprise “wherein sending the first message to the corresponding function module comprises: obtaining a first identity in the first message; and based on the first identity, sending the first message to the corresponding function module identified by the first identity” taught by Bermundo.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled to relay or forward the message to installable or plug-in libraries installed with the universal message service on the host machine (Bermundo, [0025]).
Regarding claim 15; the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 4.
Claims 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Dong, as applied to claim 1, in further view of Friedman et al. (US 2004/0163037 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Li-Dong discloses the method according to claim 1.
However, Li-Dong does not disclose further comprising: performing a message transmission between the agent module and the framework module using a first communication protocol; and performing a message transmission between the agent module and the corresponding function module using a second communication protocol, wherein the first communication protocol supports a communication between processes running on a same kernel, and the second communication protocol supports a communication between processes running on different kernels.
In an analogous art, Friedman discloses performing a message transmission between the agent module and the framework module using a first communication protocol ([0060]: operational block 301 bridge 106 receives a request that is in a non-WebDAV protocol (e.g., FTP request 20 in FIG. 2) that is not natively capable of invoking a WebDAV method); and performing a message transmission between the agent module and the corresponding function module using a second communication protocol ([0060]: the input handler translates the request from the non-WebDAV protocol to a canonical format. In sub-block 34, the canonical formatted request is processed to construct a WebDAV protocol request… WebDAV protocol request is used to invoke the desired WebDAV method), wherein the first communication protocol supports a communication between processes running on a same kernel, and the second communication protocol supports a communication between processes running on different kernels ([0028]: bridge 106, which is shown in this example as being implemented within server 105 but may in other embodiments be arranged external to server 105 and communicatively coupled thereto. As shown, bridge 106 is communicatively coupled to WebDAV method processing unit 108 via communication link 107).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filed date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Li-Dong to comprise “further comprising: performing a message transmission between the agent module and the framework module using a first communication protocol; and performing a message transmission between the agent module and the corresponding function module using a second communication protocol, wherein the first communication protocol supports a communication between processes running on a same kernel, and the second communication protocol supports a communication between processes running on different kernels” taught by Friedman.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled to translate a received request from any of a plurality of different protocols to a canonical format (Friedman, [0010]).
Regarding claim 16; the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 5.
Claims 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Dong, as applied to claim 1, view of Zhao (US 2013/0191526 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Li-Dong discloses the method according to claim 1.
However, Li-Dong does not disclose wherein the first message comprises a message generated by the UI module detecting a starting operation that triggers any UI function.
In an analogous art, Zhao discloses wherein sending the first message to the corresponding function module comprises: obtaining a first identity in the first message; and based on the first identity, sending the first message to the function module identified by the first identity ([0052]: the management of the plug-in may further include: the browser inquires whether plug-in version information needs to be updated via the plug-in management platform when the browser is launched).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filed date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Li-Dong to comprise “wherein the first message comprises a message generated by the UI module detecting a starting operation that triggers any UI function” taught by Zhao.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled to provide an interacting medium of a plug-in with the browser, to control the interaction of a loaded plug-in with the browser, to manage the plug-in, and then to adapt the plug-in for invoking by the browser (Zhao, [0006]).
Regarding claim 19; the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 8.
Additional References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicants disclosure.
Boskovic, US 2013/0159379 A1: App System Platform.
Thompson, US 2018/0309819 A1: Endpoint Management System Providing an Application Programing Interface Proxy Service.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN C TURRIATE GASTULO whose telephone number is (571)272-6707. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am-4 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, Brian J Gillis can be reached at 571-272-7952. 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.
/J.C.T/Examiner, Art Unit 2446
/BRIAN J. GILLIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2446