DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is responsive to the Application filed on 03/22/2024, said application claims a priority date of 09/19/2022.
Claims 1-20 are pending in the case.
Claims 1 and 12 are independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kostello (US 2019/0034172 A1, published 01/31/2019, hereinafter “Kostello”).
Independent Claims 1 and 12:
Kostello teaches a computing device comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions (Kostello: ¶ [0062], [0066]); and
one or more processors coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to cause the computing device to perform a method comprising (Kostello: ¶ [0062], [0066]):
obtaining a static page of a target application, wherein the static page comprises a plurality of page components (The user can provide natural language inputs to create a static page for an application (target application) wherein the page comprises components that are not yet assigned to interactive functionality (e.g. “add a picture of a cat” and “add a home button,”), after the components are added the user can then provide input to add functionality to the components, Kostello: ¶ [0022]-[0023]. Examiner considers the process of receiving the page components from the user to be “obtaining a static page of a target application.”);
receiving, from a user, interaction description information, wherein the interaction description information describes a first interaction function corresponding to at least one page component of the page components (The user can provide natural language input to describe the interactive functionality of a particular component (e.g. “when the home button is pressed, load a home screen.”), Kostello: ¶ [0022].); and
generating an application page of the target application based on the static page and the interaction description information (The application design (including the page components and the added functionality) is used to generate the application, Kostello: ¶ [0022]-[0025], [0038]),
wherein the application page comprises a second interaction function corresponding to the interaction description information (The functional instance of the application will have the functionality added to the component of the page, Kostello: abstract, ¶ [0022]-[0025], [0038].).
Claims 2 and 13:
The rejection of claims 1 and 12 are incorporated. Kostello further discloses a device and method wherein the interaction description information is voice information or text information (Kostello: ¶ [0029]).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kostello in view of Hodaei et al. (US 2018/0101506 A1, published 04/12/2018, hereinafter “Hodaei”).
Claims 3 and 14:
The rejection of claims 1 and 13 is incorporated. Kostello does not appear to expressly teach a device and method wherein the generating the application page of the target application based on the static page and the interaction description information comprises:
generating, based on the static page and the interaction description information by using an interaction code generation model, interaction code corresponding to the interaction description information; and
generating the application page of the target application based on the static page and the interaction code.
However, Hodaei teaches a device and method wherein the generating the application page of the target application based on the static page and the interaction description information comprises (Hodaei: abstract, ¶ [0050], [0075]-[0077], [0080]):
generating, based on the static page and the interaction description information by using an interaction code generation model, interaction code corresponding to the interaction description information (The user can provide natural language input to generate visual components to a page with no functional attributes, Hodaei: Fig. 7, ¶ [0075]-[0077]. The user can then add functional attributes to the components on the page, Hodaei: ¶ [0080]. A data structure is updated with code based on the natural language inputs, Hodaei: ¶ [0083]-[0085]. The natural language used to generate the code is processed by a model (interaction code generation model, Hodaei: ¶ [0049]-[0050], [0056], [0065], [0092]-[0094]); and
generating the application page of the target application based on the static page and the interaction code (Hodaei: ¶ [0064], [0080]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device and method of Kostello wherein the generating the application page of the target application based on the static page and the interaction description information comprises:
generating, based on the static page and the interaction description information by using an interaction code generation model, interaction code corresponding to the interaction description information; and
generating the application page of the target application based on the static page and the interaction code, as taught by Hodaei.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the user’s experience by providing an effective means for real-time visual interface generation via natural language input (Hodaei: ¶ [0051], [0056], [0088]).
Claims 4 and 15:
The rejection of claims 3 and 14 are incorporated. Kostello in view of Hodaei further teaches a device and method wherein the generating the application page of the target application based on the static page and the interaction code comprises:
fusing code of the static page and the interaction code, to obtain code of a candidate application page (Code for the components without functional data are stored in the data structure and then code for the functional data corresponding to components is added to the data structure (fusing code), Hodaei: ¶ [0075]-[0077], [0080], [0083]-[0084]. The code is used to generate a preview of the user interface being generated (candidate application page), Hodaei: ¶ [0088]-[0089]);
displaying the candidate application page based on the code of the candidate application page by using an interaction optimization interface (Examiner considers the interface that provides the preview to be the optimization interface, because the user can provide further edits via the interface, Hodaei: Fig. 7, ¶ [0051], [0056]-[0057], [0085], [0088]-[0089]); and
adjusting the candidate application page based on an interaction function editing operation performed by the user, to obtain the application page of the target application (Hodaei: Fig. 7, ¶ [0051], [0056]-[0057], [0075]-[0079], [0085], [0088]-[0087]).
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the user’s experience by providing an effective means for real-time visual interface generation via natural language input (Hodaei: ¶ [0051], [0056], [0088]).
Claim(s) 9-11 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kostello in view of Liu et al. (US 2021/0011592 A1, published 01/14/2021, hereinafter “Liu”).
Claims 9 and 20:
The rejection of claims 1 and 12 are incorporated. Kostello does not appear to expressly teach a device and method wherein the obtaining a static page of a target application comprises:
receiving a design diagram of the application page of the target application;
identifying the design diagram by using a static page generation model, to obtain a plurality of groups of intermediate codes, wherein the intermediate code comprises component information of a page component obtained from the design diagram through identification;
generating a static candidate page corresponding to each group of intermediate codes; and
determining a first static candidate page from a plurality of static candidate pages, and
generating the static page of the target application based on the first static candidate page.
However, Liu teaches a device and method wherein the obtaining a static page of a target application comprises:
receiving a design diagram of the application page of the target application (Liu: abstract, ¶ [0040]-[0044]);
identifying the design diagram by using a static page generation model, to obtain a plurality of groups of intermediate codes, wherein the intermediate code comprises component information of a page component obtained from the design diagram through identification (Liu: Fig. 4, ¶ [0047]-[0051], [0056]-[0057]);
generating a static candidate page corresponding to each group of intermediate codes (Liu: Fig. 4, ¶ [0047]-[0051], [0056]-[0057]); and
determining a first static candidate page from a plurality of static candidate pages (Liu: Fig. 7, ¶ [0061], [0065]-[0066]), and
generating the static page of the target application based on the first static candidate page (Liu: ¶ [0067].).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device and method of Kostello wherein the obtaining a static page of a target application comprises:
receiving a design diagram of the application page of the target application;
identifying the design diagram by using a static page generation model, to obtain a plurality of groups of intermediate codes, wherein the intermediate code comprises component information of a page component obtained from the design diagram through identification;
generating a static candidate page corresponding to each group of intermediate codes; and
determining a first static candidate page from a plurality of static candidate pages, and
generating the static page of the target application based on the first static candidate page, as taught by Liu.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the user’s experience by providing better assistance to the user for creating the design of the page (Liu: ¶ [0002]-[0006]).
Claim 10:
The rejection of claim 9 is incorporated. Kostello in view of Liu further teaches a method wherein generating the static page of the target application based on the first static candidate page comprises:
displaying the first static candidate page using an interaction optimization interface (Liu: Fig. 8-10, ¶ [0068]-[0075], [0079]-[0082]);
receiving, from the user, an adjustment operation (Liu: Figs. 9 and 10, ¶ [0079]-[0082]); and
adjusting the first static candidate page based on the adjustment operation in order to obtain the static page of the target application (Liu: Figs. 9 and 10, ¶ [0079]-[0082]).
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the user’s experience by providing better assistance to the user for creating the design of the page (Liu: ¶ [0002]-[0006]).
Claim 11:
The rejection of claim 10 is incorporated. Kostello in view of Liu further teaches a method wherein the adjustment operation comprises at least one of: an operation of adding a component, an operation of deleting a component, or an operation of modifying a component on the first static candidate page, wherein the operation of modifying the component comprises modifying a location, a style, and a size of the component, and wherein the adjustment operation comprises at least one of: an operation of dragging a component and an operation of configuring an attribute value of a component (Components can be added by the user’s adjustment operation, Liu: Figs. 9 and 10, ¶ [0079]-[0082]. The selectable renderings includes styling rules for color, contrast, shape, padding and proportion of the elements in the user interface (attribute values of components), Liu: ¶ [0055]-[0058]).
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the user’s experience by providing better assistance to the user for creating the design of the page (Liu: ¶ [0002]-[0006]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 and 16-19are 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.
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular columns and line and/or paragraph numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in 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 or disclosed by the examiner.
The examiner requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line number(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application.
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicants’ disclosure.
Huang, US 11,221,833 B1 (The user can define functionality for UI components via descriptions inputted by the user corresponding to the functionality, column 2 lines 51-67 and column 3 lines 1-4.).
Fialkow et al., US 11,640,492 B2 (The AI can suggest edits to be made to the UI components, column 7 lines 3-9.)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3633. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 5:30 am - 2:30 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, Stephen Hong can be reached at (571) 272-4124. 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.
/DANIEL RODRIGUEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178