DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the filing of 6/4/26. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been considered below.
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 .
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, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8, 13-15, 17-19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metz (20170357620) in view of San Agustin Lopez (20180059782.)
Claim 1, 18, 20: Metz discloses a page display method performed by a terminal, wherein the terminal (par. 45, client device) comprises a target application (par. 45-47, document viewing application 300 executing on the client device) of a specific type (par. 45-47, document viewing type), the method comprising:
generating, in response to a display instruction for the target page (par. 50, the process receives (at 405) a request to render an electronic document selected from a document summary list; Fig. 1: 150, selection of article) from the target application of the specific type (par. 50, The process in some embodiments is performed by a document viewing application such as document viewing application 300 in FIG. 3), a page information (par. 51, image of the document, and par. 55-58, components, including their coordinates, sizes, and parameters) acquisition request for the target page;
in response to detecting the page information acquisition request, acquiring system information of the terminal and providing the system information to the target application (par. 27, the layout generator in a client device enforces its own set of design rules based on the client device's display size, resolution; par. 30, The method determines a layout to render the electronic document based on different criteria such as size, orientation, and resolution of a device display screen. Par. 57, 59, 75), and
in response to acquiring page information and the system information, displaying, by the target application, the target page based on the page information and the system information (Fig. 1: 104, par. 75, rendering the article based on device attributes. Par. 59, render an electronic document (e.g., an article or a web page) based on the size, orientation, and resolution of the device display screen as well as the number and properties of different components of the documents.)
However, Metz does not explicitly disclose: a system service, wherein the system service is a service in an operating system having permission to acquire the system information.
San Agustin Lopez discloses a similar method for page layout, including:
wherein the system service is a service in an operating system having permission (if the information is acquired, as disclosed, it is inherent that there was permission to do so) to acquire the system information (par. 51, the screen size (w, h) may be obtained programmatically through software (e.g., through an operating system API).)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Metz and San Agustin Lopez based on a suggestion in Metz for operating system services for basic system services (i.e. fetching device information.) (Par. 109. The OS 1372 includes instructions for handling basic system services and for performing hardware dependent tasks.)
Claim 2, 19: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 1, herein in response to detecting the page information acquisition request, acquiring, by the system service, the system information of the terminal and providing the system information to the target application comprises:
monitoring, by the system service, a request generated according to an indication of an application of the specific type; in response to having monitored a request generated according to an indication of the target application, acquiring, by the system service, the system information of the terminal; and providing, by the system service, the system information acquired to the target application (San Agustin Lopez par. 51, the screen size (w, h) may be obtained programmatically through software (e.g., through an operating system API).)
Claim 3: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 2, wherein the request that has been monitored by the system service and is generated according to the indication of the target application is the page information acquisition request (San Agustin Lopez par. 51, the screen size (w, h) may be obtained programmatically through software (e.g., through an operating system API)) or the method further comprises: generating, in response to detecting the page information acquisition request, a system information acquisition request for indicating acquisition of the system information, and the request that has been monitored by the system service and is generated according to the indication of the target application is the system information acquisition request.
Claim 8: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 1, further comprising: generating, in response to detecting the page information acquisition request, a system information acquisition request for indicating acquisition of the system information; and indicating the system service to acquire the system information by sending the system information acquisition request generated to the system service (San Agustin Lopez par. 51, the screen size (w, h) may be obtained programmatically through software (e.g., through an operating system API).)
Claim 13: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein in response to detecting the page information acquisition request, acquiring, by the system service, the system information of the terminal comprises: in response to detecting the page information acquisition request, sending a system information acquisition instruction to the system service to indicate the system service to acquire the system information of the terminal (San Agustin Lopez par. 51, the screen size (w, h) may be obtained programmatically through software (e.g., through an operating system API).)
Claim 14: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the system service is a local information acquisition module deployed in a system layer, or a native application of the terminal (San Agustin Lopez par. 51, the screen size (w, h) may be obtained programmatically through software (e.g., through an operating system API).)
Claim 15: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the system information comprises at least one of: manufacturer information of the terminal; version information of the operating system carried by the terminal; and characteristic page information designed by a manufacturer of the terminal for the operating system (San Agustin Lopez par. 51, the screen size (w, h) may be obtained programmatically through software (e.g., through an operating system API).)
Claim 17: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the specific type comprises a third-party application (Metz par. 45-47, document viewing application 300 executing on the client device.)
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, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metz and San Agustin Lopez in view of Boyle (US 8,843,847.)
Claim 4: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 3. However, Yao Fuguo does not explicitly disclose wherein the page information acquisition request or the system information acquisition request is a JS request.
Boyle discloses a similar method for page display customization, including: wherein the page information acquisition request or the system information acquisition request is a JS request (Claim 4, wherein the request for information is a JavaScript request.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yao Fuguo with Boyle. One would have been motivated to combine the teachings as JavaScript is an often used and popular interpreted language generally designed for writing software routines that operate within a client computer on the Internet.
Claim(s) 5-7, 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metz and San Agustin Lopez in view of Bauch (2004/0177158.)
Claim 5: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 2. However, Metz does not explicitly disclose further comprising: providing the request generated according to the indication of the application of the specific type to a request forwarding module, so that the request forwarding module matches, under a request forwarding rule maintained by the terminal, the request generated; and in response to that the request hits a mapping relationship in the request forwarding rule, forwarding the request based on the mapping relationship.
Bauch discloses a similar method for request forwarding, including: further comprising: providing the request generated according to the indication of the application of the specific type to a request forwarding module, so that the request forwarding module matches, under a request forwarding rule maintained by the terminal, the request generated; and in response to that the request hits a mapping relationship (Fig. 15, NAT mapping table) in the request forwarding rule, forwarding the request based on the mapping relationship (Claim 31, receiving a network packet; selecting a rule whose rule information characterizing the header information of request packets sent by clients of the distributed application matches the received network packet; and forwarding the received network packet to a distributed application request packet router in accordance with the information stored in the selected rule specifying a manner for forwarding request packets sent by clients of the distributed application to a distributed application request packet router.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Metz with Bauch. One would have been motivated to combine the teachings for purposes of facilitating the exchange of data by distributed applications that successfully automated the selection of a server, and/or that permitted the use of various different data processing techniques such as encryption and compression (Bauch par. 8.)
Claim 6: Metz San Agustin Lopez and Bauch disclose the method according to claim 5, wherein the request forwarding module comprises a NetFilter kernel, and the request forwarding rule comprises an IPtable maintained in the NetFilter kernel (Bauch par. 105, the facility performs the identification and mangling of these packets using an iptables function provided in the netfilter module of the Linux operating system.)
Claim 7: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 2. However, Metz does not explicitly disclose further comprising: sending the request generated according to the indication of the application of the specific type to a specific port pre-configured for the system service; wherein monitoring, by the system service, the request generated according to the indication of the application of the specific type comprises: acquiring, by the system service, the request generated according to the indication of the application of the specific type by monitoring the specific port.
Bauch discloses a similar method for request forwarding, including: further comprising: sending the request generated according to the indication of the application of the specific type to a specific port pre-configured for the system service; wherein monitoring, by the system service, the request generated according to the indication of the application of the specific type comprises: acquiring, by the system service, the request generated according to the indication of the application of the specific type by monitoring the specific port (par. 106, including its destination address, destination port, source address and source port. This packet is one sent from an application client executing on a computer system having the IP address 52.166.23.34, to an application server listening on port 80 of a computer system having the IP address 15.0.32.1.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Metz with Bauch. One would have been motivated to combine the teachings for purposes of facilitating the exchange of data by distributed applications that successfully automated the selection of a server, and/or that permitted the use of various different data processing techniques such as encryption and compression (Bauch par. 8.)
Claim 9: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 8. However, Metz does not explicitly disclose wherein a request forwarding rule deployed in the terminal comprises:
sending, to the system service, a request initiated according to an indication of an application of the specific type for acquiring the system information; sending the system information acquisition request generated to the system service comprises: sending the system information acquisition request to the system service based on the request forwarding rule; and acquiring, by the system service, the system information of the terminal comprises: in response to receiving the system information acquisition request, acquiring, by the system service, the system information of the terminal.
Bauch discloses a similar method for request forwarding, including:
wherein a request forwarding rule deployed in the terminal comprises:
sending, to the system service, a request initiated according to an indication of an application of the specific type for acquiring the system information; sending the system information acquisition request generated to the system service comprises: sending the system information acquisition request to the system service based on the request forwarding rule; and acquiring, by the system service, the system information of the terminal comprises: in response to receiving the system information acquisition request, acquiring, by the system service, the system information of the terminal (Claim 31, receiving a network packet; selecting a rule whose rule information characterizing the header information of request packets sent by clients of the distributed application matches the received network packet; and forwarding the received network packet to a distributed application request packet router in accordance with the information stored in the selected rule specifying a manner for forwarding request packets sent by clients of the distributed application to a distributed application request packet router.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Metz with Bauch. One would have been motivated to combine the teachings for purposes of facilitating the exchange of data by distributed applications that successfully automated the selection of a server, and/or that permitted the use of various different data processing techniques such as encryption and compression (Bauch par. 8.)
Claim 10: Metz San Agustin Lopez and Bauch disclose the method according to claim 9, further comprising: configuring, by the system service, the request forwarding rule of the terminal, and according to the request forwarding rule configured by the system service, sending, to the system service, the request initiated according to the indication of the application of the specific type for acquiring the system information of the terminal (Bauch Claim 31, receiving a network packet; selecting a rule whose rule information characterizing the header information of request packets sent by clients of the distributed application matches the received network packet; and forwarding the received network packet to a distributed application request packet router in accordance with the information stored in the selected rule specifying a manner for forwarding request packets sent by clients of the distributed application to a distributed application request packet router.)
Claim 11: Metz San Agustin Lopez and Bauch disclose the method according to claim 10, wherein configuring, by the system service, the request forwarding rule of the terminal comprises: configuring, by the system service, a mapping relationship between a terminal IP of the terminal and a specific port in the terminal in the request forwarding rule of the terminal, so that the terminal forwards, based on the mapping relationship (Bauch Fig. 15, NAT mapping table), the request generated for acquiring the system information of the terminal (Bauch Claim 31, receiving a network packet; selecting a rule whose rule information characterizing the header information of request packets sent by clients of the distributed application matches the received network packet; and forwarding the received network packet to a distributed application request packet router in accordance with the information stored in the selected rule specifying a manner for forwarding request packets sent by clients of the distributed application to a distributed application request packet router.); and in response to receiving the system information acquisition request, acquiring, by the system service, the system information of the terminal comprises: monitoring, by the system service, the specific port, and in response to having monitored the request for acquiring the system information of the terminal, acquiring the system information (Bauch par. 106, including its destination address, destination port, source address and source port. This packet is one sent from an application client executing on a computer system having the IP address 52.166.23.34, to an application server listening on port 80 of a computer system having the IP address 15.0.32.1.)
Claim 12: Metz San Agustin Lopez and Bauch disclose the method according to claim 11, wherein configuring, by the system service, the mapping relationship between the terminal IP of the terminal and the specific port in the terminal in the request forwarding rule of the terminal comprises:
sending, by the system service, a configuration request to a firewall module (Bauch par. 37, an extensible set of transformation modules to transform application requests and responses sent through a PAN tunnel in a way negotiated as part of establishing the PAN tunnel to provide such transmission services as encryption and compression) of the terminal, so that the firewall module adds, in the request forwarding rule deployed, the mapping relationship between the terminal IP of the terminal and the specific port in the terminal (Bauch par. 113, rather than specifying a single destination address or destination port, a rule may specify a range of destination addresses and/or a range of destination ports. Such ranges may be expressed using a variety of different techniques, such as by specifying the top and bottom values of the range, or by specifying a single value together with a mask for transforming the single value into the range. In this way, a rule may match more than one destination address, and/or more than one destination port.)
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metz and San Agustin Lopez in view of Wang (20160316020.)
Claim 16: Metz and San Agustin Lopez disclose the method according to claim 1. However, Metz does not explicitly disclose wherein the display instruction is generated by the target application by scanning a two-dimensional code corresponding to the target page; or
the display instruction is generated by the target application based on a website, corresponding to the target page, in an application page of the target application.
Wang discloses a similar method for page display customization, including:
wherein the display instruction is generated by the target application by scanning a two-dimensional code corresponding to the target page; or the display instruction is generated by the target application based on a website, corresponding to the target page, in an application page of the target application (Abstract; par. 156-157, the web page access request receiving module 870 is configured to receive the web page access request; the data determining module 880 is configured to determine web page content according to the web page access request, and assemble the web page content according to prestored layout templates to obtain laid out presentation data.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Metz with Wang. One would have been motivated to combine the teachings so as to modify pages more often viewed over the internet as web pages (see Wang, par. 3-14.)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Rohrabaugh (2007/0198917) adjusting webpages to the display terminal.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREY BELOUSOV whose telephone number is (571) 270-1695 and Andrew.belousov@uspto.gov email. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Adam Queler, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-4140. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/Andrey Belousov/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2172
8/24/26
Prosecution Insights