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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/9/2025 was filed before the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejection Notes
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-13, and 15-20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Hassan et al. (US 20120084572 A1, published: 4/5/2012).
Claim 1: Dean teaches a display method, comprising:
displaying a first user interface; receiving a first input performed by a user (an improved user interface for displaying selectable software functionality controls and for presenting logical groupings of particular functionality controls associated with a selected top-level functionality [Dean, 0006]);
in response to the first input, displaying a first task window and displaying a first task sign in the first task window, the first task sign being associated with the first user interface (selection of a particular tab populates the user interface with controls for functionalities associated with the selected tab [Dean, 0006]), wherein the first task window further comprises a second task sign (display additional selectable functionality controls [Dean, 0051, FIG. 9]), the second task sign being associated with a second user interface; and displaying the second user interface in a case that a second input performed on the second task sign has been received (if the user interface contains available display space after the display one or more selectable functionality controls in response to receiving an indication of a selection of a given user interface tab, the available display space may be used to display additional selectable functionality controls associated with an additional user interface tab associated with a different task [Dean, 0051, FIG. 9]).
Claims 10, 19, and 20, sharing similar elements to claim 1, are likewise rejected.
Claim 2: Dean teaches the method according to claim 1. Dean further teaches wherein the first task sign is a first window, content displayed in the window is the same as content on the first user interface, and the first window is used for maintaining a running state of the first user interface; and the second task sign is a second window, content displayed in the second window is the same as content on the second user interface, and the second window is used for maintaining a running state of the second user interface (upon selection of the "Home" tab 905, a first set of control groupings having functionality buttons for accessing application functions associated with the "Home" feature of the application are presented in the control section 915. A "Table" tab 910 is illustrated which may be selected for replacing the first control section with a second control section for containing functionality controls associated with a "Table" feature of the application, or for populating an empty space in the user interface 200 with a second control section, as described below [Dean, 0052, FIG. 9]).
Claim 11, sharing similar elements to claim 2, is likewise rejected.
Claim 3: Dean teaches the method according to claim 1. Dean further teaches wherein the second user interface and the first user interface comprise interfaces of different application programs, the second user interface and the first user interface comprise different interfaces of one application program, or the second user interface and the first user interface comprise interfaces of one application program in different display modes ([Dean, 0052, FIG. 9, FIG. 10]; Examiner's Note: the second UI, 915 (Control Grouping 1-3) and 200, are different interfaces of one application).
Claim 12, sharing similar elements to claim 3, is likewise rejected.
Claim 4: Dean teaches the method according to claim 3. Dean further teaches wherein in a case that the second user interface and the first user interface comprise interfaces of different application programs: before the displaying a first user interface, the method further comprises: displaying the first task window within the second user interface, wherein the first task window comprises the second task sign in a case that the second user interface is displayed; and canceling display of the first task window in a case that display of the second user interface is canceled ([Dean, 0055-0058, FIG. 10]).
Claim 13, sharing similar elements to claim 4, is likewise rejected.
Claim 6: Dean teaches the method according to claim 3. Dean further teaches wherein after the in response to the first input, displaying a first task window, the method further comprises: in a case that a fourth input performed on a first data object on the first user interface has been received, creating a task sign corresponding to the first data object within the first task window (Examiner's Note: this is merely an extension of previous claims, adding more inputs. Computers may implicitly run and rerun computer programs, adding additional inputs and outputs as result).
Claim 15, sharing similar elements to claim 6, is likewise rejected.
Claim 7: Dean teaches the method according to claim 1. Dean further teaches wherein in a case that the second user interface and the first user interface comprise different interfaces of a target application program, or the second user interface and the first user interface comprise interfaces of a target application program in different display modes, the second task sign is associated with a target interface of the target application program, wherein the target interface comprises an interface of the target application program running in the background or an interface of the target application program displayed within a preset time (along the right edge of the user interface 200 is included a "Background" section 450 and a "Position" section 460. According to the user interface illustrated in FIG. 4, these selectable functionality control sections are closed or collapsed [Dean, 0039]).
Claim 16, sharing similar elements to claim 7, is likewise rejected.
Claim 8: Dean teaches the method according to claim 1. Dean further teaches wherein in a case that a target application program has at least two task signs, the in response to the first input, displaying a first task window comprises: in response to the first input, displaying the first task window and displaying a first aggregated task sign associated with the target application program in the first task window; and in a case that a fifth input performed on the first aggregated task sign has been received, expanding the at least two task signs associated with the target application program ([Dean, 0055-0058, FIG. 10]).
Claim 17, sharing similar elements to claim 8, is likewise rejected.
Claim 9: Dean teaches the method according to claim 8. Dean further teaches wherein in a case that the first task window comprises task signs corresponding to N application programs, the expanding the at least two task signs associated with the target application program comprises: expanding the at least two task signs associated with the target application program and displaying a second aggregated task sign, wherein the second aggregated task sign is associated with task signs of N–1 application programs in the first task window other than the target application program, N being an integer greater than 2; and the method further comprises: in a case that a sixth input performed on the second aggregated task sign has been received, displaying the first aggregated task sign in the first task window and expanding the task signs of the N–1 application programs ([Dean, FIGs. 10 and 11]).
Claim 18, sharing similar elements to claim 9, is likewise rejected.
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) 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dean et al. (US 20090217192 A1, published: 8/27/2009), in view of Hassan et al. (US 20120084572 A1, published: 4/5/2012).
Claim 5: Dean teaches the method according to claim 4. Dean does not teach wherein after the displaying the first task window within the second user interface but before the canceling display of the first task window, the method further comprises: receiving a third input performed by a user; and in response to the third input, setting the second task sign to a locked state, wherein the first task window comprises any task sign in the locked state.
However, Hassan teaches wherein after the displaying the first task window within the second user interface but before the canceling display of the first task window, the method further comprises: receiving a third input performed by a user; and in response to the third input, setting the second task sign to a locked state, wherein the first task window comprises any task sign in the locked state (the locked state is associated with permitted task information. The method includes steps of receiving a user request to activate a selected task, identifying the locked state of the device, and determining whether the selected task is permitted based upon the permitted task information and, if so, activating the selected task [Hassan, 0015]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the task window display invention of Dean to include the lock feature of Boss.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to lock a frequently used task onto the display, for easy access by users.
Claim 14, sharing similar elements to claim 5, is likewise rejected.
Additional Reference
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references also displays various task interfaces:
Chung et al. (US 20170277396 A1, published: 9/28/2017)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH A SILVERMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9783. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur, 8AM-4PM MST.
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, Adam Queler can be reached at (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 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.
/Seth A Silverman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172