DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/24/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges the amendments to the claims received on 3/24/2026 have been entered, and that no new matter has been added.
Response to Arguments
Argument 1: Applicant argues on page 9 in the filing on 3/24/2026 that Kocienda does not teach “page scrolling a view… to display different text” in claim 1, because the cursor moves “within text, not page scrolling of the view to display different text.”
Response to Argument 1: Respectfully, the combination of Kocienda and Coddington teach the above. Kocienda Fig. 5AA-5BB shows the user’s finger movement increasing the size of the selected area with a drag. While doing so, the page scrolls vertically downwards to display different text. For example, the last line shown in Fig. 5AA reads “have come to dedicate a portion of that.” Fig. 5BB shows that the screen has scrolled further down the page to reveal different text in the page. The last line from Fig. 5AA is now in the middle of Fig. 5BB. Fig. 5BB’s last line reads “nation might live. It is altogether fitting,” which is different text that was not seen in Fig. 5AA. See rejection below for more details.
Argument 2: Applicant argues on page 10 that the cited prior art does not teach “a distinct navigation mode that is expressly ‘without page scrolling the view of the first information,’ and ‘while maintaining display of the cursor,” in claim 1.
Response to Argument 2: Respectfully, the combination of Kocienda and Coddington teach the above. Kocienda teaches a non-page scrolling mode (Kocienda Fig. 5A-5C). Coddington’s drag and drop cursor also does not scroll the page (Coddington Fig. 6). Coddington’s display of the cursor is maintained, because it is a drag and drop motion [Coddington 0023] of the user’s finger and the cursor, to place it between the letters ‘u’ and ‘c.’ See rejection below for more details.
This meets the claim limitations as currently claimed, and Applicant's Arguments 1 and 2 filed on 3/24/2026 are not persuasive. Applicant’s remaining statements regarding the remaining independent and dependent claims are moot or not persuasive for the reasons stated above.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 10, 12, 14-16, 18-19 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kocienda et al., Patent Application Publication number US 20100235729 A1, (hereinafter “Kocienda”), in view of Coddington, Patent Application Publication number US 20100287486 A1 (hereinafter “Coddington”).
Claim 1: Kocienda teaches “A method comprising:
displaying, on a touch-sensitive display (i.e. touch screen display [Kocienda 0324]), first information for a first application and second information for the first application, the first information comprising text and the second information comprising a virtual keyboard (Kocienda Fig. 5AA shows text in a text editor in the top half of the screen, and a virtual keyboard in the bottom half of the screen);
detecting a gesture on the touch-sensitive display (i.e. a finger contact 558 (FIG. 5AA) that subsequently moves (e.g., movement 560, FIG. 5AA) on the touch screen display [Kocienda 0324]);
when the gesture originates in and is associated with a first area of the touch- sensitive display related to the first information, page scrolling a view of the first information through the text to display different text (i.e. the initial location of the finger contact after the single tap, such as the word "nation" in FIG. 5AA). In response to recognizing the tap-and-a-half gesture by the single finger, the device updates the selected portion of the content in accordance with detected movement of the finger contact 558 on the touch screen display (e.g., increasing the selected portion 524 as shown in FIGS. 5AA and 5BB) [Kocienda 0324, Fig. 5AA-5BB] Fig. 5AA-5BB shows the page scrolling vertically downwards to display different text. For example, the last line shown in Fig. 5AA reads “have come to dedicate a portion of that.” Fig. 5BB shows that the screen has scrolled further down the page to reveal different text in the page. The last line from Fig. 5AA is now in the middle of Fig. 5BB. Fig. 5BB’s last line reads “nation might live. It is altogether fitting,” which is different text that was not seen in Fig. 5AA);
when the gesture originates in and is associated with a second area…, scrolling a cursor through the text in a direction dependent on a direction of the gesture (i.e. a finger contact 514 across the touch screen display [Kocienda 0239]… The device moves (924) the insertion marker 510 from the first location to a second location… in accordance with the detected movement of the finger contact (e.g., from the end of the word "equal" in FIG. 5B to the beginning of the word "Four" in FIG. 5C) [Kocienda 0241, Fig. 5A-5C] note: Finger contact 514 originates in a text editing area, as a second area, and finger contact 514 is associated with the second area by originating in the second area) without page scrolling the view of the first information and while maintaining display of the cursor (Kocienda Fig. 5A-5C shows cursor scrolling without the page changing. The display of the cursor is maintained in Figs. 5A-5A),
wherein the amount of scrolling is dependent on the length of the gesture (i.e. the end of the selected portion of the content may be increased as the finger contact moves forward through text on the display… as illustrated in FIGS. 5AA and 5BB [Kocienda 0324, Fig. 5AA-5BB]).”
Kocienda teaches the required two scrolling modes. For example, page scrolling [Kocienda 0324, Fig. 5AA-5BB] and cursor scrolling through text [Kocienda 0241, Fig. 5A-5C]; see mapping above. Kocienda is silent regarding the gesture of the second scrolling mode originating in a second area “of the virtual keyboard.” Coddington is introduced to modify the second scrolling mode to originate on a virtual keyboard:
Coddington teaches “when the gesture originates in and is associated with a second area of the virtual keyboard, scrolling a cursor through the text in a direction dependent on a direction of the gesture (i.e. a user 606 selects the cursor key 608 of virtual keyboard 610. Such a selection may include a touch-and-hold gesture… user 606 releases the touch gesture between the letters "u" and "c" of the text "juce." [Coddington 0023, Fig. 6] note: user’s gesture originates in a second area, a keyboard area, and gesture is associated with the keyboard area by originating in the keyboard area. The direction of the gesture affects the location, and therefore the direction, of the cursor) without page scrolling the view of the first information and while maintaining display of the cursor (i.e. the cursor may be configured for gesture-based drag-and-drop placement within text displayed on the display… cursor may be configured to move in correspondence with the touch gesture [Coddington 0023, Fig. 6] note: Fig. 6 shows the cursor following the user’s finger, and moving between the letters ‘u’ and ‘c’. The screen does not scroll to another page. The display of the cursor is maintained because the cursor follows the users finger as the user moves the cursor with the drag and drop gesture),”
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention to modify the invention/combination of Kocienda to include the feature of having the ability to gesture on a virtual keyboard as disclosed by Coddington.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the time of invention because it provides the benefit to be able to use a non-reading space to move a cursor, which improves screen viewability and to use a lower portion of the screen to scroll, which improves ergonomics.
Claim 3: Kocienda and Coddington teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Kocienda teaches “wherein the virtual keyboard is displayed while scrolling through the text (Kocienda Fig. 5A-5C and 5AA-5BB show that the virtual keyboard is displayed while scrolling).”
Claim 5: Kocienda and Coddington teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Kocienda teaches “wherein detecting a gesture comprises detecting a swipe (i.e. swipe-initiated selection gesture is a single-finger gesture that comprises: (1) a finger contact (e.g., a finger-down event 584, FIG. 5OO) initially at a first location (e.g., the word "brought" in FIG. 5OO) in the content, wherein the finger contact is initially moving… and (2) movement of the finger contact to a second location in the content (e.g., movement 586, FIG. 5OO)… In response to recognizing the swipe-initiated selection gesture by the single finger, the device selects a portion of the content, wherein the first location begins or ends the selected portion of content (e.g., the word "brought" in FIG. 5OO begins the selected portion), and updates the selected portion 524 of the content in accordance with the movement of the finger contact 584 to the second location in the content (FIG. 5PP) [Kocienda 0334, Fig. 5OO-5PP]).”
Claim 6: Kocienda and Coddington teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Kocienda teaches “comprising determining a direction of the gesture (i.e. a finger contact 558 (FIG. 5AA) that subsequently moves (e.g., movement 560, FIG. 5AA) on the touch screen display… the device updates the selected portion of the content in accordance with detected movement of the finger contact 558 on the touch screen display (e.g., increasing the selected portion 524 as shown in FIGS. 5AA and 5BB) [Kocienda 0324] note: gesture is determined to move in the down direction, so the page scrolls in the down direction).”
Claim 7: Kocienda and Coddington teach all the limitations of claim 6, above. Kocienda teaches “wherein the gesture is associated with the first area of the touch-sensitive display when the gesture begins and ends on the first area (i.e. a finger contact 558 (FIG. 5AA) that subsequently moves (e.g., movement 560, FIG. 5AA) on the touch screen display… the device updates the selected portion of the content in accordance with detected movement of the finger contact 558 on the touch screen display (e.g., increasing the selected portion 524 as shown in FIGS. 5AA and 5BB) [Kocienda 0324, Fig. 5AA-5BB] note: Kocienda Fig. 5AA and 5BB shows finger contact 558 beginning and ending on the text editing area).”
Claim 10: Kocienda and Coddington teach a portable electronic device (i.e. a multifunction device includes a touch screen display, one or more processors, memory, and one or more programs. The one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors [Kocienda 0030]) comprising operations corresponding to the method of claim 1; therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 12: Claim 12 is similar in content and in scope to claim 3, thus it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 14: Claim 14 is similar in content and in scope to claim 5, thus it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 15: Claim 15 is similar in content and in scope to claim 6, thus it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 16: Claim 16 is similar in content and in scope to claim 7, thus it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 18: Kocienda and Coddington teach a non-transitory computer-readable medium having computer-readable code executable that when executed by at least one processor (i.e. a multifunction device includes a touch screen display, one or more processors, memory, and one or more programs. The one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors [Kocienda 0030]) cause the processor to perform operations corresponding to the method of claim 1; therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 19: Kocienda and Coddington teach all the limitations of claim 18, above. Coddington teaches “wherein the gesture is associated with the second area of the virtual keyboard when the gesture begins at any one of multiple different locations on the virtual keyboard (i.e. FIG. 7 shows a portable computing device 700 with a touch-sensitive display 702 displaying text 704. At time to, a user 706 performs a touch gesture, e.g. a touch-and-hold gesture, at the spacebar key 708 of virtual keyboard 710. Such a gesture yields an image 712 of a cursor, as shown at time t.sub.1 of the depicted touch sequence. At time t.sub.2, user 706 releases the touch gesture between the letters "u" and "c" of the text "juce," thus positioning a cursor at that location [Coddington 0024, Fig. 6, 7] note: multiple locations including cursor key of keyboard Fig. 6 and the spacebar key in 0024).”
One would have been motivated to combine Kocienda and Coddington, before the time of invention because it provides the benefit to be able to use a non-reading space to move a cursor, which improves screen viewability and to use a lower portion of the screen to scroll, which improves ergonomics.
Claim 21: Kocienda and Coddington teach all the limitations of claim 18, above. Coddington teaches “wherein the gesture is associated with the second area of the virtual keyboard when the gesture begins at any one of multiple different locations on the virtual keyboard and only when the gesture originates in the second area of the virtual keyboard (i.e. FIG. 7 shows a portable computing device 700 with a touch-sensitive display 702 displaying text 704. At time to, a user 706 performs a touch gesture, e.g. a touch-and-hold gesture, at the spacebar key 708 of virtual keyboard 710. Such a gesture yields an image 712 of a cursor, as shown at time t.sub.1 of the depicted touch sequence. At time t.sub.2, user 706 releases the touch gesture between the letters "u" and "c" of the text "juce," thus positioning a cursor at that location [Coddington 0024, Fig. 6, 7] note: multiple locations including cursor key of keyboard Fig. 6 and the spacebar key in 0024).”
One would have been motivated to combine Kocienda and Coddington, before the time of invention because it provides the benefit to be able to use a non-reading space to move a cursor, which improves screen viewability and to use a lower portion of the screen to scroll, which improves ergonomics.
Claims 2, 8, 11, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kocienda, in view of Coddington, in view of Elias, Patent Application Publication number US 20100148995 A1 (hereinafter “Elias”).
Claim 2: Kocienda and Coddington teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Kocienda and Coddington teach a virtual keyboard in claim 1 (Coddington 0023, Fig. 6), above. Coddington teaches “wherein the gesture is associated with the second area of the virtual keyboard when the gesture begins… on the virtual keyboard (i.e. a user 606 selects the cursor key 608 of virtual keyboard 610. Such a selection may include a touch-and-hold gesture… user 606 releases the touch gesture between the letters "u" and "c" of the text "juce." [Coddington 0023, Fig. 6] note: user’s gesture originates in a second area, a keyboard area, and gesture is associated with the keyboard area by originating in the keyboard area. The direction of the gesture affects the location, and therefore the direction, of the cursor)”
Kocienda and Coddington are silent regarding wherein the gesture is associated with the second area of the virtual keyboard when the gesture begins “and ends” on the virtual keyboard.
Elias teaches “wherein the gesture is associated with the second area of the virtual keyboard when the gesture begins and ends on the virtual keyboard (i.e. In mouse mode, touch sensing circuitry associated with keyboard 100 can track the movement of the user's hands/fingers in order to provide cursor input, such as moving the cursor, scrolling… with a one-to-one correlation between hand/finger motion and the desired action of moving something on the screen [Elias 0022, Fig. 1]… touch sensitive area 120 can span all keys 110 [Elias 0020, Fig. 1] note: using keys of the keyboard as a mouse indicates the gesture begins and ends on the keys of the keyboard).”
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention to modify the invention/combination of Kocienda and Coddington to include the feature of having the ability to have a gesture begin and end on a keyboard as disclosed by Elias.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the time of invention because it provides the benefit of being able to scroll a display without moving a user’s hands off the keyboard, which increases user ergonomics, and user input efficiency.
Claim 8: Kocienda and Coddington teach all the limitations of claim 6, above. Kocienda and Coddington teach a virtual keyboard in claim 1 (Coddington 0023, Fig. 6), above. Coddington teaches “wherein the gesture is associated with the second area of the virtual keyboard when the gesture begins… on the virtual keyboard (i.e. a user 606 selects the cursor key 608 of virtual keyboard 610. Such a selection may include a touch-and-hold gesture… user 606 releases the touch gesture between the letters "u" and "c" of the text "juce." [Coddington 0023, Fig. 6] note: user’s gesture originates in a second area, a keyboard area, and gesture is associated with the keyboard area by originating in the keyboard area. The direction of the gesture affects the location, and therefore the direction, of the cursor)”
Kocienda and Coddington are silent regarding wherein the gesture is associated with the second area of the virtual keyboard when the gesture begins “and ends” on the virtual keyboard.
Elias teaches “wherein the gesture is associated with the second area of the virtual keyboard when the gesture begins and ends on the virtual keyboard (i.e. In mouse mode, touch sensing circuitry associated with keyboard 100 can track the movement of the user's hands/fingers in order to provide cursor input, such as moving the cursor, scrolling… with a one-to-one correlation between hand/finger motion and the desired action of moving something on the screen [Elias 0022, Fig. 1]… touch sensitive area 120 can span all keys 110 [Elias 0020, Fig. 1] note: using keys of the keyboard as a mouse indicates the gesture begins and ends on the keys of the keyboard).”
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention to modify the invention/combination of Kocienda and Coddington to include the feature of having the ability to have a gesture begin and end on a keyboard as disclosed by Elias.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the time of invention because it provides the benefit of being able to scroll a display without moving a user’s hands off the keyboard, which increases user ergonomics, and user input efficiency.
Claim 11: Claim 11 is similar in content and in scope to claim 2, thus it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 17: Claim 17 is similar in content and in scope to claim 8, thus it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 20: Kocienda and Coddington teach all the limitations of claim 18, above. Codding teaches “further wherein the gesture is associated with the second area of the virtual keyboard when the gesture begins anywhere on the virtual keyboard (i.e. a user 606 selects the cursor key 608 of virtual keyboard 610. Such a selection may include a touch-and-hold gesture… user 606 releases the touch gesture between the letters "u" and "c" of the text "juce." [Coddington 0023, Fig. 6] note: user’s gesture originates in a second area, a keyboard area, and gesture is associated with the keyboard area by originating in the keyboard area. The direction of the gesture affects the location, and therefore the direction, of the cursor).”
Kocienda and Coddington are silent regarding “and only when the gesture begins and ends in the second area of the virtual keyboard.”
Elias teaches “and only when the gesture begins and ends in the second area of the virtual keyboard (i.e. In mouse mode, touch sensing circuitry associated with keyboard 100 can track the movement of the user's hands/fingers in order to provide cursor input, such as moving the cursor, scrolling… with a one-to-one correlation between hand/finger motion and the desired action of moving something on the screen [Elias 0022, Fig. 1]… touch sensitive area 120 can span all keys 110 [Elias 0020, Fig. 1] note: using keys of the keyboard as a mouse indicates the gesture begins and ends on the keys of the keyboard).”
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention to modify the invention/combination of Kocienda and Coddington to include the feature of having the ability to have a gesture begin and end on a keyboard as disclosed by Elias.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the time of invention because it provides the benefit of being able to scroll a display without moving a user’s hands off the keyboard, which increases user ergonomics, and user input efficiency.
Claims 4 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kocienda, in view of Coddington, in view of Marr et al., Patent Application Publication number US 20110074699 A1 (hereinafter “Marr”).
Claim 4: Kocienda and Coddington teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Kocienda and Coddington are silent regarding “wherein page scrolling through the text comprises page scrolling through multiple different pages of the text.”
Marr teaches “wherein page scrolling through the text comprises page scrolling through multiple different pages of the text (i.e. detects a swipe gesture 506 with an initial contact 506-1 and swipe motion 506-2 on the touch screen 112 in 5A1 [Marr 0161, Fig. 5A]… FIG. 5B depicts that scrolling of the electronic document 500 has been initiated, as coverage mark 502 is now covering portions of page 2 500-2 and page 3 500-3, and UI 500B (section 5B1 of FIG. 5B) shows content mark 504-4 for a portion of page 2, page boundary 518, and content marks 504-5 and 504-6 for a portion of page 3 [Marr 0164, Fig. 5B] note: a swipe on the screen scrolls from page 1 to page 3).”
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention/combination of Kocienda and Coddington to include the feature of having the ability to scroll through multiple pages as disclosed by Marr.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit of having the option to scroll as far as the user desires, increasing user flexibility and reduces manual steps (of many smaller scrolling operations).
Claim 13: Claim 13 is similar in content and in scope to claim 4, thus it is rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yeh (US 20020051018 A1) listed on 892 is related to page scrolling modes, specifically in a browser application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL SHEN whose telephone number is (469)295-9169 and email address is samuel.shen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7:00 am - 5:00 pm CT.
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 on (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.
/S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2179
/IRETE F EHICHIOYA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2179
Prosecution Insights