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 .
Claims in Consideration
Claims 1-17 are pending in this application.
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, 10, 11, 16, and 17, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Hibino (US 20110299116 A1, published: 12/8/2011).
Claim 1: Hibino teaches a computer system configured to communicate with a display generation component and one or more input devices, comprising: one or more processors (processor (for example, a CPU) [Hibino, 0019]); and memory storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more processors (storage device (for example, a hard disk drive) [Hibino, 0019]), the one or more programs including instructions for:
displaying, via the display generation component, a settings user interface that includes a settings recommendation option (FIG. 9 shows a display example of a selection screen for a recommended setting and other setting candidates [Hibino, 0012]; Examiner's Note: as illustrated);
detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the settings recommendation option (if the setting candidates are selected, the CPU 51 displays the recommended setting and the respective selected setting candidates on the display section 22 (ACT 24) [Hibino, 0074]); and
in response to detecting activation of the settings recommendation option, displaying, via the display generation component, a plurality of recommendation options for configuring network-based operations, wherein activation of a respective recommendation option of the plurality of recommendation options initiates a process to configure a respective network-based operation (the recommended setting table 42 stores a plurality of kinds of recommended settings which is set for respective users [Hibino, 0035]. If the setting candidates are selected, the CPU 51 displays the recommended setting and the respective selected setting candidates on the display section 22 (ACT 24) [Hibino, 0074]. Recommended setting for network printing [Hibino, 0106]) and wherein:
in accordance with a first set of recommendation criteria being met, the plurality of recommendation options includes a first set of recommendation options (If the setting candidates are selected, the CPU 51 displays the recommended setting and the respective selected setting candidates on the display section 22 (ACT 24). The CPU 51 receives a user's choice on the recommended setting or the respective setting candidates displayed on the display section 22 (ACT 25) [Hibino, 0074]); and
in accordance with a second set of recommendation criteria being met, the plurality of recommendation options includes a second set of recommendation options, wherein the second set of recommendation options is different from the first set of recommendation options (if the user has selected any one of the recommended setting and the setting candidates (ACT 25: YES), the CPU 51 reflects the setting content of the selected recommended setting or the selected print setting candidate on the present setting content (ACT 26). If the user's choice is reflected on the present setting content, the CPU 51 displays a detailed setting screen showing the present setting content on the display section 22 (ACT 27) [Hibino, 0074]; Examiner's Note: wherein recommendations are based on users choices. If those choices are different per session, than the recommendations will likely be different).
Claims 16 and 17, having similar elements to claim 1, are likewise rejected.
Claim 10: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino further teaches wherein displaying the settings user interface includes displaying: information about a quantity of photos and/or videos stored using a service, information about a last backup of the computer system to the service, information on whether instant messages of the computer system are being synchronized to the service, and/or information on whether data of one or more respective applications are being synchronized to the service ([Hibino, 0020-0021]).
Claim 11: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino further teaches wherein the plurality of recommendation options includes a duplicate files recommendation option, the one or more programs further including instructions for: detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the duplicate files recommendation option; and in response to detecting activation of the duplicate files recommendation option, initiating a process for removing one or more duplicate files from a service (The process of displaying the recommended setting set for each user (role) and the print setting candidates selected based on the recommended setting together with the amount of consumption of the Quota value as in the display example shown in FIG. 9 can be applied to the setting of a job (for example, a copy process) using the operation panel 13 [Hibino, 0101]).
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) 2 and 3, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hibino (US 20110299116 A1, published: 12/8/2011), in view of Jagtiani et al. (US 20140380346 A1, published: 12/25/2014).
Claim 2: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach wherein: in accordance with the first set of recommendation criteria being met, a first subset of the first set of recommendation options are arranged in association with a displayed first category identifier and a second subset of the first set of recommendation options are arranged in association with a displayed second category identifier that is different from the first category identifier, and wherein the first category identifier and the second category identifier are arranged based on respective recommendation scores of a first category corresponding to the first category identifier and a second category corresponding to the second category identifier; and in accordance with the second set of recommendation criteria being met, a third subset of the second set of recommendation options are arranged in association with a displayed third category identifier and a fourth subset of the second set of recommendation options are arranged in association with a displayed fourth category identifier that is different from the third category identifier, and wherein the third category identifier and the fourth category identifier are arranged based on respective recommendation scores of a third category corresponding to the third category identifier and a fourth category corresponding to the fourth category identifier.
However, Jagtiani teaches wherein: in accordance with the first set of recommendation criteria being met, a first subset of the first set of recommendation options are arranged in association with a displayed first category identifier and a second subset of the first set of recommendation options are arranged in association with a displayed second category identifier that is different from the first category identifier, and wherein the first category identifier and the second category identifier are arranged based on respective recommendation scores of a first category corresponding to the first category identifier and a second category corresponding to the second category identifier; and in accordance with the second set of recommendation criteria being met, a third subset of the second set of recommendation options are arranged in association with a displayed third category identifier and a fourth subset of the second set of recommendation options are arranged in association with a displayed fourth category identifier that is different from the third category identifier, and wherein the third category identifier and the fourth category identifier are arranged based on respective recommendation scores of a third category corresponding to the third category identifier and a fourth category corresponding to the fourth category identifier (in response to a selection of the add filter category option 860, the recommendation settings display 800 may display an option to add filter(s) associated with one or more categories (e.g., genres, directors, producers, locations, costume designers, music, captions, languages, availability, image formats, choreographers, script writers, story writers, vendors, providers, etc.). In response to a selection of the remove filter category option 804, the recommendation settings display 800 may include an option to remove filters associated with one or more categories (e.g., 830, 832, 834, or a combination thereof) [Jagtiani, 0097]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the recommendation categories feature of Jagtiani.
One would have been motivated to make this modification because targeted recommendations can improve user satisfaction when the recommendations are closely tied to the user's values or likes (Jagtiani, 0003).
Claim 3: The combination of Hibino and Jagtiani further teaches the computer system of claim 2. Jagtiani further teaches wherein: in accordance with the first set of recommendation criteria being met: respective recommendation options of the first subset of the first set of recommendation options are ordered based on respective recommendation scores of the respective recommendation options of the first subset; and respective recommendation options of the second subset of the first set of recommendation options are ordered based on respective recommendation scores of the respective recommendation options of the second subset; and in accordance with the second set of recommendation criteria being met: respective recommendation options of the third subset of the second set of recommendation options are ordered based on respective recommendation scores of the respective recommendation options of the third subset; and respective recommendation options of the fourth subset of the second set of recommendation options are ordered based on respective recommendation scores of the respective recommendation options of the fourth subset ([Jagtiani, 0097-0099]).
Claim(s) 4, 5, and 13, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hibino (US 20110299116 A1, published: 12/8/2011), in view of Berner et al. (US 20140344861 A1, published: 11/20/2014).
Claim 4: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach wherein the first set of recommendation criteria and/or the second set of recommendation criteria includes a storage space criterion that is based on an amount of server storage space assigned to a user account that corresponds to a user of the computer system.
However, Berner teaches wherein the first set of recommendation criteria and/or the second set of recommendation criteria includes a storage space criterion that is based on an amount of server storage space assigned to a user account that corresponds to a user of the computer system (a display subsystem generates the graphical elements and/or displays from data (e.g., media program recommendations, EPG data, wish lists, media program viewing preferences of one or more users, user permissions related to providing private information to a server such as the program trending server 103, stored graphic components, recorded media programs, etc.) stored on a storage device [Berner, 0069]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the recommendation storage feature of Berner.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to enable users to discern which recommendations are linked to stored files, to better categorize said files.
Claim 5: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach wherein the first set of recommendation criteria and/or the second set of recommendation criteria includes a storage space change criterion that is based on whether a change has been made within a time period in an amount of server storage space corresponding to a user account that corresponds to a user of the computer system.
However, Berner teaches wherein the first set of recommendation criteria and/or the second set of recommendation criteria includes a storage space change criterion that is based on whether a change has been made within a time period in an amount of server storage space corresponding to a user account that corresponds to a user of the computer system (a display subsystem generates the graphical elements and/or displays from data (e.g., media program recommendations, EPG data, wish lists, media program viewing preferences of one or more users, user permissions related to providing private information to a server such as the program trending server 103, stored graphic components, recorded media programs, etc.) stored on a storage device [Berner, 0069]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the recommendation storage feature of Berner.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to enable users to discern which recommendations are linked to stored files, to better categorize said files.
Claim 13: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach wherein the plurality of recommendation options includes a storage space recommendation option, the one or more programs further including instructions for: detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the storage space recommendation option; and in response to detecting activation of the storage space recommendation option, initiating a process for changing an amount of storage space of a service allocated for a user account corresponding to a user of the computer system.
However, Berner teaches wherein the plurality of recommendation options includes a storage space recommendation option, the one or more programs further including instructions for: detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the storage space recommendation option; and in response to detecting activation of the storage space recommendation option, initiating a process for changing an amount of storage space of a service allocated for a user account corresponding to a user of the computer system (a display subsystem generates the graphical elements and/or displays from data (e.g., media program recommendations, EPG data, wish lists, media program viewing preferences of one or more users, user permissions related to providing private information to a server such as the program trending server 103, stored graphic components, recorded media programs, etc.) stored on a storage device [Berner, 0069]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the recommendation storage feature of Berner.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to enable users to discern which recommendations are linked to stored files, to better categorize said files.
Claim(s) 6, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hibino (US 20110299116 A1, published: 12/8/2011), in view of Balakrishnan (US 20210028983 A1, published: 1/28/2021).
Claim 6: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach wherein the first set of recommendation criteria and/or the second set of recommendation criteria includes a new device criterion that is based on whether a new device of the user has been configured to use a feature of a service.
However, Balakrishnan teaches wherein the first set of recommendation criteria and/or the second set of recommendation criteria includes a new device criterion that is based on whether a new device of the user has been configured to use a feature of a service (database 112 may be initialized with preliminary data for different second computing devices 120 so that ML module 110 can make recommendations as soon as new second computing devices 120 are added [Balakrishnan, 0045]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the new device recommendations feature of Balakrishnan.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to determine optimum configurations to allow easy management of large numbers of devices (Balakrishnan, 0011).
Claim(s) 7 and 15, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hibino (US 20110299116 A1, published: 12/8/2011), in view of Raghuramu et al. (US 20230275818 A1, filed: 5/2/2023).
Claim 7: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach wherein the first set of recommendation criteria and/or the second set of recommendation criteria includes a VPN criterion that is based on whether the computer system is currently configured to use a VPN feature of a service.
However, Raghuramu teaches wherein the first set of recommendation criteria and/or the second set of recommendation criteria includes a VPN criterion that is based on whether the computer system is currently configured to use a VPN feature of a service (embodiments can determine one or more recommendations based on if a VPN system supports providing MAC addresses [Raghuramu, 0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the VPN recommendations feature of Raghuramu.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to prevent the spreading of an infection of a device or an attack through a network which is important for securing a communication network (Raghuramu, 0003).
Claim 15: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach wherein the plurality of recommendation options includes a VPN recommendation option, the one or more programs further including instructions for: detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the VPN recommendation option; and in response to detecting activation of the VPN recommendation option, initiating a process for configuring the computer system to use a VPN feature of a service.
However, Raghuramu teaches wherein the plurality of recommendation options includes a VPN recommendation option, the one or more programs further including instructions for: detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the VPN recommendation option; and in response to detecting activation of the VPN recommendation option, initiating a process for configuring the computer system to use a VPN feature of a service (embodiments can determine one or more recommendations based on if a VPN system supports providing MAC addresses [Raghuramu, 0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the VPN recommendations feature of Raghuramu.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to prevent the spreading of an infection of a device or an attack through a network which is important for securing a communication network (Raghuramu, 0003).
Claim(s) 8 and 12, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hibino (US 20110299116 A1, published: 12/8/2011), in view of Kim et al. (US 20230049881 A1, published: 1/16/2023).
Claim 8: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach wherein the first set of recommendation criteria and/or the second set of recommendation criteria includes a synchronization criterion that is based on whether a first type of data are configured to be synchronized with a service.
However, Kim teaches wherein the first set of recommendation criteria and/or the second set of recommendation criteria includes a synchronization criterion that is based on whether a first type of data are configured to be synchronized with a service (the electronic device 400 herein may synchronize predictive text data (e.g., user word data) with the external device 405, so as to provide the same recommended word and user experience as the external device 405 [Kim, 0087]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the synchronization recommendations feature of Kim.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to keep a variety of devices synchronized so that its users can go from device to device without losing any presented information.
Claim 12: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach wherein the plurality of recommendation options includes a synchronization recommendation option, the one or more programs further including instructions for: detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the synchronization recommendation option; and in response to detecting activation of the synchronization recommendation option, initiating a process to synchronize a type of data between the computer system and a service.
However, Kim teaches wherein the plurality of recommendation options includes a synchronization recommendation option, the one or more programs further including instructions for: detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the synchronization recommendation option; and in response to detecting activation of the synchronization recommendation option, initiating a process to synchronize a type of data between the computer system and a service (the electronic device 400 herein may synchronize predictive text data (e.g., user word data) with the external device 405, so as to provide the same recommended word and user experience as the external device 405 [Kim, 0087]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the synchronization recommendations feature of Kim.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to keep a variety of devices synchronized so that its users can go from device to device without losing any presented information.
Claim(s) 9, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hibino (US 20110299116 A1, published: 12/8/2011), in view of Zhang et al. (US 20140052542 A1, published: 2/20/2014).
Claim 9: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach the one or more programs further including instructions for: in response to detecting activation of the settings recommendation option, displaying, via the display generation component, an option that corresponds to completed and/or dismissed recommendations; detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the option that corresponds to completed and/or dismissed recommendations; and in response to detecting activation of the option that corresponds to completed and/or dismissed recommendations, displaying, via the display generation component, a collection of recommendations, including one or more completed recommendations that correspond to respective network-based operations that were previously configured and/or one or more dismissed recommendations that correspond to respective network-based operations that were previously dismissed.
However, Zhang teaches the one or more programs further including instructions for: in response to detecting activation of the settings recommendation option, displaying, via the display generation component, an option that corresponds to completed and/or dismissed recommendations; detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the option that corresponds to completed and/or dismissed recommendations; and in response to detecting activation of the option that corresponds to completed and/or dismissed recommendations, displaying, via the display generation component, a collection of recommendations, including one or more completed recommendations that correspond to respective network-based operations that were previously configured and/or one or more dismissed recommendations that correspond to respective network-based operations that were previously dismissed (in FIG. 10C, pop-box 1026 also includes a "Dismiss" affordance 1028, which, when activated, causes client device 702 to cease to display pop-box 1026 and software recommendation notification 1022 on touch screen 1006 [Zhang, 0103]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the ability to dismiss recommendations feature of Zhang.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to display recommended software until a user decides to dismiss said recommendation.
Claim(s) 14, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hibino (US 20110299116 A1, published: 12/8/2011), in view of Ben David (US 20170310366 A1, published: 10/26/2017).
Claim 14: Hibino teaches the computer system of claim 1. Hibino does not teach wherein the plurality of recommendation options includes a remove backups recommendation option, the one or more programs further including instructions for: detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the remove backups recommendation option; and in response to detecting activation of the remove backups recommendation option, initiating a process for deleting one or more data backups from a service.
However, Ben David teaches wherein the plurality of recommendation options includes a remove backups recommendation option, the one or more programs further including instructions for: detecting, via the one or more input devices, activation of the remove backups recommendation option; and in response to detecting activation of the remove backups recommendation option, initiating a process for deleting one or more data backups from a service (if such backups are stored on the storage element 38, the process 600 moves to block 652 where the data management application 52 provides a recommendation to the user of mobile device A to remove some or all of those backups from the storage element 38, to allow the device 10 to perform the requested backup for mobile device A [Ben David, 0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the displayed setting recommendation invention of Hibino to include the ability to remove backup recommendations feature of Ben David.
One would have been motivated to make this modification due to the pervasive storage of data on mobile communication devices, and the frequent upgrading and changing of mobile communication devices, are a source of motivation for users to perform data backup procedures (Ben David, 0003).
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