DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is responsive to the Application filed on 05/22/2024, said application claims a priority date of 06/04/2023.
Claims 1-24 are pending in the case.
Claims 1, 9 and 17 are independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, 9, 10, 15, 17, 18 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogers et al. (US 2017/0331952 A1, published 11/16/2017, hereinafter “Rogers”) in view of Hundley (US 2009/0041311 A1, published 02/12/2009, hereinafter “Hundley”).
Independent Claims 1, 9 and 17:
Rogers discloses a computer system configured to communicate with one or more display generation components and one or more input devices, comprising (Rogers: Fig. 10, ¶ [0203]-[0205], [0208]):
one or more processors (Rogers: Fig. 10, ¶ [0203]-[0205]); and
memory [non-transitory computer-readable storage medium] storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for [performing a method comprising] (Rogers: Fig. 10, ¶ [0203]-[0207]):
receiving first information indicative of a request to initiate a real-time communication session that includes the computer system and a first external device different from the computer system, wherein the first information includes first visual content corresponding to the request to initiate the real-time communication session (A video call request can be received from a caller device [first external device different from the computer system], Rogers: Figs. 4 step 410 and Fig. 5B-5E. As part of the request, caller preview data [visual content] can be provided to the callee device [computer system], Rogers: Fig. 4 steps 416-426 and Figs. 5B-5E, [0095]-[0096], [0099]-[0100], [0114], [0116].); and
in response to receiving the first information:
displaying, via the one or more display generation components, a first user interface indicative of the request to initiate a real-time communication session, including (Rogers: Figs. 5A-5E):
in accordance with a determination that the first visual content satisfies a set of criteria, displaying the first user interface without displaying the first visual content (If the callee device does not enable the caller preview data or if the available bandwidth over the connection is not sufficient, the caller preview data will not be displayed, Rogers: Fig. 4, ¶ [0111]. Also if the caller preview data is enabled, the preview data can be filtered based on callee settings and preferences, Rogers: Fig. 4, ¶ [0097], [0100]); and
in accordance with a determination that the first visual content does not satisfy the set criteria, displaying, via the one or more display generation components, the first user interface including displaying the first visual content (If the callee device does enable caller preview data and there is sufficient bandwidth, the preview data is not set to be filtered, then the preview data is displayed on the called device, Rogers: Fig. 4, and 5C, ¶ [0095], [0106], [0116].).
Rogers does not appear to expressly teach a system, medium and method wherein the set of criteria corresponds to a set of sensitive content criteria.
However, Hundley teaches a system, medium and method wherein the set of criteria corresponds to a set of sensitive content criteria (A set of criteria corresponding to sensitive content can be selected for triggering content blocking, Hundley: Fig. 3, ¶ [0002], [0005], [0034]. If the set of criteria are satisfied, the content is blocked, if the set of criteria is not satisfied, the content is displayed, Hundley: Fig. 3, ¶ [0032]-[0036].).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system, medium and method of Rogers wherein the set of criteria corresponds to a set of sensitive content criteria, as taught by Hundley.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the user’s experience by better protecting the user from unintentionally viewing inappropriate and offensive content and by providing the user greater control over the visual content filtering options (Hundley: Fig. 3, ¶ [0002], [0005], [0032]-[0036].).
Claims 2, 10 and 18:
The rejection of claims 1, 9 and 17 are incorporated. Rogers in view of Hundley further teaches a system, medium and method wherein:
displaying the first user interface further comprises displaying an accept option that is selectable to indicate a user request to initiate a real-time communication session that includes the computer system and the first external device (The user interface comprises an interface element 504 that enables the user to answer the call, Rogers: Figs. 5A-5E, ¶ [0113]); and
the one or more programs further include instructions for:
while displaying the first user interface including the accept option, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection input corresponding to selection of the accept option (The user can provide an input to select the interface element 504 to answer the call, Rogers: Figs. 5A-5F, ¶ [0113], [0118]-[0119]); and
in response to receiving the selection input corresponding to selection of the accept option:
in accordance with a determination that the first visual content does not satisfy the set of sensitive content criteria:
initiating a real-time communication session that includes the computer system and the first external device (The determination that the preview data does not satisfy the set of criteria is in step 420, in accordance with that determination, the flow of the method goes to step 426 wherein the preview data is output and then the flow of the method goes to the subsequent steps that include receiving call acceptance input, sending acceptance to call request to caller device and finally conduct the call, Rogers: Fig. 4, ¶ [0097]-[0110]. Accordingly, the conducting the call [initiating a real-time communication session] is in accordance with the determination that the preview data should not be filtered since the conducting the call is only provided after the determination is made. The determination corresponds the set of sensitive content criteria, Hundley: Fig. 3, ¶ [0002], [0005], [0032]-[0036]); and
displaying, via the one or more display generation components, a real-time communication session user interface that is indicative of an active real-time communication session (Rogers: Figs. 5E-5F, ¶ [0118]-[0119]).
Claim 7, 15, and 23:
The rejection of claims 1, 9 and 17 are incorporated. Rogers in view of Hundley further teaches a system, medium and method wherein the first user interface is a full screen user interface (The incoming video call screen is a full screen user interface, Rogers: Figs. 5A-5E, ¶ [0113]-[0118].).
Claim(s) 5, 13 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogers in view of Hundley and further in view of Santamaria et al. (US 2011/0249079 A1, published 10/13/2011, hereinafter “Santamaria”).
Claims 5, 13 and claim 21:
The rejection of claims 1, 9 and 17 are incorporated. Rogers in view of Hundley does not appear to expressly teach a computing system, medium and method wherein:
displaying the first user interface comprises displaying a decline option that is selectable to decline the request to initiate a real-time communication session; and
the one or more programs further include instructions for:
while displaying the first user interface including the decline option, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection input corresponding to selection of the decline option; and
in response to receiving the selection input corresponding to selection of the decline option, ceasing display of the first user interface without initiating a real-time communication session that includes the computer system and the first external device.
However, Santamaria teaches a system, medium and method wherein:
displaying the first user interface comprises displaying a decline option that is selectable to decline the request to initiate a real-time communication session (Santamaria: Fig. 14, ¶ [0183]); and
the one or more programs further include instructions for:
while displaying the first user interface including the decline option, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection input corresponding to selection of the decline option (Santamaria: Fig. 14, ¶ [0185]); and
in response to receiving the selection input corresponding to selection of the decline option, ceasing display of the first user interface without initiating a real-time communication session that includes the computer system and the first external device (Santamaria; Fig. 14, ¶ [0185]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system, medium and method of Rogers in view of Hundley wherein:
displaying the first user interface comprises displaying a decline option that is selectable to decline the request to initiate a real-time communication session; and
the one or more programs further include instructions for:
while displaying the first user interface including the decline option, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection input corresponding to selection of the decline option; and
in response to receiving the selection input corresponding to selection of the decline option, ceasing display of the first user interface without initiating a real-time communication session that includes the computer system and the first external device, as taught by Santamaria.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the user’s experience by providing the user with greater control over handling incoming video call invites (Santamaria: Fig. 14, ¶ [0183]-[0185]).
Claim(s) 6, 14 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogers in view of Hundley and further in view of Chang et al. (US 2021/0400131 A1, published 12/23/2021, hereinafter “Chang”) and further in view of ITJungles (“iPhone 13/13 Pro: How to Reject an Incoming Call with a Respond With Text”, published 09/29/2021, hereinafter “ITJungles”).
Claims 6, 14 and 22:
The rejection of claims 1, 9 and 17 are incorporated. Rogers in view of Hundley does not appear to expressly teach a computing system, medium and method wherein:
displaying the first user interface comprises displaying a messages option that is selectable to display a messaging user interface that corresponds to an asynchronous messaging session that includes a user of the computer system and a user of the first external device; and
the one or more programs further include instructions for:
while displaying the first user interface including the messages option, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection input corresponding to selection of the messages option; and
in response to receiving the selection input corresponding to selection of the messages option:
ceasing display of the first user interface; and
displaying the messaging user interface that corresponds to an asynchronous messaging session that includes the user of the computer system and the user of the first external device.
However, Chang teaches a system, medium and method wherein:
displaying the first user interface comprises displaying a messages option that is selectable to display a messaging user interface that corresponds to an asynchronous messaging session that includes a user of the computer system and a user of the first external device (The incoming video call interface includes a message option 624k, Chang: Fig. 6GG, ¶ [0227]. The message option enables the user to initiate a process for sending a message to the caller, Chang: ¶ [0196]. The messaging user interface enables an asynchronous messaging session between the two users, Chang: Fig. 6A, ¶ [0191].); and
the one or more programs further include instructions for:
while displaying the first user interface including the messages option, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection input corresponding to selection of the messages option (The user can select the messaging option when the incoming call interface is displayed, Chang: Figs. 6D and 6GG, ¶ [0196]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system, medium and method of Rogers in view of Hundley wherein:
displaying the first user interface comprises displaying a messages option that is selectable to display a messaging user interface that corresponds to an asynchronous messaging session that includes a user of the computer system and a user of the first external device; and
the one or more programs further include instructions for:
while displaying the first user interface including the messages option, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a selection input corresponding to selection of the messages option, as taught by Chang.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the user’s experience by providing the user with greater control over how to manage incoming calls (Chang: Figs. 6D and 6GG, ¶ [0196], [0227]).
Rogers in view of Hundley and further in view of Chang does not appear to expressly teach a system, medium and method wherein:
in response to receiving the selection input corresponding to selection of the messages option:
ceasing display of the first user interface; and
displaying the messaging user interface that corresponds to an asynchronous messaging session that includes the user of the computer system and the user of the first external device.
However, ITJungles teaches a system, medium and method wherein:
in response to receiving the selection input corresponding to selection of the messages option:
ceasing display of the first user interface (When the user selects the custom response option, the incoming call interface ceases to be displayed and a messaging interface is displayed for writing a message to the caller, ITJungles: Fig. 1-3 and page 4, timestamps 0:26-0:47.); and
displaying the messaging user interface that corresponds to an asynchronous messaging session that includes the user of the computer system and the user of the first external device (ITJungles: Fig. 1-3 and page 4, timestamps 0:26-0:47).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system, medium and method of Rogers in view of Hundley and further in view of Chang wherein:
in response to receiving the selection input corresponding to selection of the messages option:
ceasing display of the first user interface; and
displaying the messaging user interface that corresponds to an asynchronous messaging session that includes the user of the computer system and the user of the first external device, as taught by ITJungles.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to provide an effective means of providing a process for messaging the caller (ITJungles: Fig. 1-3 and page 4, timestamps 0:26-0:47; Chang: Figs. 6D and 6GG, ¶ [0196], [0227]).
Claim(s) 8, 16 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogers in view of Hundley and in view of Ruble et al. (US 2024/0378537 A1, filed on 05/10/2023, hereinafter “Ruble”).
Claim 8, 16 and 24:
The rejection of claims 1, 9 and 17 are incorporated. Rogers in view of Hundley further teaches a system, medium and method wherein displaying the first visual content further comprises the first interface includes a display option that is selectable to initiate a process for displaying the first visual content (The user can select an option to disable the filter, Rogers: ¶ [0083]-[0084], [0105].).
Rogers in view of Hundley does not appear to expressly teach a system, medium and method wherein the display option is included or not included in the interface in accordance with a determination that a user of the computer system satisfies first user criteria.
However, Ruble teaches a system, medium and method wherein a display option is included or not included in an interface in accordance with a determination that a user of the computer system satisfies first user criteria (visualization options are displayed or not based on the user’s role, Ruble: ¶ [0104].).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system, medium and method of Rogers in view of Hundley wherein the display option is included or not included in the interface in accordance with a determination that a user of the computer system satisfies first user criteria, as taught by Ruble.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to provide better control over which users have access to particular functionality (Ruble: ¶ [0104].).
In combination, Rogers in view of Hundley and further in view of Ruble teaches a system, medium and method wherein displaying the first user interface without displaying the first visual content further comprises: in accordance with a determination that a user of the computer system satisfies first user criteria, the first user interface includes a display option that is selectable to initiate a process for displaying the first visual content; and in accordance with a determination that the user of the computer system does not satisfy the first user criteria, the first user interface does not include the display option (The user can select an option to disable the filter, Rogers: ¶ [0083]-[0084], [0105]. Visualization options are displayed or not based on the user’s role, Ruble: ¶ [0104].).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 11, 12, 19 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular columns and line and/or paragraph numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
The examiner requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line number(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application.
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicants’ disclosure.
AHN et al., US 20180103234 A1 (The system censors inappropriate images during a video call, abstract.)
KIM, US 2013/0219290 A1 (The user can reject the incoming call and cause a messaging interface to be displayed by selecting the “reject with message” button 43 on the incoming call interface, Fig. 17, ¶ [0205])
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3633. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 5:30 am - 2:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephen Hong can be reached at (571) 272-4124. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL RODRIGUEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178