Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Summary
2. RCE for continued application filed on March 10, 2026, has been received and made of record. In response to Final Office Action mailed on December 10, 2025, applicant amended independent claims 1, 12, and 20 and cancelled dependent claims 5 and 16. Claims 2-4, 6-11, 13-15, and 17-19 are maintained. NO claim has added as a new claim after the Final Office Action. Therefore, claims 1-4, 6-15, and 17-20 are pending for consideration.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments in “REMARKS” filed on February 06, 2026, with respect to independent claims 1, 12, and 20 have been fully considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection as necessitated by applicant’s amendment. Since objected claim 5 depends on 4 and claim 4 depends on independent claim 1, combination of claims 1, 4 and 5 would not be the same as the combination of claims 1 and 5. Without incorporating the subject matter of intervening claim 4 into independent claim 1, amendment changes the scope of the independent claim 1. Same argument is also applied to claim 12 incorporating subject matter of dependent claim 16 without incorporating intermediate claim 15. Similarly, claim 5 or claim 16 was not dependent on independent claim 20. Therefore, amendment incorporating the subject matter of claim 5 or claim 16 into independent claim 20 changes the scope of the claim 20. Therefore, it is a new ground of rejection.
Double Patenting
4. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/ patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
5. Claims 1-3, 6-14, and 17-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because except for minor wording and insignificant change in terminology, each and every limitation of claims 1-16 of the US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2 reads on the corresponding limitations of claims 1-3, 6-14, and 17-20 of the current application 18/673,462. Both the current applications and the US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2 disclose a system and method for handwriting input detection on a touch sensing electronic device.
Comparison of claims 1-3, 6-14, and 17-20 of the current application and claims 1-16 of the US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2 is given below: -
18/673,462
US 11,995,308 B2
Claim 1: An electronic device comprising:
a display;
at least one processor comprising processing circuitry; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
display an execution screen of an application,
receive a first handwriting input on the execution screen,
display one or more first graphical objects corresponding to the first handwriting input via the execution screen,
receive a second handwriting input on the execution screen while the first graphical objects are displayed,
display a second graphical object corresponding to the second handwriting input with the first graphical objects,
based on at least one graphical object from the first graphical objects being at least partially overlapped
adjust an alignment of the target graphical object(Para-152 of the Specification submitted on May 24, 2025, “crossing” is an alternative of phrase “overlapping”(crossing or overlapping)).
Claim 2: The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to:
perform the selecting further based on the second graphical object corresponding to a non-textual symbol(“function object”, claim 2, US 11,995,308 B2).
Claim 1: An electronic device comprising:
a display;
memory for storing instructions; and a processor operatively connected to the display and the memory,
wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the electronic device to:
display an execution screen of an application that supports a handwriting input,
receive the handwriting input through the display while displaying the execution screen,
display at least one object corresponding to the handwriting input on the execution screen,
configure at least one area of interest based on the at least one object,
detect a user input based on a specified object for executing a handwriting alignment,
determine a recent action from a user's action in response to detecting the user input,
determine a target area of interest corresponding to the recent action from the at least one area of interest,
identify a target object for alignment based on the target area of interest, and
perform the handwriting alignment using a specified alignment method for the target object in a state where at least a part of objects different from the target object is maintained.
Claim 2: The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, further comprising:
dividing the at least one object corresponding to the handwriting input in a unit of the user's action, and
determining the at least one target area of interest based on at least one object corresponding to at least one handwriting input related to the recent action,
wherein the user's action includes a user input related to switching of the application and/or executing a function based on a function object(non-textual object).
Part of claim 4: The electronic device of claim 2, wherein the instructions, further comprising: identifying a first object of the at least one area of interest, identifying a second object related to the first object among objects of handwriting inputs in accordance with a previous action, determining the first object and the second object as the target object, configuring a target area of interest including the first object of the at least one area of interest and the second object, and aligning the first object and the second object together based on the target area of interest.
Part of claim 9: ---, wherein the first handwriting input and the second handwriting input are divided in the unit of an action in accordance with the first action and the second action, and wherein at least a part of the first object of the first action, crossing the second object of the second action, is related to the second object, and is aligned together with the second object.
Claim 3 corresponds to part of the claim 1 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 6 corresponds to part of the claim 1 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 7 corresponds to claim 2 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 8 corresponds to part of claims 1 and 7 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 9 corresponds to part of claims 1 and 7 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 10 corresponds to claim 9 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 11 corresponds to claim 8 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 12 corresponds to claim 10 and part of claim 13 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 13 corresponds to claim 11 and part of claim 13 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2(non-textual symbol interpreted as function object);
Claim 14 corresponds to part of claims 10 and 13 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 17 corresponds to part of claim 10 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 18 corresponds to part of claims 10 and 11 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2;
Claim 19 corresponds to part of claim 15 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2; and
Claim 20 corresponds to claim 16 of US published Patent No. US 11,995,308 B2.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 4, and 15 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.
7. The following is a statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter:
Claim 4: None of the cited prior arts, on record, alone or in combination, provides a reasonable motivation to fairly teach or suggest the applicant’s claimed invention, "the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to: perform the selecting such that the second graphical object is included as part of the target graphical object, and perform the adjusting such that an alignment of the second graphical object is adjusted concurrently with the at least one graphical object”.
Claim 15: None of the cited prior arts, on record, alone or in combination, provides a reasonable motivation to fairly teach or suggest the applicant’s claimed invention, “the method of claim 12, wherein adjusting the alignment comprises: performing the selecting such that the second graphical object is included as part of the target graphical object, and performing the adjusting such that an alignment of the second graphical object is adjusted concurrently with the at least one graphical object”.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD SAIFUL A SIDDIQUI whose telephone number is (571)270-1530. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9:00AM - 5:30PM.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae, can be reached on (571)272-3017. 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.
/MD SAIFUL A SIDDIQUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626
Prosecution Insights