DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-3 and 5-18 remain for examination. The amendment filed 12/8/25 amended claims 1-3, 5, 8, 9, 11-13, & 15-18; and cancelled claim 4.
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 .
Response to Arguments
The rejection of claims 1-3 and 5-18 under 35 USC 112(b) [or pre-AIA 35 USC 112, 2nd paragraph] are withdrawn as moot in view of Applicant’s amendment to the independent claims such that the claims provide the explicit structure of the various identified “units”; as such, the identified claim limitations no longer invoke 35 USC 112(f) [or pre-AIA 35 USC 112, 6th paragraph].
Applicant’s arguments, see page 13 of the amendment filed 12/8/25, with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 15, & 17 (and those claims dependent therefrom) in view of Wordpress have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-3, 5-10, 15, & 17 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 12/8/25 regarding claims 11-14, 16, & 18 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On page 14, Applicant argues:
As amended, the insertion unit extracts and inserts insertable character string in a case where a part of the insertion data is insertable whereas other parts are not insertable. Support for these features can be found, for example, in paragraph [0056] et seq., in the specification.
In WordPress, to the contrary, there is no teaching or suggestion, inter alia, of extracting and inserting insertable character string in a case where a part of the insertion data is insertable whereas other parts are not insertable, as now recited in Claims 11, 16 and 18.
Examiner disagrees. Referring specifically to the “Block Error” page of the Wordpress reference, the example shown depicts a user attempting to add a block comprising the character string “Sample text” into a webpage, but the block comprises improper or invalid HTML code (see e.g. “Block Error”, page 4: “This can happen for a number of reasons. Commonly, it will appear if you modify the HTML of the block in the Code Editor and make a syntax error.”) Wordpress discloses a number of methods to fix the problem, including inter alia converting the block to HTML which in part takes the text that was intended to be added to the web page and surrounds it with valid HTML code that will obviate the error. See the “Resolve Block” screenshot at the top of page 6 which illustrates that the actual content – i.e. the character string that says “Sample Text” – will be re-encoded within a valid HTML block suitable for inclusion in the edited web page, whereas the invalid HTML code will not be inserted. The Examiner contends that this reads on the limitation given the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term(s) in view of the instant specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 11-14, 16, & 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wordpress.com (hereinafter, “Wordpress”), as evidenced by the following web pages on the Wordpress.com Support website: “Getting Started with Wordpress.com” [hereinafter, “Getting Started”], “Posts”, “Pages” “Post vs. Page”, “Use the Site Editor”, “WordPress Editor >> Add Content Using Blocks” [hereinafter, “Add Content”], “WordPress Editor >> Customize Blocks” [hereinafter, “Customize Blocks”], “WordPress Editor >> Block Error: Unexpected or Invalid Content” [hereinafter, “Block Error”], and “Settings >> Privacy Settings” [hereinafter, “Privacy Settings”].
Regarding claim 11:
Wordpress discloses an image generation system that functions as a cloud browser (the Wordpress.com service, which allows one to create websites from within one’s web browser), the image generation system comprising: a memory containing instructions and a processor for executing instructions (i.e. any computing device implementing the Wordpress software product, which would inherently comprise those elements) to operate as: a reception unit configured to receive, from a communication apparatus, insertion data to be inserted into an operation target element of a Web page (“Pages”, page 9: “Update: Select to save changes you’ve made to a published page”; see also the various “Click Save Changes” on pages 10-12; and “Posts”, page 5, “Publish Your Post”, including “When you’re done, click the Publish button in the top right corner of the editor to publish your new blog post to your blog”; see also pages 5-6, “What Happens When You Publish”); a determination unit configured to determine whether or not the insertion data is in a format that is insertable into the operation target element (“Block Error”, pages 3-4, including “Occasionally a block will display an error if it contains content that has a formatting problem”); and an insertion unit configured to insert the insertion data into the operation target element, in a case where the insertion data is in a format that is insertable (“Pages”, Ibid; “Posts”, Ibid) wherein the insertion unit extracts and inserts insertable character string in a case where a part of the insertion data is insertable whereas other parts are not insertable (“Block Error”, pages 4-7. “Four Ways to Solve the Error”, including “Resolve”, “Convert to HTML” and “Convert to Classic Block” which each attempt to salvage the character string data [e.g. “Sample Text” in the examples provided] and reencode them in a properly formatted block for insertion into the page).
Regarding claim 12: Wordpress further discloses a notification unit configured to notify the communication apparatus that the insertion data cannot be inserted into the operation target element, in a case where the insertion data is not in the format that is insertable (“Block Error”, page 3: “When a block contains an error, it displays the following message: This block contains unexpected or invalid content”).
Regarding claim 13: Wordpress further discloses an acquisition unit configured to acquire element information of the operation target element (the Block Editor: see e.g. “Getting Started”, page 3: “Content – the content on your site is made up of pages, posts, and media. You can add or edit pages and posts by going to Pages or Posts in the left sidebar of your site dashboard. You will make changes using the Block editor” see also “Add Content” and “Customize Blocks”, entire article[s]); and a transmission unit configured to transmit the element information to the communication apparatus (the means by which one saves changes as per “Pages”, pages 9-12 and “Posts”, pages 5-6).
Regarding claim 14: Wordpress further discloses wherein, in a case where insertion data of a length that cannot be inserted into the operation target element is received, the insertion unit inserts, into the operation target element, an insertion data subset that is cut out from the insertion data by insertable length from the head of the insertion data (“Block Error”, pages 4-7, “Four Ways to Solve the Error”, including all subsections thereof).
Regarding claims 16 and 18:
The rationale for rejection of claim 11 applies mutatis mutandis to claims 16 & 18.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-10, 15, and 17 are allowed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thomas A Gyorfi whose telephone number is (571)272-3849. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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, Amir Mehrmanesh can be reached at 571-270-3351. 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.
/THOMAS A GYORFI/Examiner, Art Unit 2435
/AMIR MEHRMANESH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2435