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 . This action is made final.
Claims 1-7 and 9-21 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 9, and 10 are independent claims. Claim 8 has been canceled.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: CONTROL PANEL EXPANSION BASED ON A DISTANCE FROM A PAGE EDGE.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 7, and 9-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jin et al. (US 2015/0309689 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jin teaches a method for information processing, comprising:
in response to a first predetermined operation on a first control of a first document, wherein the first control is an entry for adding content to the first document, displaying a control panel corresponding to the first control, the control panel comprising at least one second control (FIG. 28 and [0231-0233]: first predetermined operation occurs at FIG. 28(a), on a first control, such as a left edge, of a first document. In response to this operation, a control panel/application tray, comprising at least one second control, is displayed; FIGS. 8 and 9 and [0150-0160], FIG. 14 and [0177-0180]: as evidenced in FIG. 9, the first control/left edge is an entry for adding content, such as a camera application corresponding to icon 17 in application tray 20, to the first document/window band. Similarly, FIG. 14 provides another example showing how the first control is an entry for adding content, in this case a messenger application, to the first document);
in response to a second predetermined operation on the control panel, determining whether a distance between the first control or the control panel and a page edge of the first document is greater than a predetermined threshold (FIG. 28 and [0231-0233]: second predetermined operation occurs at FIG. 28(b). In response to the dragging, it is determined whether a distance between the control panel and a page edge/right edge of the first document is greater than a predetermined threshold. For example, a predetermined threshold may correspond to zero, which would indicate the control panel has reached a page edge of the first document); and
if the distance is greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold, expanding a display area of the control panel and displaying a third control in the expanded display area (FIG. 28 and [0231-0233]: as seen in the case of FIG. 28(b), the distance between the control panel and the page edge is greater than zero, thus a display area of the control panel is expanded to the state seen in FIG. 28(c). A third control, such as an icon not previously displayed, is displayed in the expanded display area).
Regarding claim 2, Jin further teaches the method for information processing of claim 1, wherein the page edge corresponds to an extending direction of the control panel (FIG. 28 and [0231-0233]: the page edge/right edge corresponds to an extending direction of the control panel).
Regarding claim 3, Jin further teaches the method for information processing of claim 1, wherein if the distance is greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold value, a control in the control panel slides with the second predetermined operation while expanding the display area of the control panel and displaying the third control in the expanded display area (FIG. 28 and [0231-0233]: for example, see how the lightbulb icon is slid with the second predetermined operation from (b) to (c) of FIG. 28 while the display area of the control panel is expanded. A third control, such as an icon not previously displayed, is displayed in the expanded display area).
Regarding claim 6, Jin further teaches the method for information processing of claim 1, wherein the control panel comprises a plurality of control areas, and controls in the control panel are located in corresponding areas according to their respective properties (FIGS. 28-29 and [0231-0237]: as seen in FIG. 29, the control panel comprises a plurality of control areas as marked by boundaries. The controls are located in corresponding areas according to their respective properties, such as social media for the top controls or photography for the bottom controls).
Regarding claim 7, Jin further teaches the method for information processing of claim 1, further comprising: in response to a third predetermined operation on the control panel, causing a control in the control panel to slide with the third predetermined operation without hiding the expanded display area of the control panel (FIG. 29 and [0234-0236]: a third predetermined operation of scrolling occurs on the control panel. In response, a control slides with the third predetermined operation without hiding the expanded display area of the control panel).
Regarding claim 11, Jin further teaches the method for information processing of claim 1, wherein a fourth control comprises a plurality of sub-controls and the method further comprises:
in response to a fourth predetermined operation on the fourth control, displaying a plurality of sub-controls in a sub-control panel (FIGS. 28-29 and [0231-0237]: as seen in FIG. 29, the control panel comprises a plurality of control areas as marked by boundaries. For example, a fourth predetermined operation is an input in FIG. 29(a) delineating a sub-control panel for a plurality of sub-controls in the top region marked by boundary 70).
Regarding claim 12, Jin further teaches the method for information processing of claim 1, wherein the page edge indicates an edge of a document page corresponding to the extending direction of the control panel (FIG. 28 and [0231-0233]: the page edge/right edge indicates an edge of a document page which corresponds to an extending direction of the control panel).
Regarding claim 13, Jin further teaches the method of claim 7, the third predetermined operation is an opposite operation to the second predetermined operation.
Regarding claims 9 and 14-21, the claims recite a terminal, comprising: at least one memory and at least one processor; wherein the at least one memory is used to store program code, and the at least one processor is used to call the program code stored in the at least one memory (controller 1500 and memory 1400 of FIG. 75 and [0473-0493]) to perform acts comprising operations corresponding to the method of claims 1-7, 11, and 12, respectively, and are therefore rejected on the same premises.
Regarding claim 10, the claim recites a storage medium, wherein the storage medium is used to store program code and the program code is used ([0515-0516]) to perform acts comprising operations corresponding to the method of claim 1 and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
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.
Claims 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (US 2015/0309689 A1), in view of Ellis et al. (US 2021/0365174 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Jin further teaches the method information processing of claim 1.
Jin does not explicitly teach wherein if the distance is less than the predetermined threshold, the display area of the control panel remains unchanged and a control in the control panel slides with the second predetermined operation.
Ellis teaches wherein if the distance is less than the predetermined threshold, the display area of the control panel remains unchanged and a control in the control panel slides with the second predetermined operation (FIGS. 8BP-BS and [0325-0329], FIG. 8M: for example, the distance is less than a predetermined threshold when the dialog affordance 873/control panel has reached its maximum display size and cannot expand further, as seen in either FIG. 8BS or FIG. 8M. For example, see the distance between the top of dialog affordance 873 and the top edge of the UI displayed on device 800. This distance is less than a predetermined threshold, meaning dialog affordance 873 cannot further expand. As such, the second predetermined operation of sliding in the direction of the expansion of the control panel results in a control/UI element in the control panel sliding with the second predetermined operation, as supported by scroll indicator 876).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jin by incorporating the teachings of Ellis so as to include wherein if the distance is less than the predetermined threshold, the display area of the control panel remains unchanged and a control in the control panel slides with the second predetermined operation. Doing so would allow the user to access a greater amount of controls in the control panel despite the restricted expansion of the display area of the control panel. The user may more intuitively perform the second predetermined operation, which is the same operation as expanding the display area of the control panel, to access additional controls. Thus, the user may associate the second predetermined operation with accessing additional controls regardless of whether the control area has fully expanded or not, streamlining the user experience.
Regarding claim 5, Jin teaches the method for information processing of claim 1.
Jin does not explicitly teach wherein while a control in the control panel slides with the second predetermined operation, a scroll bar is displayed at a predetermined position of the control panel.
Ellis teaches wherein while a control in the control panel slides with the second predetermined operation, a scroll bar is displayed at a predetermined position of the control panel (FIGS. 8BP-BS and [0325-0329], FIG. 8M: while a control/UI element in the control panel/dialog affordance 873 slides with the second predetermined operation of a scrolling operation, a scroll bar/scroll indicator 876 is displayed at a predetermined position of the control panel).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jin by incorporating the teachings of Ellis so as to include wherein while a control in the control panel slides with the second predetermined operation, a scroll bar is displayed at a predetermined position of the control panel. Doing so would allow the user greater context about where the user is situated within the control panel so that the user can more predictably and precisely navigate the control panel. In this way, the user can reference the scroll bar to more easily move and/or return to a relevant portion of the control panel, improving efficacy and convenience to the user.
Response to Arguments
The amendment to the title remains insufficient. Applicant may consider the Examiner’s suggestion or amend the title.
Applicant's arguments filed 04/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In Remarks, Applicant argues:
Regarding amended claim 1, “Jin’s left edge does not serve any document-editing function; rather, it is a general-purpose gesture-sensing region for invoking an application launcher. Jin does not appear to disclose that the left edge of the device screen is an entry for adding content to a first document, as specified in amended claim 1” (p. 9 of Remarks). “The application tray does not have a ‘corresponding’ relationship to the left edge in the manner claimed, because the tray is a system-level interface rather than a context-specific panel associated with a particular document-editing control” (p. 9 of Remarks). “However, Jin’s right edge is the physical boundary of the device display, not a page edge of any document” (p. 10 of Remarks).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding point (a), the Examiner’s position is that amended claim 1 still does not have sufficient details that would preclude Jin’s anticipatory teachings.
First, neither the claimed “document” nor “control” is explicitly defined in the Specification or detailed in the claim in such a way that precludes the rich media document embodied as Jin’s window band and the control embodied as Jin’s left edge. As evidenced in Jin’s FIG. 9 and paragraphs [0150-0160], the first control, or left edge, is an entry for adding content, such as a camera application corresponding to icon 17 in application tray 20, to the first document, or window band. As another example, Jin’s FIG. 14 and [0177-0180] shows the first control being an entry for adding content, in this case a messenger application, to the first document. It is clear from these examples that the first control that is the left edge allows editing of the first document that is the window band.
Second, contrary to Applicant’s assertion, the application tray does, indeed, have a corresponding relationship to the left edge because input at the left edge triggers display of the application tray (Jin, FIG. 28 and [0231-0233]). Moreover, while Applicant reasons the opposite “because the tray is a system-level interface rather than a context-specific panel associated with a particular document-editing control” (p. 9 of Remarks), no such “context-specific panel” or its equivalent is actually claimed. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “context-specific panel”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Third, Applicant asserts, “Jin’s right edge is the physical boundary of the device display, not a page edge of any document” (p. 10 of Remarks). The Examiner’s position is that the right edge, while it may coincide with the physical boundary of the device display, corresponds to a page edge of the document, or window band, as illustrated in Jin’s teachings (FIG. 28 and [0231-0233]; FIGS. 8 and 9 and [0150-0160], FIG. 14 and [0177-0180]).
In conclusion, Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive. Amended independent claim 1, and similarly amended independent claims 9 and 10, are properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jin et al. (US 2015/0309689 A1). The dependent claims accordingly remain rejected.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 KENNY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4980. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7AM to 5PM.
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, KIEU D VU can be reached at (571)272-4057. 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.
/KENNY NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights