DETAILED ACTION
A. This action is in response to the following communications: Transmittal of New Application filed 04/05/2024.
B. Claims 13-32 remains pending.
Priority
C. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 202111172662.3, filed on 2021-10-08.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 13-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to certain methods of organizing human activity without significantly more. The claim(s) 13 recite(s) “receiving a first operation, (e.g. user input)”, grouping of abstract ideas. The mere nominal recitation of a generic content server and generic network-based storage devices does not take the claim out of the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim as a whole merely describes how to generally “apply” the concept of looking up information in a computer environment. The claimed “network based non-transitory storage devices” and “content server” are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as tools perform an existing lookup information process. Even considered in combination, simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer with storage devices recited at a high level of generality is not a practical application of the abstract idea.The limitation viewing results of lookup on a generic user interface executed by a generic computer, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “by a processor,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “by a processor” language, “in response to receiving” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually organizing data.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to the significantly more than the judicial exception because as noted previously, the content server and the storage devices individually and in combination merely describe how to generally “apply” the concept of lookup in a computer environment. The same applies here. (MPEP 2106.05(d). Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
The claim is ineligible.
Claims 14-32 do not include elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea and are also rejected under the same rational.
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.
Claim(s) 13-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Stibel, Jeffrey et al. (US Pub. 2013/0238387 A1), herein referred to as “Stibel”.
As for claims 13, 23 and 32, Stibel teaches. A method of displaying information and corresponding electronic device of claim 23 and non-transitory computer storage medium of claim 32, comprising:
Specific to claim 23: At least one memory and at least one processor; wherein the memory is used to store program code , and the processor is used to call the program code stored in the memory to cause the electronic devices to perform acts comprising:
Specific to claim 32 Wherein the non-transitory computer storage medium stores program code that when executed by a computer device causes the computer device to perform acts comprising:( par. 87 Describes the different hardware environment for implementing the software system)
PNG
media_image1.png
714
527
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Summary: FIG. 17 presents an exemplary set of credibility modules in a dynamically generated website that is produced by the interface portal in accordance with some embodiments.
receiving a first operation on a content block in a document (par. 175 fig. 17 user interacts with different content blocks (1730-1745) presented in toolbar 1710);
and in response to the first operation, displaying a first function identifier in an associated area of the content block, the first function identifier comprising a first sub-identifier and a second sub-identifier, the first sub-identifier used to represent a content type of the content block, and the second sub-identifier used to represent an operation type of the content block (par. 175 Each credibility module of the set of credibility modules 1710 is selectable and depending on which credibility module is selected, credibility data that is associated with a different dimension of credibility is displayed within the body of the website 1720;
a first function identifier 1730 is displayed in toolbar 1710, which renders 1770 in the body 1750 among other second to the nth function identifiers also selected for display in body 1750; user interface for 1770 is depicted and discussed in more detail with reference to figure 19; which shows first and second sub-identifiers such as tabs displayed horizontally on user interface which can be denoted as “content block”; additionally the content identifiers could also be interpreted as icons “Se”, “Pr” and “Eg”) next second sub identifiers relating to operation type can be denoted as filter list presented on left side of user interface wherein interaction with this will change operation of how information is displayed based upon condition of a filter applied to data set; par. 195) .
As for claims 14 and 24, Stibel teaches. The method of displaying information of claim 13, further comprising: in response to a second operation by a user on the first sub-identifier, displaying a function list of the content block; and/or,
in response a third operation by a user on the second sub-identifier, moving the content block (fig. 19, par. 195 user has selected this content block from figure 17 and has interacted with filter operations).
As for claims 15 and 25, Stibel teaches. The method of displaying information of claim 13, further comprising: if a type of the content block to which the first operation points is not determined, displaying a second function identifier (par. 196 first operation is not determined because user has to input filter into 2020 to be presented with second function identifiers as an example of showing where information is not shown but because of user interaction information is then shown to the user; par. 196).
As for claims 16 and 26, Stibel teaches. The method of displaying information of claim 13, further comprising:
in response to a fourth operation by a user on a blank text line of the document, displaying a third function identifier, wherein the third function identifier is used to create the content block (par. 211 interactive elements for better understanding this dimension of credibility include interactive elements 2530 to filter the displayed messages by social media site, search bar 2540 to search for specific messages that include one or more keywords specified in the search bar 2540, and word cloud 2550 that presents the most commonly occurring words or phrases in the social media messages. The detailed credibility data presented in this figure differs from that presented in FIG. 20 in that the presented credibility data is focused to include credibility data for a particular dimension of credibility, namely the social media dimension of credibility) .
As for claims 17 and 27, Stibel teaches. The method of displaying information of claim 16, further comprising: in response to the third function identifier being selected, displaying a control panel for displaying at least one content block identifier; wherein the content block identifier and the first sub-identifier of a same content block have a correspondence (par. 214 fig. 27 1740 is selected on toolbar from fig. 17 to displays updated body which consists of four different information blocks 2710-2740 each of which correspond to one another).
As for claims 18 and 28, Stibel teaches. The method of displaying information of claim 13, wherein, if the content type of the content block is a non-text type, the first sub-identifier is identical to a content block identifier of the content block; and/or, if the content type of the content block is a text type, the first sub-identifier of the content block is a text identifier (fig. 27; par. 214 graphic and text blocks can be rendered onto the user interface to display various information from a plurality of information sources).
As for claims 19 and 29, Stibel teaches. The method of displaying information of claim 13, wherein if the content block is a text type comprising a title, the method further comprises: determining the first sub-identifier based on a title level of the title (fig. 27; depicted at each block 2710-2740 consists as having a title, “overview”, “trend”, “review updates” and “take action”).
As for claims 20 and 30, Stibel teaches. The method of displaying information of claim 13, wherein if the content block is a text type, the method further comprises: in response to receiving an operation setting a title of the content block, setting the content block to a title format; and determining a title level of the title, and determining the first sub-identifier based on the title level of the title (fig. 27 as example shows titles per content block; fig. 17 depicts other content blocks each having different titles as determined based upon type of data rendering into each block).
As for claims 21 and 31, Stibel teaches. The method of displaying information of claim 13, wherein, the first operation comprises a user hovering a cursor within a predetermined area corresponding to the content block (par. 226 user interaction can consists of interaction of “hovers” on top of displayed content within the user interface).
As for claim 22, Stibel teaches. The method of displaying information of claim 13, wherein the content type of the content block comprises at least one of the following: a text type, an image type, a chart type, or a file type (fig. 17-27 depicts each type of content type of text, image, chart and file).
(Note :) It is noted that any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Systems For Sharing Annotations And Location References For Same For Displaying The Annotations In Context With An Electronic Document
Document ID
US 8799765 B1
Date Published
2014-08-05
Abstract
In one embodiment, a user of a first portable digital computing device creates an annotation associated with a particular reading location within a reference document. The annotation and the reading location are shared with a second portable digital computing device storing a copy of the reference document. Using the shared information, the second device displays the reference document with the annotation shown at the reading location
Method And System For Converting Between Structured Language Elements And Objects Embeddable In A Document
Document ID
US 6182092 B1
Date Published
2001-01-30
Abstract
A converter converts between structured language elements and objects embeddable in the native format of a document editor. A data structure representing the embeddable object is created without instantiating an instance of the object and includes the associated structured language element. Subsequently, the structured language element is used to instantiate an object and set its properties. Any portion of the structured language element not recognized during the conversion process is retained by the embeddable object. If conversion back to a structured language element is subsequently required, the conversion process is facilitated by the presence of the original structured language element within the embeddable object as well as the retained portion of the structured language element not recognized.
Inquires
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to NICHOLAS AUGUSTINE at telephone number (571)270-1056.
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.
PNG
media_image2.png
213
559
media_image2.png
Greyscale
/NICHOLAS AUGUSTINE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178 December 18, 2025