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 4/26/2024. Claims 1-13 and 15-21 are pending in the case. Claim 14 has been cancelled.
Examiner Note
The specification distinguishes the “storage medium” from the “signal medium” by listing several examples for each type of medium (see paragraph 0078,0086). For the “computer-readable storage medium,” only hardware mediums are listed, and for the “computer-readable signal medium,” only non-statutory mediums are listed. In light of the specification, a “computer-readable storage medium” Claim 16 is statutory since signals and/or carrier waves are excluded from the BRI of the claimed medium.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 9-13, 15-17, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shiplacoff et al. (US 20100095240 A1, hereinafter Shiplacoff).
As to independent claim 1, Shiplacoff teaches a display control method, comprising:
arranging opened pages of a target application in a form of continuous task flow, and displaying a first page which is recently opened among the opened pages in a display area (“For example, if a new card 301 is opened for an already-running activity, the new card 301 can be placed adjacent to open card(s) 301 for that application. These cards 301, referred to as "sibling cards", are therefore positioned so that cards 301 for a given activity are located adjacent to one another in the overall card sequence. For example, a new card 301 for an email application may appear when a user initiates a reply to an email message; the new sibling card 301 for the reply can be positioned adjacent to the existing card 301 for the original message…Placing related cards 301 so that they are adjacent to each other allows a user to more easily discern the relationship among cards 301 in the sequence and to navigate among cards 301.” Paragraph 0145,0149, Fig. 12B); and
displaying, in response to a first preset operation, a second page adjacent to the first page among pages arranged in the form of continuous task flow in the display area (“a card 301 can be closed by dragging the card upward off screen 101, or performing a flicking action in an upward direction. Referring now to FIGS. 8A and 8B, there is shown an example of a sequence where the user drags card 301B upward off screen 101, causing card 301B to be dismissed. As can be seen in FIGS. 8A and 8B, in one embodiment dismissing card 301B causes 301C to move leftward to fill in the gap caused by card 301B being dismissed. In general, when a card 301 is dismissed, other cards 301 move to fill the gap.” Paragraph 0100-0101).
As to dependent claim 2, Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 1, Shiplacoff further teaches wherein, the opened pages are respectively carried in page cards, and the page cards are arranged in the form of continuous task flow (“In the context of the present invention, an "activity" is intended to include a software application, a task, a document, a page, and/or any other activity that can be performed in connection with an electronic device. As described herein, the present invention provides techniques for displaying and manipulating representations of activities on an electronic device, using a card metaphor. Thus, activities are represented by "cards", which is a term used herein to refer to areas of the screen that can be moved and manipulated by the user.” Paragraph 0060, 0015).
As to dependent claim 3, Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 1, Shiplacoff further teaches wherein, the first preset operation is an upward sliding operation or a downward sliding operation (“Referring now to FIGS. 8A and 8B, there is shown an example of a sequence where the user drags card 301B upward off screen 101, causing card 301B to be dismissed…301C to move leftward to fill in the gap caused by card 301B being dismissed” Paragraph 0101).
As to dependent claim 9, Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 1, Shiplacoff further teaches wherein,
a page in the continuous task flow comprises a full-screen display state and a non-full-screen display state, and the page is provided with a display control for controlling the page to switch between the full-screen display state and the non-full-screen display state (“physical button 103 can be used to toggle between full-screen mode and card mode…a "full-screen" mode, in which a card representing an application or other activity occupies substantially the entire display screen 101; a "card" mode, in which at least two cards are presented, at least one of which is only partially visible, with each card representing an application or other activity,” paragraph 0068-0070).
As to dependent claim 10. Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 1, Shiplacoff further teaches the method comprising:
scrolling and displaying, in response to a third preset operation, pages in the continuous task flow, and displaying a fourth page located in the display area when the scrolling stops (“The sequence of cards 301 scrolls left or right in response to the dragging operation; for example, if the user drags card 301 near the right edge of the screen, the sequence scrolls to the left to cause additional cards 301 in the sequence to be shown while others scroll off the screen.” Paragraph 0106,0119); or
scrolling and displaying, in response to the third preset operation, pages in the continuous task flow, and displaying, in response to a fourth preset operation on a fourth page among the scrolled and displayed pages, the fourth page.
As to dependent claim 11. Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 10, Shiplacoff further teaches wherein,
the third preset operation is an upward sliding operation with a sliding speed greater than a speed threshold or a downward sliding operation with a sliding speed greater than a speed threshold (The user can scroll, for example, by moving cards 301 to the left or right, or performing a gesture in gesture area 102, or by any other known means. In the example of FIG. 10G, scrolling is implemented in a horizontal direction, so that the off-screen cards 301 are positioned to the left and to the right of the displayed cards 301; however, one skilled in the art will recognize that scrolling can be implemented in any desired direction, and/or in two or more directions if desired., one skilled in the art will recognize that sliding speed can be implement to increase or decrease the scrolling speed. Paragraph 0119); and/or
the fourth preset operation is a click operation. (“Alternatively, the user can click on partially displayed card 301C to move it to the central position and to cause card 301D to be partially displayed, then on partially displayed card 301D to move it to the central position and to cause card 301E to be partially displayed, and then on partially displayed card 301E to move it to the central position. Either mechanism operates to shift focus from the activity represented by card 301B to the activity represented by card 301E.” paragraph 093).
As to dependent claim 12. Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 1, Shiplacoff further teaches the method comprising: in response to a fifth preset operation on a page displayed in the display area, closing the page on which the fifth preset operation is performed (“the user can dismiss activities, for example by closing a card 301. In one embodiment, a card 301 can be closed by clicking on a control within the card.” Paragraph 0100).
As to dependent claim 13. Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 12, Shiplacoff teaches the method further comprising:
after closing the page on which the fifth preset operation is performed, displaying a page adjacent to the closed page in the continuous task flow (“As can be seen in FIGS. 8A and 8B, in one embodiment dismissing card 301B causes 301C to move leftward to fill in the gap caused by card 301B being dismissed. In general, when a card 301 is dismissed, other cards 301 move to fill the gap.” Paragraph 0101); or
after closing the page on which the fifth preset operation is performed, displaying a most recently accessed page among remaining pages in the continuous task flow.
Claims 15-17, and 21 are substantially the same as claims 1,3 and 9 and are therefore rejected under the same rational as above.
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.
Claims 4-6, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiplacoff et al. in view of Zhong et al. (US 20200409518 A1, hereinafter Zhong).
As to dependent claim 4, Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 1, Shiplacoff further teaches wherein the method further comprises:
opening and displaying a third page of the target application in the display area in response to a triggering operation "sibling cards", are therefore positioned so that cards for a given activity are located adjacent to one another in the overall card sequence. For example, a new card for an email application may appear when a user initiates a reply to an email message; the new sibling card for the reply can be positioned adjacent to the existing card for the original message.” Paragraph 0023, 0145, 0149, Fig. 12B, Fig. 13D displays 4 sibling cards. “New cards can be launched, for example, when a new application or activity is launched, or in some cases for an application that is already running (for example if a new message is being composed in an email application).” Paragraph 0021).
Shiplacoff does not appear to expressly teach opening and displaying a third page of the target application in the display area in response to a triggering operation of a first identifier in the target application.
Zhong teaches opening and displaying a third page of the target application in the display area in response to a triggering operation of a first identifier in the target application (“The second trigger operation may be used for triggering the terminal to jump to a corresponding page, and may be a predetermined operation performed by the user on a corresponding function control displayed in a UI. A specific form of the second trigger operation may be set according to an actual requirement providing that the form does not conflict with other functions of the application program. For example, the second trigger operation may be a click/tap operation, a press operation, or the like on the corresponding function control” paragraph 0071-0073, Fig. 8).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Shiplacoff to comprise opening and displaying a third page of the target application in the display area in response to a triggering operation of a first identifier in the target application. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the convenience of page switching.
As to dependent claim 5, Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 4, Shiplacoff further teaches wherein, the third page pushes the second page out of the display area upward or downward (“In FIG. 12B, sibling card 301D' is introduced, for example in response to the user initiating a task that opens a new card for the activity corresponding to card 301D. For example, if card 301D includes an email message, the user's initiation of a reply message can result in new card 301D' being opened for the reply. As shown in FIG. 12B, new card 301D' is introduced at a position adjacent to card 301D within the card sequence. As shown in FIG. 12B, in one embodiment new card 301D' is given focus, and now occupies substantially the entire screen 101.” Paragraph 0149, Fig. 13D displays 4 sibling cards), and the opened pages are arranged in a form of vertical continuous task flow (“The user moves cards 301 along a horizontal axis to navigate from one activity to another. One skilled in the art will recognize that other arrangements are possible. For example, cards 301 could be arranged vertically instead of horizontally.” Paragraph 0088).
As to dependent claim 6, Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 4, Shiplacoff does not appear to expressly teach wherein opening and displaying the third page of the target application in the display area in response to the triggering operation of the first identifier in the target application comprises:
opening and displaying the third page of the target application in the display area in response to a triggering operation of an identifier in the second page; or,
displaying a control option bar, wherein the control option bar comprises at least one control, and opening, in response to a triggering operation of a first control in the control option bar, a third page associated with the first control and displaying the third page in the display area.
Zhong teaches opening and displaying the third page of the target application in the display area in response to a triggering operation of an identifier in the second page (“The second trigger operation may be used for triggering the terminal to jump to a corresponding page, and may be a predetermined operation performed by the user on a corresponding function control displayed in a UI. A specific form of the second trigger operation may be set according to an actual requirement providing that the form does not conflict with other functions of the application program. For example, the second trigger operation may be a click/tap operation, a press operation, or the like on the corresponding function control” paragraph 0071-0073, Fig. 8).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Shiplacoff to comprise opening and displaying the third page of the target application in the display area in response to a triggering operation of an identifier in the second page. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the convenience of page switching.
Claims 18-19 are substantially the same as claims 4 and 6 and are therefore rejected under the same rational as above.
Claims 7-8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiplacoff et al. in view of Zhong et al. and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20160154536 A1, hereinafter Kim).
As to dependent claim 7, Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 6, Shiplacoff does not appear to expressly teach wherein the displaying the control option bar comprises:
displaying the control option bar in response to a second preset operation; and/or
determining a display size of the control option bar based on a number of controls in the control option bar.
Kim teaches displaying the control option bar in response to a second preset operation (FIG. 3 illustrates an application list 20 executed when the button 11 is selected and displayed on a display screen 320. An icon 21 of an application B included in the application list 20 may be selected to execute the application B. Paragraph 0100-0101).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Shiplacoff to comprise wherein the displaying the control option bar comprises displaying the control option bar in response to a second preset operation. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the convenience of page switching.
As to dependent claim 8, Shiplacoff teaches the method according to claim 7, Shiplacoff does not appear to expressly teach wherein at least one of the following is satisfied:
the second preset operation is a right sliding operation or a left sliding operation;
the control option bar is hided after opening the third page associated with the first control.
Kim teaches the second preset operation is a right sliding operation or a left sliding operation (Fig. 310, user input received on UI element 11. One skilled in the art will recognize that a specific form of the second trigger operation may be set);
the control option bar is hided after opening the third page associated with the first control (Fig. 3, at 330, the application list 20 is hidden after opening application B).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Shiplacoff to comprise the second preset operation is a right sliding operation or a left sliding operation; the control option bar is hided after opening the third page associated with the first control. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the convenience of page switching.
Claim 20 is substantially the same as claim 7 and is therefore rejected under the same rational as above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Greenberg et al. US 20160103565 A1 teaches a method for displaying a wrap package of cards. The cards are arranged to be browsed in a first linear direction.
Yoon et al. US 20160004425 A1 teaches A method of displaying a graphic user interface (GUI) by an electronic device is provided. The method includes displaying a first page from a plurality of pages and the GUI corresponding to the first page on a screen, displaying at least a part of the first page and at least a part of a second page adjacent to the first page from the plurality of pages based on a user input received in at least one of an area in which the first page is displayed and an area in which the GUI is displayed, and changing the displayed GUI according to a ratio between an area of at least the part of the displayed first page and an area of at least the part of the displayed second page.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHELET SHIBEROU whose telephone number is (571)270-7493. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM-5:00 PM Eastern Time.
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 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.
/MAHELET SHIBEROU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171