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 Amendment filed on 5/12/2026. Claims 1, 3-13, and 15-21 are pending in the case.
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, 10, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Smith et al. (US 20140053116 A1, hereinafter Smith).
As to independent claim 1, Smith discloses a display control method, comprising:
arranging opened pages of an application in a form of continuous task flow, wherein each one of the opened pages is respectively carried in a page card of a plurality of page cards (Referring to Fig. 3, A main menu screen is shown which includes a number of applications which can be opened/activated through a user carrying out a particular interaction with graphical user interface objects representing the applications. The order of the applications is shown in the figure with the Home screen being shown first and the remaining applications ordered chronologically (most recently shown first). The applications spawn to the right of the Home screen.” Paragraph 0037); and displaying only a first page in a first page card which is recently opened among the opened pages in a display area (“Only one of the applications is fully visible at any one time when the user is not interacting with the applications…(most recently shown first).” Paragraph 0037. Fig. 4c, shows a Facebook social networking widget 13 accessed by the user, Paragraph 0038)
displaying, in response to a first preset operation to open a second page in a second page card, wherein the second page is associated with the first page (Fig. 4c, shows “a Facebook social networking widget 13 accessed by the user… The user has then selected the Chat icon 14.” paragraph 0038), the second page card adjacent to the first page card in the display area, wherein the second page card is placed adjacent to the first page card among the plurality of page cards arranged in the form of the continuous task flow (“As shown in FIG. 4b, directly adjacent (connected) to the left edge of the Chat screen is the Facebook widget screen 13 from which the Chat task 15 was originally activated. Moving further along the gesture control area 11 leads to more of the Facebook widget screen 13 being shown (and less of the Chat screen 15) as shown in FIG. 4c. Once the swipe is near or at the right end of the gesture control area 11, only the Facebook widget screen 13 is viewable on the screen. It will be appreciated that this example only shows two screens (Facebook widget screen and Chat screen) but a number of applications may be in the stack in which case the user can swipe between all of them by swiping forward or backward in the gesture control area in the particular order that they are maintained in the device. For example, if a link is provided in the Chat screen, selecting the link will open the link in a screen adjacent to the Chat screen. The screen (not shown) relating to a link which may be a webpage for example, would open the browser application and bring it to the foreground. A user can then swipe backwards across the gesture control area once in the browser application and this can take the user back to the Facebook widget screen 13.” Paragraph 0039, Fig. a-d).
As to dependent claim 10. Smith further discloses 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 (“As shown in FIG. 4b, directly adjacent (connected) to the left edge of the Chat screen is the Facebook widget screen 13 from which the Chat task 15 was originally activated. Moving further along the gesture control area 11 leads to more of the Facebook widget screen 13 being shown (and less of the Chat screen 15) as shown in FIG. 4c. Once the swipe is near or at the right end of the gesture control area 11, only the Facebook widget screen 13 is viewable on the screen. It will be appreciated that this example only shows two screens (Facebook widget screen and Chat screen) but a number of applications may be in the stack in which case the user can swipe between all of them by swiping forward or backward in the gesture control area in the particular order that they are maintained in the device. For example, if a link is provided in the Chat screen, selecting the link will open the link in a screen adjacent to the Chat screen. The screen (not shown) relating to a link which may be a webpage for example, would open the browser application and bring it to the foreground. A user can then swipe backwards across the gesture control area once in the browser application and this can take the user back to the Facebook widget screen 13.” Paragraph 0039, Fig. a-d), 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.
Claims 15-16 are substantially the same as claim 1 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 3, 5, 9, 11-13, 17, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. in view of Shiplacoff et al. (US 20100095240 A1, hereinafter Shiplacoff).
As to dependent claim 3, Smith teaches the method according to claim 1, Smith further teaches a rightward swiping operation or a leftward swiping operation in the display area (Fig. 4a-c). However, Smith does not appear to expressly teach the method further comprising receiving a second preset operation comprising,
an upward sliding operation or a downward sliding operation and displaying, in the display area, a third page card of the plurality of page cards that is different than the first page card and the second page card.
Shiplacoff teaches the method comprising receiving a second preset operation comprising:
an upward sliding operation or a downward sliding operation and displaying, in the display area, a third page card of the plurality of page cards that is different than the first page card and the second page card (“In various embodiments, card motion can be constrained to a single axis, for example horizontal or vertical but not both, so as to simplify the positional relationship among cards 301. Alternatively, two or more axes of movements can be made available. In the examples described herein, cards 301 are arranged in a horizontal row. 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. Alternatively, a two-dimensional arrangement of cards 301 can be provided.” Paragraph 0088).
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 Smith to comprise receiving a second preset operation comprising an upward sliding operation or a downward sliding operation and displaying, in the display area, a third page card of the plurality of page cards that is different than the first page card and the second page card. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the convenience of page switching.
As to dependent claim 5, Smith teaches the method according to claim 3, Smith does not appear to expressly teach wherein, the third page card pushes the first page card and the second page card out of the display area upward or downward, and the opened pages are arranged in a form of vertical continuous task flow.
Shiplacoff teaches wherein, the third page card pushes the first page card and the second page card 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).
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 Smith to comprise wherein, the third page card pushes the first page card and the second page card out of the display area upward or downward, and the opened pages are arranged in a form of vertical continuous task flow. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the convenience of page switching.
As to dependent claim 9, Smith teaches the method according to claim 1, Smith does not appear to expressly teach 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
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).
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 Smith to comprise 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. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the convenience of page switching.
As to dependent claim 11. Smith teaches the method according to claim 10, Smith does not appear to expressly teach 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; and/or
the fourth preset operation is a click operation.
Shiplacoff 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).
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 Smith to comprise 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; and/or the fourth preset operation is a click operation. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the convenience of page switching.
As to dependent claim 12. Smith teaches the method according to claim 1, Smith does not appear to expressly teach 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.
Shiplacoff 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).
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 Smith to comprise 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. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the convenience of page switching.
As to dependent claim 13. Smith teaches the method according to claim 12, Smith does not appear to expressly teach 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.
Shiplacoff further 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.
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 Smith to comprise 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. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the convenience of page switching.
Claims 17 and 21 are substantially the same as claims 3 and 9 are therefore rejected under the same rational as above.
Claims 4, 6, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. in view of Zhong et al. (US 20200409518 A1, hereinafter Zhong).
As to dependent claim 4, Smith teaches the method according to claim 1, Smith further teaches wherein the first preset operation comprises:
a triggering operation of a first identifier of the second page in the application, wherein the second page card is placed adjacent to the first page card in the task flow, based on a determination that the first identifier of the second page is associated with the first page (“(“The user has then selected the Chat icon 14” paragraph 0038, “As shown in FIG. 4b, directly adjacent (connected) to the left edge of the Chat screen is the Facebook widget screen 13 from which the Chat task 15 was originally activated. For example, if a link is provided in the Chat screen, selecting the link will open the link in a screen adjacent to the Chat screen. The screen (not shown) relating to a link which may be a webpage for example, would open the browser application and bring it to the foreground. A user can then swipe backwards across the gesture control area once in the browser application and this can take the user back to the Facebook widget screen 13.” Paragraph 0039, Fig. a-d).
Smith 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 Smith 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 6, Smith teaches the method according to claim 4, Smith does not appear to expressly teach wherein displaying the second page card in the display area in response to the triggering operation comprises one or more of:
displaying the second page of the target application in the display area in response to a triggering operation of an identifier in the first page; or,
displaying a control option bar, wherein the control option bar comprises at least one control, and displaying, in response to a triggering operation of a first control in the control option bar, the second page associated with the first control and displaying the second page in the display area.
Zhong teaches displaying the second page of the target application in the display area in response to a triggering operation of an identifier in the first 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 Smith 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 Smith 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, Smith teaches the method according to claim 6, Smith 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 Smith 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, Smith teaches the method according to claim 7, Smith 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 hidden after opening the second 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 Smith 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:
Hwang et al. US 20110175930 A1 FIGS. 8A to 8F are views showing main windows and sub-windows displaying an event occurring while an application is being executed as described with reference to FIG. 7.
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 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
Prosecution Insights