DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the preliminary amendment filed 26 June 2024.
Status of the Claims
Claims 44-63 are newly added.
Claims 1-43 have been canceled.
Claims 44-63 are pending.
Notice of AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 16 March 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Drawings
Figures 1a-1d and 2a-2c should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 C.F.R. § 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 44-63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 44 recites the limitations “displaying the first application window in a first mode in response to detecting a first drag operation, wherein the first drag operation comprises an operation of dragging the first application window to a first response region corresponding to the first identifier, the first response region is located in a display region corresponding to the first interface, the first identifier indicates the first mode corresponding to the first response region, and the first touch operation and the first drag operation are one continuous operation” and “displaying the first application window in a second mode different from the first mode in response to detecting a second drag operation, wherein the second drag operation comprises an operation of dragging the first application window to a second response region corresponding to the second identifier, the second response region is located in the display region corresponding to the first interface, the second identifier indicates the second mode corresponding to the second response region, and the first touch operation and the second drag operation are one continuous operation.” The use of the phrase “corresponding to” in these limitations renders the claim indefinite. Neither the claims itself nor the specification define what is considered: (1) “a first region corresponding to the first identifier;” (2) “a display region corresponding to the first interface;” (3) “the first mode corresponding to the first response region;” (4) “a second response region corresponding to the second identifier,” (5) “the display region corresponding to the first interface,” and (6) “the second mode corresponding to the second response region.” Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 45-50 are rejected for substantially the same reason indicated above for claim 1, at least due to their dependence on the claim.
Claims 51-63 are rejected for substantially the same reasons given above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 44-47, 51-54, 59-61, and 63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baer et al., US 2019/0056858 A1.
Regarding claim 44, Baer discloses a method, applied to an electronic device, the method comprising:
Detecting a first touch operation of a user. Baer teaches detecting a touch gesture. Baer ¶ 44.
Displaying a first interface, wherein the first interface comprises a first identifier, a second identifier, and at least one application window, the at least one application window comprises a first application window, and an interface of a first application is displayed in the first application window. Baer teaches displaying an interface comprising a first application window (308) and a preview panel (306). Baer ¶ 54, fig. 3. The preview panel may comprise a first identifier (e.g., display screen 302) and a second identifier (e.g., display screen 304).
Displaying the first application window in a first mode in response to detecting a first drag operation, wherein the first drag operation comprises an operation of dragging the first application window to a first response region corresponding to the first identifier, the first response region is located in a display region corresponding to the first interface, the first identifier indicates the first mode corresponding to the first response region, and the first touch operation and the first drag operation are one continuous operation. Baer teaches detecting a first gesture comprising a drag and drop operation with an application window. Baer ¶ 46. The drag and drop operation may be released on a first identifier (e.g., display screen 402) in order to display the application window in a first mode (e.g., maximized across the display screen). Id. ¶ 50, 58, fig. 4A.
Displaying the first application window in a second mode different from the first mode in response to detecting a second drag operation, wherein the second drag operation comprises an operation of dragging the first application window to a second response region corresponding to the second identifier, the second response region is located in the display region corresponding to the first interface, the second identifier indicates the second mode corresponding to the second response region, and the first touch operation and the second drag operation are one continuous operation. Additionally, Baer teaches the drag and drop operation may be released on a second identifier (e.g., display screen 404) in order to display the application window in a second, different mode (e.g., in the top region of the display screen). Id. ¶ 50, 59, fig. 4B.
Regarding claim 45, which depends on claim 44, Baer discloses: displaying a second interface in response to the first drag operation, wherein the second interface comprises a second window and a third window, and the third window is a window obtained after the first application window is displayed in the first mode, wherein: the third window is displayed above the second window in a floating manner, a height of the third window is equal to a height of the second window, and a width of the third window is less than a width of the second window; or the third window is displayed above the second window in the floating manner, a width of the third window is equal to a width of the second window, and a height of the third window is less than a height of the second window; or the third window and the second window are displayed in split screen, and a height of the third window is equal to a height of the second window or a width of the third window is equal to a width of the second window. Baer teaches a method that may be repeated with multiple application windows so that two windows are displayed in a split screen manner of equal width and/or height. See Baer ¶¶ 42-53, figs. 4B, 4D.
Regarding claim 46, which depends on claim 45, Baer discloses wherein a part of the third window is displayed on a display of the electronic device. Baer teaches a method that may be repeated with multiple application windows so that multiple windows are displayed. See Baer ¶¶ 42-53.
Regarding claim 47, which depends on claim 45, Baer discloses before displaying the second interface: displaying an entirety of the third window on the display of the electronic device; and automatically moving the third window to display the part of the third window on the display. Baer teaches a method that may be performed on one or more display screens comprising multiple application windows that may be resized and rearranged. See Baer ¶¶ 42-53.
Claims 51-54 are drawn to an apparatus that implements the methods recited in claims 44-47, respectively. Accordingly, these claims are rejected for substantially the same reasons as indicated in the above rejections of the corresponding claims.
Regarding claim 59, which depends on claim 51, Baer discloses:
Wherein before detecting the first touch operation of the user, the electronic device displays a fifth window in full screen, wherein the fifth window comprises a target object on which the first touch operation is performed. Baer teaches detecting a first gesture comprising a drag and drop operation within an area of an application window. Baer ¶ 46. Baer does not place any limitation on the state of the application window. In fact, Baer discussed performing the gesture on windows that have the ability to be in a full-screen (i.e., maximized) mode. Id.
The instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further enable the electronic device to: detect the first touch operation of the user, and display the target object or an interface corresponding to the target object in the first application window on the first interface. Baer figs. 2-3.
Regarding claim 60, which depends on claim 59, Baer discloses wherein the target object comprises an application window, an application icon, a service widget, a task window displayed on an application interface, a link displayed on the application interface, an attachment displayed on the application interface, or a task window on a multi-task interface. Baer teaches detecting a first gesture comprising a drag and drop operation within an area of an application window. Baer ¶ 46.
Regarding claim 61, which depends on claim 59, Baer discloses:
The first touch operation is an upward drag operation on the target object. Baer teaches detecting a touch gesture comprising initiating a drag and drop operation. Baer ¶ 46.
In response to the target object being the fifth window, a start point of the first touch operation is a bottom of a screen of the electronic device. Baer teaches detecting a first gesture comprising a drag and drop operation within an area of an application window. Baer ¶ 46. Baer does not place any limitation on the location of the application window.
Regarding claim 63, which depends on claim 51, Baer discloses wherein the first identifier is displayed at an upper left of the first interface, and the second identifier is displayed at an upper right of the first interface; or the first identifier is displayed at the upper right of the first interface, and the second identifier is displayed at the upper left of the first interface. Baer teaches displaying an interface comprising a preview panel (306). Baer ¶ 54, fig. 3. The preview panel may comprise a first identifier (e.g., display screen 302) on the left and a second identifier (e.g., display screen 304) on the right. The preview panel may be displayed in any area of the screen according to rules. Id. ¶¶ 48-49.
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 of this title, 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 49-50 and 56-57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Baer et al., US 2019/0056858 A1, in view of Walkin et al., US 2020/0326820 A1.
Regarding claim 49, which depends on claim 44, Baer discloses:
Displaying a third interface in response to the second drag operation, wherein: the third interface comprises a second window and a fourth window, and the fourth window is a window obtained after the first application window is displayed in the second mode; the second window is displayed in full screen by the electronic device. Baer teaches a method that may be repeated with multiple application windows so that the one of the windows is displayed in a full screen (i.e., “maximized”) format. See Baer ¶¶ 42-53, fig. 4A.
Baer does not disclose, but Walkin discloses: the fourth window floats above the second window; both a height and a width of the fourth window are less than a height and a width of the second window; and an entirety of the fourth window is displayed on a display of the electronic device. Walkin teaches displaying a window (e.g., window 4010) floating above a larger window (e.g., window 4002). Walkin fig. 4A7, ¶ 205.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify Baer’s process of managing windows including displaying a full-screen window with Walkin’s process of displaying a floating window above a full-screen window. Such a modification would increase usability by providing a way to multitask with an application in full-screen mode. See Walkin ¶¶ 3-4.
Regarding claim 50, which depends on claim 49, Walkin discloses wherein a home screen comprising at least one application icon or task widget is displayed in the second window. Walkin fig. 4A3 (dock 4006)
Claims 56-57 are drawn to an apparatus that implements the methods recited in claims 49-50, respectively. Accordingly, these claims are rejected for substantially the same reasons as indicated in the above rejections of the corresponding claims.
Conclusion
Although particular portions of the prior art may have been cited in support of the rejections, the specified citations are merely representative of the teachings. Other passages and figures in the cited prior art may apply. Accordingly, Applicant should consider the entirety of the cited prior art for potentially teaching all or part of the claims.
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Boblett et al., US 2014/0096051 A1, discloses dragging an application icon to launch an application in a selected region.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Asher D Kells whose telephone number is (571)270-7729. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri., 8 a.m. - 4 p.m..
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.
Asher D. Kells
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2171
/Asher D Kells/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights