DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to communication(s) filed on 5/20/2024.
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 .
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: Information Flow Card Expansion Method for Detailed Data Display.
Claims Status
Claims 1-14, 16-17, and 19-22 are pending and are currently being examined.
Claims 1, 16 and 17 are independent.
Claims 15 and 18 are canceled.
Claims 19-22 are newly added.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) or 112(2nd)
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1-14, 16-17, and 19-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 16-17 recite “wherein a length of the expanded target information card is set to a length of a full displayed detail information”. Here, it is unclear what is when with “a full displayed detail information”. Specifically, it is unclear whether the card is intended to display the entire content (e.g., without scrolling), or setting the card’s height to match the full (or entire) display area. For purposes of compact prosecution only, the examiner interprets the limitation(s) setting the length of the expanded target information card to a length that can completely display all of the detail information without having to scroll through to see additional details, see Instant Specification ¶ 52. Correction required.
Claims 2-14 and 19-22 are rejected as they depend on claim(s) 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.
(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, 11, 14, 16-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Feng; Xiaojun et al. (hereinafter Feng – US 20150007078 A1).
Independent Claim 1:
Feng teaches:
An information display method, comprising:
displaying at least two information cards on an information flow page; (displaying applications in tiled format [information cards], ¶ 33-35. Herein, the tiles are interpreted as information cards in a GUI because, in a broad sense, they function as distinct, containerized, and clickable "summaries" of related information—resembling physical cards—that serve as interactive entry points to more detailed, app-specific content. Each tile presents related information, e.g., in the form of charts, from their respective applications, e.g., providing feeds, analytics, etc., Abstract and ¶ 18 and fig. 1, serving as a high level summary of the source data associated with each tile, ¶ 40 and fig. 6. The displayed tiled GUI displaying the tiles is interpreted as an “information flow page” because it acts as a consolidated, dynamic dashboard that streams real-time, summarized data from diverse sources into a single visual context, allowing users to monitor, analyze, and act upon interconnected information streams simultaneously)
obtaining detail information of a target information card of the at least two information cards in response to a triggering operation on the target information card, (a user input for resizing of a tile is received, ¶ 56 fig. 9A:912)
wherein a width of the target information card is less than a width of the information flow page, (as can be seen in the example in fig 5A, the width of a to be expanded tile 502a, is less than the width of the display area 106, fig. 5A and ¶¶ 31 and 34)
a preset width is greater than the width of the target information card and less than or equal to a width of the information flow page; (the expand to width, which can be preset to a number of incremental sizes [preset width], ¶ 31, of the tile is greater than the original width, and less than the width of the display area 106, as can be seen in comparing the originally sized tile 502a in fig. 5A with the display 106 and expanded tile 502b in fig. 5B, figs. 5A-5B)
expanding the target information card on the information flow page (the tile is expanded see fig. 5B:502b and at least ¶ 34)
and moving other information cards of the at least two information cards adjacent to the target information card until the width of the target information card is equal to the preset width; (tiles are moved to adjust to the width of the extended tile, see fig. 5B. Note that tiles 504 and 506 have been moved/displaced to the right, ¶ 34)
and displaying the detail information in the expanded target information card, (more detailed information is displayed after resizing, ¶ 41 and figs. 6-6C.
wherein a length of the expanded target information card is set to a length of a full displayed detail information. (a tile can be expanded in both the vertical and horizontal directions, ¶ 45 and fig. 6C, i.e., the width and the height [length]. The original three-lined graph is fully displayed within the expanded tiles, and with all of the with additional information, e.g., tick markers, numbers, etc., in figs. 6A-6C, ¶¶ 41-45 and 47 and figs. 6A-6C. As such, this is interpreted as a “full displayed detail information”)
Claim 2:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Feng further teaches:
wherein the expanding the target information card on the information flow page comprises:
expanding the target information card on the information flow page based on an original position of the target information card. (the tile for App 4 remains in its original position, but is wider extended to the right, as such as this the expansion is based on an original position of the target information card, see figs 5A-5B)
Claim 3:
The rejection of claim 2 is incorporated. Feng further teaches:
wherein:
the original position is determined based on an upper boundary and a target side boundary of the target information card, (as can be seen in figs. 5A-5B, the original tile and expanded tile has the same upper and left side boundary, figs. 5A-5B)
and the target side boundary is a side boundary of the target information card adjacent to a boundary of the information flow page; (the left target side boundary is a side boundary of the target information card that is adjacent to a boundary of the left boundary of the information flow page [left side of the display area 106], figs. 5A-5B)
or the original position is determined based on the upper boundary of the target information card.
Claim 11:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Feng further teaches:
wherein the detail information comprises a picture, and the information display method further comprises:
performing a resizing operation on the picture in response to a triggering operation on the picture, the resizing operation comprising zooming in or zooming out. (a diagonal pinch-out gesture to trigger more details of a graph, ¶ 41 and figs. 8A and 8B. The diagonal pinch-out gesture is interpreted as a resizing operation comprising zooming because the spreading motion of the fingers directly maps to expanding the graph’s visual scale, thereby increasing the size of the image and revealing greater detail, mimicking the physical act of magnifying an object to see it better)
Claim 14:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Feng further teaches:
wherein the original information cards or the target information card comprises at least one of a video, a text, or an image. (the original and target information includes text, and/or a combination of text and images, as reflected in, e.g., the original and expanded tiles in figs. 7A-B and 8A-B)
Independent Claims 16 and 17:
Claim(s) 16 and 17 is/are directed to an electronic device and computer-readable storage medium for accomplishing the steps of the method in claim 1, and are rejected using similar rationale(s).
Claim 19:
The rejection of claim 16 is incorporated. Claim(s) 19 is directed to an electronic device for accomplishing the steps of the method in claim 2, and is rejected using similar rationale(s).
Claim 20:
The rejection of claim 19 is incorporated. Claim(s) 20 is directed to an electronic device for accomplishing the steps of the method in claim 3, and is rejected using similar rationale(s).
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.
Claim(s) 4 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng (US 20150007078 A1) as applied to claims 2 and 19 above, and further in view of Kobashi, Kazufumi et al. (hereinafter Kobashi – US 20050172226 A1).
Claim 4:
The rejection of claim 2 is incorporated. Feng does not appear to expressly teach, but Kobashi teaches:
wherein the original position is a position of a center point of the target information card in the information flow page (The container's dimensions and position are dynamically adjusted by either expanding equally from a central anchor point or resizing relative to a fixed upper side and a central vertical axis, ¶ 174 and fig. 5C. A central anchor point allows a container to extend equally in both width and height directions during resizing).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Feng to include wherein the original position is a position of a center point of the target information card in the information flow page, as taught by Kobashi.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the method, by allowing resizing of the tiles while keeping symmetry between length and width of the tiles, Kobashi ¶ 174.
Claim 21:
The rejection of claim 19 is incorporated. Claim(s) 21 is directed to an electronic device for accomplishing the steps of the method in claim 4, and is rejected using similar rationale(s).
Claim(s) 5, 6 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng (US 20150007078 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Soo; Jo S. et al. (hereinafter Soo – US 20160216875 A1).
Claim 5:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Feng does not appear to expressly teach, but Soo teaches:
wherein the expanding the target information card on the information flow page comprises: moving the target information card to a preset position and expanding the target information card on the information flow page based on the preset position (The GUI enhances user workflow by highlighting cards that need attention, and/or closer inspection, by automatically centering the card and/or enlarging the card to provide detailed system information, ¶¶ 41 and 43 and figs. 3A-3C. As such, it was well within the capabilities of a person having ordinary skill in the art, in applying Soo to Feng, to have realized that Feng’s expanded card could be further highlighted by centering in it on the information flow page [GUI]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Feng to include wherein the expanding the target information card on the information flow page comprises: moving the target information card to a preset position and expanding the target information card on the information flow page based on the preset position, as taught by Soo.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the usability and efficiency provided by the method, e.g., by simplifying work processes and facilitating efficient data management by highlighting a card that needs or has the user’s attention, Soo ¶¶ 17 and 43.
Claim 6:
The rejection of claim 5 is incorporated. Feng-Soo further teaches:
wherein the preset position is a center position, a position of user's line of sight or a top position on the information flow page. (centering the card [preset position is a center position] and/or enlarging the card to provide detailed system information, ¶¶ 41 and 43 and figs. 3A-3C)
Claim 22:
The rejection of claim 16 is incorporated. Claim(s) 22 is directed to an electronic device for accomplishing the steps of the method in claim 5, and is rejected using similar rationale(s).
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng (US 20150007078 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Holland; Jason (hereinafter Holland – US 11347388 B1).
Claim 7:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Feng further teaches based on a pinch in gesture a large, or expanded, tile is reduced back to its original size, ¶ 31. Feng does not appear to expressly teach, but Holland teaches:
further comprising: displaying a floating function control for the detail information after displaying the detail information in the expanded target information card, wherein the floating function control comprises at least one of an interaction control or a fold up control (a close button on the expanded cover card, can be selected to collapse and expanded card and revert back to a default display, cols 9:35-10:3 and figs. 6-7).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Feng to include further comprising: displaying a floating function control for the detail information after displaying the detail information in the expanded target information card, wherein the floating function control comprises at least one of an interaction control or a fold up control, as taught by Holland.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the usability of the method, by including an icon, for redundancy, to guide users who may not know how to revert back to original, unexpanded state using a pinch in gesture, Feng ¶ 31 and Holland cols 9:35-10:3 and figs. 6-7.
Claim 8:
The rejection of claim 7 is incorporated. Feng-Holland further teaches:
further comprising: in response to a triggering operation on the fold up control, folding up the expanded target information card in an original size (based on a pinch in gesture a large, or expanded, tile is reduced back to its original size, Feng ¶ 31. A pinch is considered a trigger operation on a control because it instantly acts as a direct, user-initiated command to immediately resize the target element. Because the tile is reverted back to its original size after being expanded, this operation is also interpreted as a “fold up control”, as known as a “collapse control”.)
and original position on the information flow page and closing the floating function control. (the display is reverted to the original state [original position on the information flow page], Holland cols 9:35-10:3 and figs. 6-7. The close button is displayed during the expanded state, so when the expanded state is canceled the close button is no longer displayed [closing the floating function control], Holland cols 9:35-10:3 and figs. 6-7)
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng (US 20150007078 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Leon Guerrero; Maurio Meika et al. (LeonG – US 20230176711 A1).
Claim 9:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Feng does not appear to expressly teach, but LeonG teaches:
further comprising: after displaying the detail information in the expanded target information card, displaying the information flow page as a whole sliding longitudinally in response to a longitudinal sliding operation, the target information card sliding longitudinally with the information flow page. (In response to user input, a multi-state interface transitions from a condensed state with a carousel of initial tiles having general information to an expanded, larger-sized carousel view that provides more detailed information through swipe-navigable tiles, ¶¶ 93-94 and 138 and figs. 2, 10-11 and 21. This behavior is reflective of the claimed interaction because the carousel interface, which contains the expanded tiles, is designed to be scrolled longitudinally, as reflected with horizontal arrangement of the tiles, in response to user swipes, meaning that the carousel is scrolled horizontally within the page, ¶ 138, allowing the detailed content to remain part of the broader information flow, ¶ 94.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Feng to include further comprising: after displaying the detail information in the expanded target information card, displaying the information flow page as a whole sliding longitudinally in response to a longitudinal sliding operation, the target information card sliding longitudinally with the information flow page, as taught by LeonG.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the usability and efficiency of the method by enabling immersive, topic-specific research on a single page, improving user experience while reducing network bandwidth and computational overhead, LeonG ¶¶ 74 and 94.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng (US 20150007078 A1) in view of LeonG (US 20230176711 A1 as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Gonsalves; Michael F. et al. (hereinafter Gonsalves – US 20120191577 A1) and Wagner; Annette et al. (hereinafter Wagner – US 6061063 A).
Claim 10:
The rejection of claim 9 is incorporated. Feng further teaches that one or more tiles may not be fully displayed and are largely off screen, e.g., to the right, ¶ 34 and fig. 5B:506. Feng-LeonG does not appear to expressly teach, but Gonsalves teaches:
wherein: a display position of a floating function control remains unchanged during a longitudinal sliding of the target information card (Upon selection of arrow controls, e.g., 118a and 118b in fig. 1A, the web page cycles through a set of thumbnail images [e.g., six to twelve], displaying new images on a carousel tile while removing others to manage the visible selection, ¶¶ 61, 62 and 123 and fig. 1A).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the method of Feng to include wherein: a display position of a floating function control remains unchanged during a longitudinal sliding of the target information card, as taught by Gonsalves.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to provide for navigation through undisplayed tiles, in any known and effective manner, e.g., using arrow controls, Gonsalves ¶¶ 61, 62 and 123 and fig. 1A, and Feng ¶ 34 and fig. 5B:506.
Feng-LeonG-Gonsalves does not appear to expressly teach, but Wagner teaches:
and the floating function control is closed in response to a lower boundary of the target information card slides upwardly to a first predetermined position of the information flow page or an upper boundary of the target information card slides downwardly to a second predetermined position of the information flow page (a list of item may have up and down arrows to navigate though the list, and reaching the list's boundaries causes navigation arrows to disappear and functionally disable, signaling the end of scrollable content, cols 8:38-48 and 8:57-9:5 and figs. 11B, 11C and 11D).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the method of Feng to include and the floating function control is closed in response to a lower boundary of the target information card slides upwardly to a first predetermined position of the information flow page or an upper boundary of the target information card slides downwardly to a second predetermined position of the information flow page, as taught by Wagner.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the usability of the method by indicating to the user that further scrolling is not possible, Wagner col 8:64-65.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng (US 20150007078 A1) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Seo; Kyung-yul (hereinafter Seo – US 20120081529 A1).
Claim 12:
The rejection of claim 11 is incorporated. Feng further teaches that the tiles are increased in size to provide “additional display area”, in order to see “additional information”, ¶ 41. Feng does not appear to expressly teach, but Seo teaches:
further comprising: displaying the picture in full-screen on the information flow page in response to a full-screen display operation on the picture. (A user touches a virtual object, which can be an image, see ¶ 6, on a portable device, causing detailed information—e.g., an image of Mars—to be displayed either in a picture-in-picture (PIP) format or as a full-screen image, ¶¶ 6 and 96 and figs 9C-9D.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Feng to include further comprising: displaying the picture in full-screen on the information flow page in response to a full-screen display operation on the picture, as taught by Seo.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the display quality/quantity of the method by implement a known and effective technique of displaying more information, Seo ¶ 96 and Feng ¶ 41. It was well within the capabilities of a person having ordinary skill in the art to have realized that providing the detailed view in a full-screen would utilize all of the display space and lead to displaying the most information possible.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng (US 20150007078 A1) in view of Seo (US 20120081529 A1) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Wong; Anna et al. (hereinafter Wong – US 20150009415 A1).
Claim 13:
The rejection of 12 is incorporated. Feng-Seo further teaches:
wherein the detail information comprises at least two pictures (The detailed information 505-1 may include moving or still images, Seo ¶ 96 and fig. 9D).
Feng-Seo does not appear to expressly teach, but Wong teaches:
and the information display method further comprises: switching the picture to another picture in response to a sliding operation on the picture after displaying the picture in full screen on the information flow page (The system enables user interaction in full-screen view by interpreting gestures—pointing for attention, touching for magnification, and swiping for navigation—to manage image display, ¶ 86 and figs. 5A-5D.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the method of Feng to include and the information display method further comprises: switching the picture to another picture in response to a sliding operation on the picture after displaying the picture in full screen on the information flow page, as taught by Wong.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the display quality/quantity of the method by implement a known and effective technique of displaying more information, and using known image navigation techniques, Seo ¶ 96 and Feng ¶ 41 and Wong ¶ 86. It was well within the capabilities of a person having ordinary skill in the art to have realized that providing the detailed view in a full-screen would utilize all of the display space and lead to displaying the most information possible, in a navigable fashion.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng (US 20150007078 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Leon Guerrero; Maurio Meika et al. (LeonG – US 20230176711 A1).
Claim 9:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Feng does not appear to expressly teach, but LeonG teaches:
further comprising: after displaying the detail information in the expanded target information card, displaying the information flow page as a whole sliding longitudinally in response to a longitudinal sliding operation, the target information card sliding longitudinally with the information flow page. (In response to user input, a multi-state interface transitions from a condensed state with a carousel of initial tiles having general information to an expanded, larger-sized carousel view that provides more detailed information through swipe-navigable tiles, ¶¶ 93-94 and 138 and figs. 2, 10-11 and 21. This behavior is reflective of the claimed interaction because the carousel interface, which contains the expanded tiles, is designed to be scrolled longitudinally, as reflected with horizontal arrangement of the tiles, in response to user swipes, meaning that the carousel is scrolled horizontally within the page, ¶ 138, allowing the detailed content to remain part of the broader information flow, ¶ 94.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Feng to include further comprising: after displaying the detail information in the expanded target information card, displaying the information flow page as a whole sliding longitudinally in response to a longitudinal sliding operation, the target information card sliding longitudinally with the information flow page, as taught by LeonG.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to improve the usability and efficiency of the method by enabling immersive, topic-specific research on a single page, improving user experience while reducing network bandwidth and computational overhead, LeonG ¶¶ 74 and 94.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Below is a list of these references, including why they are pertinent:
Shamis; Zhanna et al. US 9313160 B1, is pertinent to claim 1 for disclosing expanding and collapsing cards, Abstract.
Shih; Jimmy et al. US 9497147 B2, is pertinent to claim 1 for disclosing a user's request can be initiated as the result of a user selecting one of the collapsed cards corresponding to a respective message and expanding the collapsed card, col 68:59-61.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL S MERCADO whose telephone number is (408)918-7537. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-5pm (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.
/Gabriel Mercado/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights