DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendment
This is in response to applicant’s amendment/response filed on 08/11/2026, which has been entered and made of record. Claims 1, 7, 9, 10, 16 and 21 have been amended. Claim 8 has already been cancelled. No Claim has been added. Claims 1-7 and 9-21 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 9, and 10, and the dependent claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments directed to amended limitation have been addressed in the detail rejection below with new reference by Narula et al.
The arguments regarding independent claims 9 and 10 are moot for at least the reasons discussed above.
The arguments regarding dependent claims for the virtue of their dependency are moot because the independent claims are not allowable.
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: both claims recites limitations “processing apparatus to: . . . sending, by the control thread, …”. It is recommended to change to “processing apparatus to: . . . send, by the control thread, …”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: missing ending punctuation. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 9-11, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Narula et al. (US 20200192936 A1), in view of Oberbrunner et al. (US 20140237365 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Narula discloses An electronic device (¶3 reciting “Systems, methods, and articles of manufacture, including computer program products, are provided for furnishing runtime support for an application interacting with a cloud-based analytics engine.” Fig. 1 showing a client device 120. Fig. 5 showing a computing system 500), comprising:
at least one processing apparatus; (¶32, ¶59)
a storage apparatus configured to store at least one program, wherein the at least one program, when executed by the at least one processing apparatus, causes the at least one processing apparatus to: (¶59 reciting “As shown in FIG. 5, the computing system 500 can include a processor 510, a memory 520, a storage device 530, and an input/output device 540. . . The processor 510 is capable of processing instructions for execution within the computing system 500. Such executed instructions can implement one or more components of, for example, . . . the client 120. . . The processor 510 is capable of processing instructions stored in the memory 520 and/or on the storage device 530 to display graphical information for a user interface provided via the input/output device 540.”)
start a control thread and a preview thread; (¶4 reciting “The scripting engine may execute the first programming code on a first thread of the application. The in-app web browser may execute the second programming code on a second thread of the application. The second thread may be a main thread of the application. . . The first thread may be a background thread of the application.”, where the first thread (i.e. the background thread) of the application corresponds to a preview thread, and the second thread (i.e. the main thread) of the application corresponds to a control thread)
sending, by the control thread, a load instruction to the preview thread, such that the preview thread loads at least one effect control to obtain at least one piece of effect data; (¶39 reciting “A main thread may refer to a user interface (UI) thread, which may be a type of foreground thread. . . the main thread of the application 150 may be . . . responding to interactions with the one or more user interface elements. . . delegating the retrieval of visualization data to a background thread of the application 150 ” Further, ¶41 reciting “the user at the client 120 sending, via the application 150, the request for at least the portion of the data stored at the database 140”. )
periodically send, by the control thread, an effect data request to the preview thread, wherein the control thread is associated with at least one effect control; (¶33 reciting “a user at the client 120 may send, via the application 150 at the client 120, a request for at least a portion of the data stored at the database 140. In order to provide a visual representation of at least the portion of the data stored at the database 140, an in-app web browser 152 may be configured to load one or more software widgets. As used herein, an “in-app web browser” may refer to a web browser that is invoked through a corresponding application instead of being a standalone web browser. An in-app web browser such as, for example, the in-app web browser 152, may be used to directly embed web content such as, for example, visualization data retrieved form the cloud-based analytics engine, within an application (e.g., the application 150)” Further, ¶43 reciting “the retrieval and/or the manipulation of visualization data may be run on a background thread of the application 150”)
return, by the preview thread, the at least one piece of effect data to the control thread according to the data request; (¶43 reciting “the retrieval and/or the manipulation of visualization data may be run on a background thread of the application 150 at least partially in parallel with the rendering of the visualization data run on a main thread of the application 150.”) and
render, by the control thread, the at least one piece of effect data returned by the preview thread to obtain at least one intermediate effect image; (ABST reciting “The second programming code may be executed to render, based on the visualization data retrieved from the cloud-based analytics engine, the data presentation.” Further, ¶51 reciting “the in-app web browser 152 may render, based on the data retrieved from the cloud-based analytics engine 110, a corresponding chart providing a visual representation of the underlying data. This rendering may be run on a main thread of the application 150 whereas the retrieval and/or the manipulation of the data from the cloud-based analytics engine 110 may be run on a background thread of the application 150.”) and
displaying the at least one intermediate effect image at a position associated with the at least one effect control; (¶12 reciting “The main thread of the application may be configured to render one or more user interface elements of the application and respond to interactions with the one or more user interface elements.” further, ¶35 reciting “the rendering of a data presentation may refer to the generation and/or synthesis of an image containing the data presentation, which may be displayed at the client 120 as part of a graphic user interface (GUI).” ¶39 reciting “the main thread of the application 150 may be responsible for rendering one or more user interface (UI) elements associated with the application 150 and responding to interactions with the one or more user interface elements.”)
wherein the control thread and the preview thread are two execution threads of the same electronic device. (¶37 disclosing the control thread (i.e. the main thread) and the preview thread (i.e. the background thread) are for the same application 150 running on the client device 120, and reciting “the application 150 may be deployed with the runtime system 154, which may include a scripting engine configured to execute the programming code for retrieving and/or manipulating visualization data from the cloud-based analytics engine 110. . . Meanwhile, the programming code for rendering the corresponding data representation may be executed by the in-app web browser 152. . . For instance, the retrieval and/or manipulation of visualization data from the cloud-based analytics engine 110 may be run on a background thread at the client 120 while the rendering of the corresponding data representation may be run on a main thread of the application 150.” Further, ¶32 reciting “As FIG. 1 shows, the client 120 may include an application 150. ”)
However, Narula does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one piece of effect data carries an identifier that represents the at least one effect control corresponding to the at least one piece of effect data.
Oberbrunner teaches “Systems and methods for applying visual effects to video” (ABST). ¶18 teaches effect panel 204 for choosing and applying effect accordingly, and recites “Effects appear in the Thumbnail Panel (204); the user may choose one or more effects from that panel to be applied to the video clip (205). To adjust or steer the effect, one or more Effect Control Sliders (206) are provided; the user can drag them and see the results in real time in the Video Preview Window.” Further, ¶22 recites “The server also sends to the browser in (406) a description of the controls available to steer or adjust the look. The browser interprets that description and displays the controls, which may take the form of knobs, buttons, sliders, menus or other common controls, as well as on-screen direct manipulation using mouse or touch screen input, for instance to indicate an X,Y spatial position relative to the video frame, or to adjust or control a parameter value.” In other words, Oberbrunner discloses identifying different effect and applying the chosen effect to the preview image.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device (taught by Narula) to identify different effect and to apply the chosen effect to the preview image (taught by Oberbrunner). The suggestions/motivations would have been to apply effect at appropriate position, and to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Claim 1, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 9, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 9.
Claim 10, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 9, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 9.
Regarding Claim 11, Narula in view of Oberbrunner discloses The electronic device according to claim 9, wherein the effect control is configured with effect resources, and the effect resources are obtained by loading an effect program file. (Oberbrunner, ¶22 discoing the effect resources obtained by loading files, and reciting “one more text or binary preset files describing the look to be applied and various metadata about that look (404, 405). . . The server also sends to the browser in (406) a description of the controls available to steer or adjust the look.” Further, ¶23 disclosing the effect control configured with effect resources, and reciting “The user may then interact (407) in real time with those sliders or controls; each update of a control is sent to the server (408)”)
Claim 2, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 11, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 11.
Claim 17, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 11, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 11.
Claim(s) 3-7, 12-16, and 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Narula in view of Oberbrunner, and further in view of Shen et al. (US 20050057576 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, Narula in view of Oberbrunner discloses The electronic device according to claim 11, wherein the electronic device is further caused to:
send, by the control thread, a reload instruction to the preview thread, such that the preview thread reloads the at least one effect control based on the new effect resources, to obtain at least one piece of new effect data. (Oberbrunner, ¶23 disclosing the client sends an update to the server, and reciting “The user may then interact (407) in real time with those sliders or controls; each update of a control is sent to the server (408), which renders one or more frames (409) and sends them immediately to the browser (410, 411, 412), providing nearly instantaneous feedback to the user about the effect of that control.” Fig. 4)
However, Narula in view of Oberbrunner does not explicitly disclose in response to detect that the effect program file is modified, reload, by the control thread, the modified effect program file to obtain new effect resources.
Shen teaches “ a method and apparatus for graphical design” (¶3). More specifically, ¶88 teaches a recites “The decorative effect setting change interface 113 exposes the selected decorative effect layer pattern setting parameters to the user through various graphical controls. Manipulating these controls, the user can change the setting values to the memory decorative effect data structure, thereby triggering a further change event.” Further, ¶89 recites “A change event arising from the decorative effect layer change interface 111 is applied to the decorative effect data structure 136 as described above. The changes are then extracted from the data structure as decorative delta data and added into the album data tree 119 so that these changes can be saved and restored later on. Meanwhile, the decorative effect data structure is passed onto the decorative effect renderer 118 whenever any change occurs. ” In other words, Shen teaches in response to detect a change to the memory decorative effect data structure (i.e. a file), obtaining the new effect resources (i.e. effect setting changes).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device (taught by Narula in view of Oberbrunner) to obtain new effect resources in response to detect the effect data structure is modified (taught by Shen). The suggestions/motivations would have been for “a system that balances the needs of the advanced graphical designers and simple users.” (¶10), and to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claim 13, Narula in view of Oberbrunner and Shen discloses The electronic device according to claim 12, wherein the effect program file comprises configuration information, general parameter information, and shading information;(Shen, ¶118. ¶162: Appendix C.) and
the electronic device is further caused to detect that the effect program file is modified by:
detecting that at least one of the general parameter information and the shading information is modified. (Shen, ¶88 reciting “The decorative effect setting change interface 113 exposes the selected decorative effect layer pattern setting parameters to the user through various graphical controls.” The suggestions/motivations would have been the same as that of Claim 12 rejections.)
Regarding Claim 14, Narula in view of Oberbrunner and Shen discloses The electronic device according to claim 12, wherein reloading, by the control thread, the modified effect program file comprises:
reparsing, by the control thread, the modified effect program file; and
constructing the new effect resources according to a parsing result.
(Shen, ¶81 reciting “Upon the detection of the decorative effect information in the artwork, a decorative effect interpreter 107 is invoked and is provided with the detected decorative effect information. The interpreter 107 loads a corresponding decorative effect file 129 from the external storage device 104 and parses the file 129 into its memory representative data structure 136.” Further, ¶89 reciting “A change event arising from the decorative effect layer change interface 111 is applied to the decorative effect data structure 136 as described above. The changes are then extracted from the data structure as decorative delta data and added into the album data tree 119 so that these changes can be saved and restored later on. Meanwhile, the decorative effect data structure is passed onto the decorative effect renderer 118 whenever any change occurs. ” The suggestions/motivations would have been the same as that of Claim 12 rejections.)
Regarding Claim 15, Narula in view of Oberbrunner and Shen discloses The electronic device according to claim 12, wherein after the at least one piece of new effect data is obtained, the electronic device is further caused to:
periodically send, by the control thread, an effect data request to the preview thread;
return, by the preview thread, at least one piece of new effect data to the control thread according to the data request; and
render, by the control thread, the at least one piece of new effect data to obtain at least one new intermediate effect image, and displaying the at least one new intermediate effect image.
(See Claim 9 rejections and Claim 12 rejections for detailed analysis.)
Regarding Claim 16. Narula in view of Oberbrunner and Shen discloses The electronic device according to claim 9, wherein before the periodically sending, by a control thread, an effect data request to a preview thread, the electronic device is further caused to:
create, in the control thread, an image input control, at least one effect control, and a scene output control through a creation operation triggered by a user; (Oberbrunner, ¶24-27. ¶25 reciting “User opens browser and selects URL of video server (e.g.: http://video.genarts.com) (401)” and ¶27 reciting “The JavaScript (JS) code asynchronously sends information to the server to set up the current effect and any preset parameters. (403)”) and
connect the image input control, the at least one effect control, and the scene output control in sequence through a connection operation, triggered by the user, according to a set rule (Fig. 4, 401-406.) (Oberbrunner, ¶22 reciting “The browser (301) initiates the conversation with the server code (307), such as via an HTTP GET command (401).” ¶25 reciting “User opens browser and selects URL of video server (e.g.: http://video.genarts.com) (401)” and ¶26 reciting “Server responds with initial web page contents (402), including HTML text, images, cascading style sheets (CSS) styling, and JavaScript (JS) or other scripting language code to run in the browser.”)
Claim 3, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 12, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 12.
Claim 4, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 13, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 13.
Claim 5, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 14, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 14.
Claim 6, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 15, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 15.
Claim 7, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 16, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 16.
Claim 18, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 12, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 12.
Claim 19, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 13, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 13.
Claim 20, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 14, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 14.
Claim 21, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 15, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YI WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6022. The examiner can normally be reached 9am - 5pm.
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, Jason Chan can be reached at (571)272-3022. 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.
/YI WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619
Prosecution Insights