DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Preliminary Amendment filed on 06/20/2024.
In the instant application, claims 1-12 are cancelled; Claims 13-32 are newly added; claims 13 and 23 are independent claims; Claims 13-32 have been examined and are pending. This action is made non-final.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings submitted 06/20/2024 are acceptable.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/04/2024 and 03/15/2025 were filed before the mailing date of the first office action on the merits. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17, 20-21, 27 and 30-31 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected based claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 13-16, 18, 22-26, 28 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DASCOLA et al. (“Dascola,” US 2020/0348822), published on 5 November 2020 in view of Louch (US 2015/0346957), published on 3 December 2015.
Regarding claim 13, Dascola teaches an application widget display method, applied to an electronic device wherein the method comprises:
displaying an application widget in a first preset display area (Dascola: ¶0203 and Fig. 6C; electronic device 600 displays widget(s) in widget region 628. Note: the widget region 628 is interpreted as a first preset display area), and displaying a first interface in a second preset display area (Dascola: ¶0203 and Fig. 6C; displays app icons in app region 630. Note: the app region 630 is interpreted as a second preset display area. ¶0213 and Fig. 6J; widget region 628 and app region 630 are displayed on home screen 608), wherein the application widget comprises a first application widget and a second application widget (Dascola: ¶0220 and Fig. 6O; widgets 622F-622H are displayed in widget region 628);
in response to a received first input: entering a first editing state for the application widget (Dascola: ¶0221 and Fig. 6O; upon detecting tap gesture 681, electronic device 600 displays edit user interface 682 and causes widgets and app icons to enter an edit mode, as shown in Fig. 6P),
displaying the application widget in a third preset display area (Dascola: ¶0222 and Fig. 6P; widgets are displayed in edit mode in widget region 628 as shown in Fig. 6P. Note: widget region 628 in edit mode is interpreted as a third preset display area), displaying the first interface in a fourth preset display area (Dascola: ¶0222 and Fig. 6P; application icons are displayed in edit mode in app region 630. Note: app region 630 in edit mode is interpreted as a fourth preset display area),
displaying a first control in a first location of the third preset display area, and displaying a second control in a second location, wherein the first location is at least near the first application widget, the second location is at least near the second application widget, the first control is a control of the first application widget, the second control is a control of the second application widget (Dascola: ¶0222 and Fig. 6P; widgets in edit mode are displayed associated delete icon 673 and/or add icon 675), the third preset display area is at least near the first preset display area, and the fourth preset display area is at least near the second preset display area (Dascola: ¶0222 and Fig. 6P; widgets and app icons displayed in the edit mode, (e.g, third preset area and fourth preset area), are displayed near or at the location of widgets and app icons displayed in the regular mode (e.g. first preset area and second preset area)); and
[in response to a received second input: 1entering a second editing state for the application widget, displaying the application widget in a fifth preset display area, and displaying, in a sixth preset display area, an application widget that is not added to the first preset display area, wherein the fifth preset display area corresponds to the first preset display area, and the sixth preset display area corresponds to the second preset display area].
Dascola does not appear to teach: in response to a received second input: 1entering a second editing state for the application widget, displaying the application widget in a fifth preset display area, and displaying, in a sixth preset display area, an application widget that is not added to the first preset display area, wherein the fifth preset display area corresponds to the first preset display area, and the sixth preset display area corresponds to the second preset display area
However Louch teaches graphical user interface for displaying widgets. Louch further teaches:
in response to a received second input: entering a second editing state for the application widget (Louch: ¶0183 and Fig. 5; the widget display are 500 can include an edit toggle 504, which the user can engage to add or remove widgets in the widget display are 500), displaying the application widget in a fifth preset display area (Louch: ¶0184 and Fig. 6A; an exemplary user interface of a widget display area 600 in a second sate for adding an active widget for display in the widget display area. ¶0185; the widget display area 600 in the second state includes two regions. The first region 600A includes the active widgets displayed similar to how the widget display area appears in the first state and the second region 600B includes a listing of representations of available widgets that can be added to the first region 600A. Note: the first region 600A may be interpreted as the fifth region and the second region 600B may be interpreted as the sixth region), and displaying, in a sixth preset display area, an application widget that is not added to the first preset display area (Louch: ¶0185-0187 and Fig. 6A; the second region 600B includes a listing of representations of available widgets that can be added to the first region 600A. ¶0187 and Fig. 6A; a representation of a widget includes an add widget button 603. When the add widget button 603 is engaged, a new active widget corresponding to the representation of the widget is added to the first region 600A. When the new active widget is added to the first region 600A, the corresponding representation of the widget is removed from the listing of available widgets in the second region 600B), wherein the fifth preset display area corresponds to the first preset display area, and the sixth preset display area corresponds to the second preset display area (Louch: ¶0185-0187 and Figs. 6A-6B; the widget display area 600 in the second state includes two regions. The first region 600A includes the active widgets displayed similar to how the widget display area appears in the first state and the second region 600B includes a listing of representations of available widgets that can be added to the first region 600A. Note: the first region 600A may be interpreted as the fifth region and the second region 600B may be interpreted as the sixth region).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art , before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Louch and Dascola in front of them to include the interface for adding active widgets to the widget display area as disclosed by Louch with the user interfaces for widgets as taught by Dascola to provide a faster and more efficient interfaces that facilitates ease of accessing, adding, removing, and configuring the widget display area and widgets therein as desired by the user (Louch: see abstract).
Regarding claim 14, Dascola and Louch teach the application widget display method of claim 13,
Dascola and Louch further teach: wherein the method further comprises: in response to a third input for a third application widget displayed in the sixth preset display area, displaying the third application widget in the fifth preset display area (Louch: ¶0185-0187 and Fig. 6A; the second region 600B includes a listing of representations of available widgets that can be added to the first region 600A. ¶0187 and Fig. 6A; a representation of a widget includes an add widget button 603. When the add widget button 603 is engaged, a new active widget corresponding to the representation of the widget is added to the first region 600A. When the new active widget is added to the first region 600A, the corresponding representation of the widget is removed from the listing of available widgets in the second region 600B), and adjusting the third application widget in the sixth preset display area to grayscale; or in response to a third input for a third application widget displayed in the sixth preset display area, displaying the third application widget in the fifth preset display area, and deleting the third application widget displayed in the sixth preset display area (Louch: ¶0185-0187 and Fig. 6A; the second region 600B includes a listing of representations of available widgets that can be added to the first region 600A. ¶0187 and Fig. 6A; a representation of a widget includes an add widget button 603. When the add widget button 603 is engaged, a new active widget corresponding to the representation of the widget is added to the first region 600A. When the new active widget is added to the first region 600A, the corresponding representation of the widget is removed from the listing of available widgets in the second region 600B).
Regarding claim 15, Dascola and Louch teach the application widget display method of claim 14,
Dascola and Louch further teach: wherein after the displaying the third application widget in the fifth preset display area, the method further comprises: in response to a received fourth input, exiting from the second editing state (Louch: ¶0192 and Figs. 6A-6B; once the user has added the desired widgets, the user can exit the edit state by engaging the edit toggle 504, which displays ‘Done’ in this state), and displaying, in the first preset display area, the third application widget that has been displayed in the fifth preset display area (Louch: ¶0192; in turn, the widget display area 600 returns to the first state illustrated in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 16, Dascola and Louch teach the application widget display method of claim 13,
Dascola and Louch further teach: wherein control of the first application widget by the first control comprises: editing display content of the first application widget, deleting the first application widget (Dascola: ¶0222 and Fig. 6P; in the edit mode, the user can perform a variety of functions pertaining to the widgets or app icons), or adjusting a size of the first application widget; and control of the second application widget by the second control comprises: editing display content of the second application widget, deleting the second application widget (Dascola: ¶0222 and Fig. 6P; in response to detecting a tap gesture at delete icon 673, the electronic device moves the widget corresponding to the delete icon 673 from the “favorites” category to the “library” category. Louch: ¶0196 and Fig. 6B; when the remove widget button 629 is engaged, the corresponding active widget is removed from the first region 600A), or adjusting a size of the second application widget.
Regarding claim 18, Dascola and Louch teach the application widget display method of claim 16,
Dascola and Louch further teach: wherein the first control is a size control; and the method further comprises: receiving a sixth input for the size control of the first application widget; and adjusting the size of the first application widget in response to the sixth input (Dascola: ¶0214 and Figs. 6J-6K; electronic device 600 detects tap gesture 664 at expand chevron 666 to expand the size of widget 622A).
Regarding claim 22, Dascola and Louch teach the application widget display method of claim 13,
Dascola and Louch further teach: wherein the first interface comprises a desktop wallpaper or an application interface (Dascola: ¶0203 and Fig. 6C; displays app icons in app region 630. Note: the app region 630 is interpreted as a second preset display area. ¶0213 and Fig. 6J; widget region 628 and app region 630 are displayed on home screen 608).
Regarding claims 23-26, 28 and 32, these claims are directed to an electronic devices comprising a processor and a storage device (Dascola: ¶0036 and Fig. 1A; device includes memory and processor) for executing the application widget display method as claimed in claims 13-16, 18 and 22, respectively. Claims 23-26, 28 and 32 are similar scope to claims 13-16, 18 and 22, respectively and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 19 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dascola and Louch as applied to claim 13 and further in view of DALONZO et al. (“Dalonzo,” US 2022/0391056), filed on 19 October 2021.
Regarding claim 19, Dascola and Louch teach the application widget display method of claim 13,
Dascola and Louch do not explicitly teach: wherein the method comprises: displaying application widgets in the fifth preset display area or the sixth preset display area in a stack manner in response to a received seventh input.
Dalonzo teaches user interfaces for managing application widgets; wherein the method comprises: displaying application widgets in the fifth preset display area or the sixth preset display area in a stack manner in response to a received seventh input (Dalonzo: ¶0210; application widgets 608d and 608e are stacks of application widgets that provide information from different applications in response to input).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art , before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Dalonzo, Dascola and Louch in front of them to include the user interfaces for managing application widgets as disclosed by Dalonzo with the user interfaces for widgets as taught by Dascola to provide electronic devices with fastaer, more efficient methods and interfaces for managing application widgets and reduce the cognitive burden on a user and produce a more efficient human-machine interface (Dalonzo: ¶0005).
Regarding claim 29, this claim is directed to an electronic devices comprising a processor and a storage device (Dascola: ¶0036 and Fig. 1A; device includes memory and processor) for executing the application widget display method as claimed in claim 29. Claim 29 is similar scope to claim 19 and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when responding to this action.
It is noted that any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275,277 (CCPA 1968)).
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tam T. Tran whose telephone number is (571) 270-5029. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, William L. Bashore can be reached on 571-272-4088. 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.
/TAM T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights