CTNF 18/729,158 CTNF 72554 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. Claims 5-7 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Per claim 5, it is not clear if some of the claim limitations are joined as “and” or “or”. The claim has one conjunction joining two sets of phrases. As below, the upper set (the first set of parenthesis-added for illustration) of the phrases is joined by the “and/or” conjunction to the bottom set (the second set of parentheses). Since the phrases in each set has no conjunction connecting each other to show whether they are all required, i.e., “and”, or alternately required, i.e., “or”, it is impossible to understand the claimed scope. the first comment information in the content interface is displayed in a first predetermined format, the first comment information and at least one of the following are displayed in the first predetermined format: ( a publisher of the comment information, publication time of the comment information, a like identification of the comment information, the number of likes of the comment information, a reply identification of the comment information, the number of replies of the comment information, an share identification of the comment information, the number of shares of the comment information, a reply arca ) and/or , the first comment information in the discussion interface is displayed in a second predetermined format, the first comment information and at least one of the following are displayed in the second predetermined format: (a publisher of the comment information, publication time of the comment information, a like identification of the comment information, the number of likes of the comment information, a reply identification of the comment information, the number of replies of the comment information, a share identification of the comment information, the number of shares of the comment information, a reply area, quoted first content, an identification of the first document) Per claim 7, the limitation “if the content interface of the first document is displayed in full screen, the content interface and the discussion interface are in different display interfaces;” is confusing and does not make sense. The statement is contracting itself, since if the “content interface” takes up the full screen, there would not be any screen space left to display anything else, like the discussion interface. Claim 6 depends on claim 5 and is rejected for incorporating the deficiencies of claim 5. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-6, 8-13 and 18-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al., USPAT 2022/0335206 A1 in view of the Examiner’s Official Notice . Per independent claim 1, Zhang et al. teaches a method of information processing, comprising: in response to a first operation event on a first content in a content interface of a first document, creating first comment information, and publishing the first comment information to a discussion interface (See FIG.4 and Para [0062] Comment 415 is associated with text portion 410” shows creating the comment and then publishing the comment on the right frame, the discussion interface); wherein the content interface and the discussion interface are different interfaces and the discussion interface is configured to display information published by a current user and an associated user of the current user. (See FIG 4. Shows the display area 450 divided into two frames – the left representing the “content interface” and the right representing the “discussion interface.” The right interface showing the discussion; Paragraph [0002], “editors who made the comment, other collaborators… and author” show the multiple users being able to publish the comments.). However, Zhang et al. does not explicitly show the feature of “creating first comment information in the content interface”. Nevertheless, Zhang et al. teaches the pertinent feature in FIG.6, where the comment generating window, 615 is not confined to the discussion interface on the right. Rather, it sits on the border of the content interface and the discussion interface. Regarding the feature, Zhang et al. further provides the important teaching in Para [0064] that the invention “may display the … comment 615 within the margins of the displayed preview document 605.” Since 605 is the total display window screen including both the content interface and the discussion interface, Zhang et al. explicitly teaches that the comment generating window 615 can be placed anywhere within the display, including in the content interface. Given that the Examiner takes an Official Notice that it was well known technique for the windows, such as 615, to be moved into position to be less intrusive and less overlapping positions by user. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the well-known windows technique to have moved the comment window 615 into the content interface during operation, as needed, since the example of FIG.6 alone showed that it was very possible for the content interface to have less cluttered areas to position the comment entering windows to optimize useable space. Per claim 2, Zhang et al. teaches the method of claim 1, that the first comment information in the content interface is kept in synchronization with the first comment information in the discussion interface (Para [0099] where the version of the document, content ID, the user ID are all kept to synchronize the comment to the content portion of the document.) Per claim 3, Zhang et al. teaches the feature of reply information for the first comment information (See FIG4, item 430 “Reply …” function.) Per claim 4, Zhang et al. further teaches, in response to a triggering operation on a first control associated with the first comment information in the content interface, jumping to the first comment information in the discussion interface; and/or, in response to a triggering operation on a second control associated with the first comment information in the discussion interface, jumping to the first comment information in the content interface (Para [0067] where the user highlights the text 440 triggering the comments windows to open). Per claim 5, given the 112, Second Paragraph, issues pointed out above, Zhang et al. teaches the first comment information in the content interface is displayed in a first predetermined format, the first comment information and at least one of the following are displayed in the first predetermined format: a publisher of the comment information (FIG.4 shows the “User A” the publisher of the comment and the picture icon). To help facilitate a compact prosecution even though not currently required to meet the claimed language, the examiner also provides for reference the article Ellis, “How to Use Reddit, Learn the basics of how to post on Reddit and more”, May 23, 2019 that shows many of the claimed features were well known in the art of comment posting. Per claim 6, Zhang et al. teaches The method of claim 5, wherein after the identification of the first document is triggered, one of the following is performed: opening the first document; opening the first document and locating to the first content; opening the first document, locating to the first content and highlighting the first content (Para [0074] shows synchronizing and opening a new version of the document and it’s corresponding comments; [00670 shows both the system and user highlighting the text portions.) Per claim 8, Zhang et al. teaches wherein in response to the first operation event on the first content in the content interface of the first document, creating the first comment information of the first content in the content interface comprises: in response to a first operation on the first content, displaying a comment publishing interface; and in response to a second operation, creating the first comment information of the first content based on information input to the comment publishing interface (Para [0062] and [0067], that the highlighting the text portion opens the comment publishing interface and the “replay” or a second operation can be used to publish comments based on the first comments.) Per claim 9, which depends on claim 8, Zhang et al further teaches the comment publishing interface comprises at least one of: a quotation area, a text area and a picture area the quotation area is configured to display part or all of the first content; the text area is configured to display a text input to the comment publishing interface; and the picture area is configured to display a picture input to the comment publishing interface (FIG.4, item 425 shows the text area).) Per claim 10, Zhang et al. discloses wherein the method further comprises performing at least one of the following after creating the first comment information of the first content in the content interface: displaying a first identification at an associated position of the first content; and displaying the first content in a first style which is different from a second style if the first content does not have associated comment information (Para [0067] and FIG.4, item 440, which is displayed in the highlights, i.e., a different style). Per claim 11, Zhang et al. discloses in response to a third operation on the first content, displaying a comment display interface on a side of the first content, the first comment information being displayed on the comment display interface (FIG. 4 shows that the first content on the right side and the side of the first content is the comment display interface). Per claim 12, Zhang et al. teaches method of claim 11, wherein at least one of the following is satisfied: if the comment display interface is displayed, an input identification is focused on a reply area in the comment display interface; a third control is displayed on the comment display interface, the third control is configured to switch comment information displayed on the comment display interface after being triggered, and the comment information displayed on the comment display interface after being switched is comment information in the first document (FIG.4 and Para [0067] shows “reply” button being visible, i.e., focused). Per claim 13, Zhang et al. teaches the method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the following is satisfied: a fourth control is displayed on a display interface, and the discussion interface is displayed after the fourth control is triggered; an information publishing area is displayed on the discussion interface, and the information publishing area is configured to publish information; a fifth control is displayed in the discussion interface, the fifth control is configured to display an information publishing interface after being triggered, and the information publishing interface is configured to publish information on the discussion interface; the discussion interface comprises a first sub-interface and a second sub-interface, the first sub-interface is configured to display all information published on the discussion interface, and the second sub-interface is configured to display information associated with the current user in the discussion interface (FIG.4 shows that the information publishing area is displayed on the discussion interface, and the information publishing area is configured to publish information). Claims 18-22 is for a general-purpose computing apparatus performing the method of claims 1-5, respectively, and are similarly rejected. Claim 23 is for a computer readable medium comprising the instructions for executing the method of claim 1, and is similarly rejected . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al., USPAT 2022/0335206 A1 in view of the Examiner’s Official Notice, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Haynes, II et al., USPAT 2012/0036423 A1 . Per dependent claim 7, which depends on claim 1, Zhang et al in view of Examiner’s Official Notice teaches the limitation of claim 1 and the rejection being incorporated herein, but does not explicitly teach the feature that if the content interface of the first document is not displayed in full screen and the content-discussion interface of the first document is not displayed in full screen, the content interface and the discussion interface are in different tab pages, the tab pages are pages independent from each other. Regarding the missing feature Haynes, II et al. that also teaches the document comment system, teaches the use of “tab” technology to organize and display multiple windows of contents by using the tabs (see FIG.14, for example). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated Haynes, II et al.’s tab technology into the invention of Zhang et al and the Examiner’s Official Notice, since it would have more content to be effectively organized and displayed in a given size of display screen . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al., USPAT 2022/0335206 A1 in view of the Examiner’s Official Notice, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Thall et al., USPAT 2021/0136025 A1 . Per dependent claim 14, Zhang et al. in view of Examiner’s Official Notice teaches the limitations of claim 1 and the rejection is incorporated herein. However, they do not show that the first comment information in the discussion interface has an expanded state and an abridged state; if the first comment information is in the abridged state, abridged information and a first reply area of the first comment information is displayed; and if the comment information is in the expanded state, all information and a second reply area of the first comment information are displayed. Regarding the missing feature, Thall et al., in the mobile device screen adaptation of the similar commenting system shows both the abridged and the expanded state (see FIG.9 and FIG.10. Fig 9 can be interpreted as abridged but the interpretation can be swapped). Furthermore, FIG.9 and FIG.10 show the different reply areas. Given that, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Thall et al.’s teaching into that of Zhang et al. and Examiner’s Official Notice, since Thall et al.’s technology would have helped Zhang et al. to expand the user devices to include the portable display devices that can also be optimized by the disclosed screen display technology . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US-20200007487-A1 2020-01-02 Chao; Ed G06F40/169 1/1 US-20190391959-A1 2019-12-26 Niu; Boyang G06F16/176 1/1 US-20210027007-A1 2021-01-28 PENG; Cheng G06F40/106 1/1 US-10546048-B2 2020-01-28 Behr; Jay Allan G06F40/169 1/1 Ellis, “How to Use Reddit, Learn the basics of how to post on Reddit and more”, May 23, 2019 (https://zappier.com/blog/ how-to-use-reddit/). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Stephen Hong whose telephone number 571-272-4124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 10AM-6PM. 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, a supervisor, William 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. /STEPHEN S HONG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/729,158 Page 2 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/729,158 Page 3 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/729,158 Page 4 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/729,158 Page 5 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/729,158 Page 6 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/729,158 Page 7 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/729,158 Page 8 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/729,158 Page 9 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/729,158 Page 10 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/729,158 Page 11 Art Unit: 2178
Prosecution Insights