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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 8, 2024 was filed after the filing date of the application on June 21, 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on June 21, 2024. These drawings are accepted.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0108] of the specification, the last sentence recites, “…In an example show, a user can interact with tool pane 520 to select the annotation tool 524, in order to link an annotation with a select design element 512, to display a value for a particular type of attribute or property…” but should recite, “In an example show, a user can interact with tool panel 520 to select the annotation tool 524, in order to link an annotation with a select design element 512, to display a value for a particular type of attribute or property…”
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 and 3-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MUSCOLINO et al. (US 2023/0237717) in view of Tao (US 2019/0325626).
As to claim 1, MUSCOLINO et al. disclose maintaining a graphic design data set for a graphic design (Figure 1, canvas of graphics design system 100), the graphic design data set structuring the graphic design as a collection of layers (e.g. Figure 2, [0042] further notes layers 208 includes sky layer 216, airplane layer 214, mountains layer 220, and trees layer 224), wherein each layer corresponds to an object, a group of objects or a type of object (e.g. each layer corresponds to one or more objects, e.g. sky, airplane, mountains, and trees), and each layer is associated with a set of attributes (e.g. semantic information, where [0038] notes semantic information can include content type, the location where the content was added the way the user added the content, nearby layers and/or content types, the layer manager encodes the semantic information into the new layer and adds an entry associated with the new layer to layer data); in response to a user interaction with a selected layer of the collection (e.g. when a user adds content to the canvas, e.g. a selected layer), generating an annotation that indicates or is based on a selected attribute of the selected layer ([0042] notes when a user adds content to the canvas, a semantic layer is automatically added to the drawing which includes semantic information about the object that has been added); and logically linking the annotation with the selected attribute (e.g. logically linking semantic layer, which includes semantic information based on sematic relationships and rules), such that an update to the selected layer of the collection automatically updates the annotation (Figures 3-5, [0043]-[0044] notes managing z-order of layers based on semantic information, which can be determined semantically based on knowledge of the content of layers and semantic rules that define how different types of content are related, [0045] notes the z-order of the layers can be updated appropriately to place, e.g. a cloud layer behind the mountain layer, this z-ordering updating is performed as content is created based on the sematic relationship between layers and the placement of the content on the canvas).
MUSCOLINO et al. differ from the invention defined in claim 1 in that MUSCOLINO et al. disclose its graphics design system capable of receiving one or more input selections, but do not disclose its graphics design system, “including a text identifier.”
Tao discloses a computer-implemented method (Figure 4) comprising: maintaining a graphic design data set for a graphic design (e.g. via Figure 1, digital graphic design computing system 100), the graphic design data set structuring the graphic design as a collection of layers ([0046] notes digital graphic design computing system 100 includes processing hardware to execute a digital design application 102, the digital design application 102 includes program instructions that, when executed, can provide a variety of interfaces, features, and functions to users via a user device 126, where examples of these program instructions include program instructions for overlaying different graphics in a multilayer design), each layer is associated with a set of attributes ([0052] notes a brand attribute can specify one or more constraints on visual characteristics of output branded design content 130 generated by the design engine 108, which may include a font attribute 116 [0053], a color attribute 118 [0054], [0055], a logo attribute 122 [0056], [0057], a graphical attribute 120 [0058], [0059] and/or a personality attribute 124, [0060], [0061]), including a text identifier ([0097] notes brand engine 104 can extract one or more text elements that can be used as input text in a content creation process performed by the design engine, e.g. textual analysis, where step 406, [0099] further notes identifying text); in response to a user interaction (step 404, [0097] notes obtaining one or more input graphics and one or more text elements responsive to input received via the control elements of the content creation interface), generating an annotation that indicates or is based on a selected attribute (step 412, [0105] notes generating output branded design content 130 based on a combination of the permissible text features of the input text, the permissible visual features of the input graphic, and the identified additional elements (e.g. images or other graphics, logo content, etc.) for inclusion in the output branded design content, where steps 406, 408, and 410, [0099]-[0104], [0106] notes permissible text and/or visual features is based on each of the brand attributes notes above); and logically linking the annotation with the selected attribute ([0052] notes a brand attribute can specify one or more constraints on visual characteristics of output branded design content 130 generated by the design engine 108, where a constraint that is specified by or otherwise indicated by a brand attribute indicates which visual characteristics are required for the output branded design content 130 (e.g. a set of colors that should always be included somewhere in the output branded design content 130), and/or a constraint that is specified by or otherwise indicated by a brand attribute indicates which visual characteristics are prohibited for the output branded design content 130 (e.g., a set of colors that should never be included anywhere in the output branded design content 130)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify MUSCOLINO et al.’s graphics design system and method with Tao’s graphics design system and method of including a text identifier to dynamically and automatically generate content, e.g. graphics and/or text, thus enhancing the functionality of the system (see [0004] of Tao).
As to claim 3, MUSCOLINO et al. modified with Tao disclose the annotation corresponds to an alphanumeric entry that includes or corresponds to an attribute value (modified with Tao, e.g. as noted above, the generated output brand design content 130 based on user input, e.g. graphics and text).
As to claim 4, MUSCOLINO et al. modified with Tao disclose logically linking the annotation with the selected attribute includes, in response to a user providing input to update the graphic design to change the selected attribute, automatically updating the annotation to reflect the change to the selected attribute (MUSCOLINO, e.g. as noted in claim 1, generating a sematic layer and further automatically updating in response to when a user adds content to the canvas; modified with Tao, e.g. as noted in claim 1, the generated output brand design content 130 based on user input, e.g. graphics and text).
As to claim 5, MUSCOLINO et al. modified with Tao disclose the annotation includes a numeric value corresponding to the selected attribute, and in response to the selected attribute being changed, the numeric value also changes to coincide with the change in the selected attribute (modified with Tao, e.g. as noted in claim 1, the generated output brand design content 130 may be graphics or text and based on the brand attributes, where changes may occur upon receiving additional input at step 404).
As to claim 6, MUSCOLINO et al. modified with Tao disclose the selected attribute corresponds to one or more of a font size or type, a spacing or padding value or dimension, or other attribute (modified with Tao, [0053] notes brand attribute is a font attribute 116 which includes a font type size, style, capitalization setting, color of text, a priority for the font, etc.).
As to claim 7, MUSCOLINO et al. modified with Tao disclose the selected attribute includes a measurement (modified with Tao, e.g. as noted in claim 1, [0052] notes a brand attribute can specify one or more constraints on visual characteristics of output branded design content 130 generated by the design engine 108, which may include a font attribute 116 [0053], a color attribute 118 [0054], [0055], a logo attribute 122 [0056], [0057], a graphical attribute 120 [0058], [0059] and/or a personality attribute 124, [0060], [0061], where constraints may be considered a measurement).
Claim(s) 2 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MUSCOLINO et al. (US 2023/0237717) in view of Tao (US 2019/0325626) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Aviles et al. (US 11,481,545).
As to claim 2, MUSCOLINO et al. modified with Tao do not disclose, but Aviles et al. disclose providing multiple rendering modes to view the graphic design, the multiple modes including a design mode and a developer mode (e.g. review mode and “non-review” mode), wherein in the developer mode, all annotations created for the graphic design are concurrently viewable (e.g. in “non-review” mode all annotations are visible)(column 5, lines 18-25 notes annotations can be hidden from a user interface in order to prevent a user from inadvertently interacting with and/or editing any annotations in the course of the user’s activity with respect to a document the user is accessing via word processing module 115, where comment annotations can be hidden by toggling off a review mode of word processing module 115, which may disable other features from the user interface, such as markup (e.g., text insertion and strikethrough)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify MUSCOLINO et al. modified with Tao’s graphics design system and method with Aviles et al.’s method of toggling annotations based on a mode to prevent a user from inadvertently interacting with and/or editing any annotation, thus further enhancing the functionality of the system (see column 5, lines 18-25 of Aviles et al.).
As to claim 8, MUSCOLINO et al. modified with Tao do not disclose, but Aviles et al. disclose enabling the user to toggle each annotation of the graphic design between visible and invisible, and filter annotations by type or content (column 5, lines 18-25 notes annotations can be hidden from a user interface in order to prevent a user from inadvertently interacting with and/or editing any annotations in the course of the user's activity with respect to a document the user is accessing via word processing module 115, where comment annotations can be hidden by toggling off a review mode of word processing module 115, which may disable other features from the user interface, such as markup (e.g., text insertion and strikethrough)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify MUSCOLINO et al. modified with Tao’s graphics design system and method with Aviles et al.’s method of toggling annotations based on a mode to prevent a user from inadvertently interacting with and/or editing any annotation, thus further enhancing the functionality of the system (see column 5, lines 18-25 of Aviles et al.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding independent claims 9 and 17, the prior art of record teaches similar features and/or limitations as claimed in independent claim 1 as outlined above. However, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest, singly or combined, the limitations of independent claims 9 and 17 as recited as a whole. Dependent claims 10-16 are indicated allowable for depe4nding upon indicated allowable claim 9. Dependent claims 18-20 are indicated allowable for depe4nding upon indicated allowable claim 17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhao et al. (US 10,649,618) disclose a system and method for creating a visual representation of data, the method includes receiving a user input to be represented by a glyph, generating, by a neural network, the glyph based on a vector extracted based on the received user input, linking an aspect of the generated glyph with an attribute of the data to be visually represented; and displaying the visual representation of the data created using the generated glyph to represent that linked aspect of the data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACINTA M CRAWFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-1539. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30a.m. to 4:30p.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, King Y. Poon can be reached at (571)272-7440. 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.
/JACINTA M CRAWFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2617
Prosecution Insights