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 .
Applicant’s Response
In Applicant’s Response dated 7/13/26, the Applicant amended Claim 1, 8, 10, 11, 16, 18, and argued Claims previously presented in the Office Action dated 4/10/26. Claims 1-6, 8-16 and 18-20 are pending examination.
In light of the Applicant’s amendments and remarks, the objection against the Specification and the 35 USC 101 rejections have been withdrawn.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/18/26 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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)(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.
Claims 1-6, 8-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yushkina et al., United States Patent Publication 20230047383 (hereinafter “Yushkina”).
Claim 1:
Yushkina discloses:
An electronic device comprising:
memory which stores instructions (see paragraph [0015]). Yushkina teaches memory storing instructions; and
at least one processor (see paragraph [0015]). Yushkina teaches a processor,
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to:
detect an execution event of an application which supports a web-based interface (see paragraph [0066]). Yushkina teaches detecting a copy event in the application on a web-based interface;
obtain, from the memory, history information on a plurality of web pages accessed through the application, wherein the history information includes information on a first tab corresponding to a first web page and information on a second tab corresponding to a second web page and information on at least one third tab corresponding to at least one third web page (see paragraphs [0064], [0065] and [0067]). Yushkina teaches obtaining history information on a plurality of web pages accessed through the web application. The history information is related is all webpages that have been accessed;
identify whether the first tab is grouped with at least one third tab and whether the second tab is grouped with at least one third tab, based on the history information (see paragraph [0065]). Yushkina teaches determining if a web page is put in a tab group based on history information and timestamps.
determine that the first tab is to be excluded from a graphic user interface of the application based on identifying that the first tab is not grouped with the at least one third tab (see paragraph [0097]). Yushkina teaches determine that the first tab is to be excluded based on a score being below a threshold and may be triggered to be hidden ; and
determine that the second tab is to be included in the graphic user interface of the application based on identifying that the second tab is grouped with the at least one third tab (see paragraph [0097]). Yushkina teaches if the tab score is above the threshold, then the tab is included in the group.
display the graphic user interface in which the second tab is included and the first tab is excluded (see paragraph [0097]). Yushkina teaches displays the active tab and hiding the other tab.
wherein the excluding the first tab from the graphic interface causes data corresponding to the first tab in the memory of the electronic device to be removed when the application is executed (see paragraph [0180] and [0181]). Yushkina teaches excluding data from a tab cluster and also receiving a request to remove data from the memory of the browser history.
Claim 2:
Yushkina discloses:
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to identify a first entry point of the first web page corresponding to the first tab, wherein the first entry point indicates an access path for a plurality of web pages including the first web page (see paragraph [0105]). Yushkina teaches identifying a first entry point of the first web page associated the first web page that gives access to a plurality of pages in the history.
Claim 3:
Yushkina discloses:
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to identify first Uniform Resource Location (URL) information of the first web page and second URL information of the second web page, based on identifying that the first entry point and a second entry point of the second web page corresponding to the second tab are not present (see paragraphs [0065], [0083] and [0105]). Yushkina teaches identifying the URL information of the first and second web pages based on the save entry points.
Claim 4:
Yushkina discloses:
identify a first timing of accessing the first web page and a second timing of accessing the second web page, based on identifying that the first URL information and the second URL information are identical (see paragraph [0035]-[0039]). Yushkina teaches the identifying timing of the first web page and a second web page; and
determine the first tab as a target to be excluded from the graphic user interface,
based on identifying that the first timing precedes the second timing (see paragraph [0054]). Yushkina teaches determining the first tab is excluded based on the tab is not the most recent.
Claim 5:
Yushkina discloses:
identify a first timing of accessing the first web page and a second timing of accessing the second web page, based on identifying that the first entry point and a second entry point of the second web page corresponding to the second tab are identical (see paragraphs [0048], [0054] and [0151]). Yushkina teaches identifying timing information to a first and second webpage based on the timestamps being similar; and
determine the first tab as a target to be excluded from the graphic user interface, based on identifying that the first timing precedes the second timing (see paragraph [0054]). Yushkina teaches determining the first tab is excluded based on the tab is not the most recent.
Claim 6:
Yushkina discloses:
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to determine the first tab as a target to be excluded from the graphic user interface, based on identifying that the first tab is in a first state of not being locked (see paragraph [0063] and [0097]). Yushkina teaches determining if the page is private and if not, exclude the tab from the GUI for reasons such as recency.
Claim 8:
Yushkina discloses:
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to identify the first entry point, based on identifying that the first tab is in a third state of grouped with the at least one third tab (see paragraph [0105] and [0142]). Yushkina teaches determining the entry point of grouped tabs to continue browsing or searching.
Claim 9:
Yushkina discloses:
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to identify first URL information of the first web page and third URL information of at least one third web page, based on identifying that the first entry point and a third entry point of the at least one third web page corresponding to the at least one third tab are not present (see paragraph [0091] and [0105]). Yushkina teaches identifying URL based on the entry point of grouped webpages based on matching the pages with keywords and entry points.
Claim 10:
Yushkina discloses:
identify a first timing of accessing the first web page and a third timing of accessing the at least one third web page, based on identifying that the first URL information and the third URL information are identical (see paragraphs [0048], [0054] and [0151]). Yushkina teaches identifying timing information to a first and second webpage based on the timestamps being similar; and
determine the first tab as a target to be excluded from the graphic user interface, based on identifying that the first timing precedes the third timing (see paragraph [0054]). Yushkina teaches determining the first tab is excluded based on the tab is not the most recent.
Claims 11-16, 18-20:
Although Claims 11-16, 18-20 are method claims, they are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as the device of Claims 1-6, 8-10, respectively.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/13/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections Under 35 USC 101
Applicant argues The recited computer components are integral to the claimed application-execution tab-management and memory-management operation.
Accordingly, claims 1 and 11, and pending dependent claims 2-6, 8-10, 12-16,
and 18-20, are patent eligible. Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the rejection
under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
The Examiner agrees and withdraws the 35 USC 101 rejections.
Claim Rejections Under 35 USC 102
Applicant argues First, Yushkina does not disclose the claimed "detect[ing] an execution event of an application." The Office Action appears to rely on Yushkina I [0066], but that paragraph describes context-based annotations or metadata indicating how a user navigated a webpage, including monitoring explicit copy operations such as Ctrl-C or other inputs that trigger a copy operation, share operations, scrolling, or resizing.
The Examiner disagrees.
Yushkina teaches detecting a copy event in the application on a web-based interface (see paragraph [0066]). The cited paragraph recites the web browser may detect a copy action is invoked in a URL toolbar, in a document within the browser, in a search field, and the like. The claim recites “detecting an execution event of an application” and Yushkina detects a copy action (i.e. execution event). If the Applicant wants a specific execution event to be detected, the Examiner suggests amending the claim to include the specific execution event. Thus, Yushkina teaches the argued limitation.
Applicant argues Second, Yushkina does not disclose identifying, based on history information, whether a first tab is grouped with at least one third tab and whether a second tab is grouped with the at least one third tab, determining that the first tab is to be excluded based on identifying that the first tab is not grouped with the at least one third tab, and determining that the second tab is to be included based on identifying that the second tab is grouped with the at least one third tab.
The Examiner disagrees.
Yushkina teaches obtaining history information on a plurality of web pages accessed through the web application. The history information is related is all webpages that have been accessed (see paragraphs [0064], [0065] and [0067]). Yushkina recites “As used herein, history clusters may include search history clusters, history clusters, or other clustering of browser data pertaining to user interaction in the web browser. The context-based annotations may be obtained using the browser history, and ML models that cluster the browser history according to topic, subtopic, scores, source event, webpage access timestamps, or other obtained metadata, and/or any combination of the above.” The tabs are grouped based on context. The tabs are excluded based on the groupings and timestamps. Yushkina teaches determining that the first tab is to be excluded based on a score being below a threshold and may be triggered to be hidden (see paragraph [0097]). Thus, Yushkina teaches the argued limitation.
Applicant argues Yushkina does not disclose excluding the claimed "first tab" from the claimed graphic user interface. The Office Action relies principally on Yushkina [0097], but that paragraph describes ranking webpage visits within a history cluster and
hiding particular related webpage visits based on a score or ranking to reduce clutter in a history cluster listing.
The Examiner disagrees.
Yushkina teaches excluding data from a tab cluster and also receiving a request to remove data from the memory of the browser history (see paragraph [0180] and [0181]). Yushkina provides an advantage of removing entire search concepts/journeys from the search history without sifting through chronological records that are not indicated according to topic. The deletion may be to remove the content from the search journey so that the content does not show up on a history cluster listing in future web sessions. Thus, Yushkina teaches the functionality of removing data from memory and teaches the argued limitation.
Applicant argues Yushkina [0060] states that the web browser may store browser tabs/tab groups data, browser history, history clusters, and metadata. Yushkina [0065] states that tab group status may be used as metadata. At most, these disclosures show that Yushkina may collect or store tab-related metadata for browser-history clustering. They do not disclose the claimed arrangement in which, upon detecting an application execution event, history information is used to identify whether first and second tabs are grouped with at least one third tab, determine that a not-grouped first tab is excluded from the application graphic user interface, determine that a grouped second tab is included in the application graphic user interface, display the graphic user interface with the second tab included and the first tab excluded, and cause data corresponding to the first tab in memory to be removed when the application is executed by excluding the first tab from the graphic user interface.
The Examiner disagrees.
See the above response to arguments regarding these individual arguments.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIONNA M BURKE whose telephone number is (571)270-7259. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4p.
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, Stephen Hong can be reached at (571)272-4124. 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.
/TIONNA M BURKE/Examiner, Art Unit 2178 9/22/26
/STEPHEN S HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2178
