DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is responsive to the Application filed on 07/10/2024, said application claims a priority date of 09/16/2022.
Claims 1-20 are pending in the case.
Claims 1, 10 and 19 are independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 6 and 15:
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the shared memory" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 15 is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 10 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhao et al. (CN 112817595 A, published 05/18/2021, hereinafter “Zhao”).
NOTE: Examiner will be citing from the attached English translation of the cited foreign reference.
Independent Claims 1, 10 and 19:
Zhao discloses an electronic device, comprising:
a processor, being suitable to implement one or more instructions; and
a [non-transitory] computer-readable storage medium, having one or more instructions stored therein, the one or more instructions being suitable to be executed by the processor, to cause the electronic device to perform a page rendering method including (Zhao: page 12 last three paragraphs and page 13 first two paragraphs.):
parsing a target page to obtain a corresponding page configuration tree (“acquiring a virtual document object model tree to be rendered,” Zhao: page 13. “The real document object model tree treats the document as a tree structure, with each node of the real document object model tree representing an HTML tag or text item within a tag…And the virtual document object model tree adopts the JS object to simulate the nodes of the real document object model tree.”, Zhao: page 5.);
constructing a layout node tree of the target page using the page configuration tree (“converting the virtual document object model tree into a rendering tree of the Flutter; creating a layout view tree corresponding to a preset layout library according to the rendering tree,” Zhao: page 13.);
obtaining layout information of the target page by traversing nodes in the layout node tree of the target page using a cross-platform layout system (“and acquiring layout parameters of the corresponding layout view tree through the preset layout library…acquiring layout parameters of each rendering object in a layout view tree through a preset layout library,” Zhao: page 13. “Yoga layout library is selected as the preset layout library, and the Yoga layout library is a cross-platform layout library of the open source of the Facebook and supports the CSS style,” Zhao: page 6.);
generating a painting instruction based on the page layout information and a render object tree; and painting the target page in response to the painting instruction ((“(2) packaging each Flutter component into rendering objects corresponding to a preset layout library to obtain a plurality of rendering objects; (3) and creating a rendering tree corresponding to the virtual document object model tree according to the plurality of rendering objects,” Zhao: page 6. “As described above, after obtaining the layout parameters of the rendering tree, the Flutter draws the rendering tree according to the layout parameters, so as to obtain the corresponding interface of the virtual document object model tree, and thus, the Flutter is used to complete the rendering of the virtual document object model tree,” Zhao: page 6.).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 5 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao in view of Lin (CN 112286576 A, published 01/29/2021, hereinafter “Lin”).
NOTE: Examiner will be citing from the attached English translation of the cited foreign reference.
Claims 5 and 14:
The rejection of claims 1 and 10 are incorporated. Zhao further teaches a device and method wherein:
wherein the obtaining layout information of the target page comprises:
invoking the cross-platform layout system through a layout rendering framework (“creating a layout view tree corresponding to a preset layout library according to the rendering tree, and acquiring layout parameters of the corresponding layout view tree through the preset layout library,” Zhao: page 13. “For example, in the embodiment of the present application, a Yoga layout library is selected as the preset layout library, and the Yoga layout library is a cross-platform layout library of the open source of the Facebook and supports the CSS style,” Zhao: page 7.);
traversing the layout node tree through the cross-platform layout system by applying a layout algorithm to each node in the layout node tree, to obtain layout information of the node, the layout information comprising at least offset information between the node and a parent node of the node (“acquiring layout parameters of each rendering object in a layout view tree through a preset layout library,” Zhao: page 13. “As described above, in the present application, when a rendering tree is created, rendering objects conforming to the specification of the preset layout library are packaged, in the present application, for each rendering object, a layout function of the rendering object is called, the preset layout library is called through the layout function to calculate the layout parameters of the rendering object, and the layout parameters are returned to the rendering object,” Zhao: page 8. “The parent collects the sizes of all the child levels and then uses this information to correctly locate each child level in its own layout system. This stage is responsible for determining the layout parameters, including size and location, of each node,” Zhao pages 9 and 10.);
incorporating the size information of the node into the layout information of the node (“the preset layout library is called through the layout function to calculate the layout parameters of the rendering object, and the layout parameters are returned to the rendering object,” Zhao: page 8. “This stage is responsible for determining the layout parameters, including size and location, of each node,” Zhao page 10.); and
determining layout information of the nodes in the layout node tree as the layout information of the target page (“the layout parameters corresponding to the layout view tree are used as the layout parameters of the rendering tree,” Zhao: page 6.).
Zhao does not appear to expressly teach a device and method wherein when layout information of a node does not comprise size information of the node, performing measurement processing on the node to obtain the size information of the node.
However, Lin teaches a device and method wherein when layout information of a node does not comprise size information of the node, performing measurement processing on the node to obtain the size information of the node (“When the node tree is generated, a yoga node is generated for each node, and the yoga node can include attribute information of the node. After the client calls the measurement function (measure) of the outermost layer to give the width and height of the outermost periphery, the size and layout position of each node of the node tree can be calculated using the yoga layout engine. Based on this, the client can obtain the size and layout position of each node using the yoga layout engine. In this embodiment, after the client acquires the size of the display area and the layout position of the text or the picture in the above manner, rendering can be achieved only by drawing at the coordinate point corresponding to the canvas,” Lin: page 7.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device and method of Zhao wherein when layout information of a node does not comprise size information of the node, performing measurement processing on the node to obtain the size information of the node, as taught by Lin.
One would be motivated to make such a combination to ensure that size information is obtainable even for the subset of nodes (root/outermost node) whose size the layout algorithm cannot itself derive from parent constraints or existing rules.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 6-9, 11-13, 15-18 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular columns and line and/or paragraph numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
The examiner requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line number(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application.
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicants’ disclosure.
You et al., US 2020/0050652 A1 (the page is parsed to obtain component data and a component node tree is created based on a page template and the component data, claim 1, ¶ [0036], [0048])
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3633. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 5:30 am - 2:30 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, 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.
/DANIEL RODRIGUEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178
Prosecution Insights