DETAILED ACTION
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Double Patenting
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,056,344.
Instant Application
Patetnt No 12,056,344
Claim 1
A method, comprising:
- receiving, at a system process of an electronic device from an application running on the electronic device, information corresponding to one or more user interface windows of a user interface managed by the application;
-receiving, by the system process, a user input at a location associated with a first user interface window managed by the application; and
-redirecting, by the system process and based on the information, the user input at the location associated with the first -user interface window to a second user interface window managed by the application
Claim 1
A method, comprising:
- receiving, at a system process of an electronic device from an application running on the electronic device, a definition of a control style for a first user interface window of a user interface (UI) managed by the application;
-receiving, by the system process while the first user interface window and a second user interface window managed by the application are displayed by the electronic device, a user input at a location associated with the second UI window; and
-redirecting, by the system process and based on the definition of the control style, the user input at the location associated with the second UI window to the first UI window.
Claims 2-20
Claims 2-20
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Claims 1-20 of Patent No. 12,056,344 contains every element of claims 1-20 of the instant application and thus anticipated the claims of the instant application. Claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the earlier patent claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting. A later patent/application claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier claim if the later claim is anticipated by the earlier claim.
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, 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) 1-2, 5-8, 11-12, and 15- 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. (“Kang”, Pub. No. US 2014/0285422) and Stecher (Pub. No. 2013/0104065).
Per claim 1 method, comprising:
receiving, at a system process of an electronic device from an at least one application running on the electronic device, information corresponding to one or more user interface windows of a user interface managed by the at least one application ([0047]… A memory 130 may include a program memory and an information memory. The program memory may store programs that control general operations of the device and programs that control display of partial information of the first screen hidden by the second screen so that the partial information is viewable on the first screen, by changing an attribute (e.g., a position, a size, a transparency, or the like) of the second screen. The information memory temporarily stores information generated during execution of the programs. [0047]…A controller 110 provides overall control to the device. [0049]… while information based on at least one application is being displayed separately on the first and second screens, upon detecting a specific gesture on the second screen, the controller 110 controls display of partial information of the first screen hidden by the second screen by changing an attribute of the second screen, so that the partial information is viewable on the first screen);
receiving, by the system process, a user input at a location associated with a first user interface window managed by the at least one application ([0049]… while information based on at least one application is being displayed separately on the first and second screens, upon detecting a specific gesture on the second screen, the controller 110 controls display of partial information of the first screen hidden by the second screen by changing an attribute of the second screen, so that the partial information is viewable on the first screen. [0051]…The specific gesture detected on the second screen may be at least one of a hovering gesture, a gesture of inputting a specific key in the device, a motion gesture of the device, a touch, a user's motion detected by infrared rays, a user's eye movement, and the like. The hovering gesture is to hold a touch pen above a screen in a non-contact manner by a gap for a certain period of time. Herein, a button of the touch pen may be kept pressed for a certain period of time. Accordingly, when the user makes a hovering gesture with the touch pen to change an attribute of the second screen, the user may or may not press the button of the touch pen according to the user's presetting.); and
redirecting, by the system process and based on the information, the user input at the location associated with the first -user interface window to a second user interface window managed by the application ([0055]…While the partial information hidden by the second screen is being displayed on the first screen by moving the second screen out of the currently displayed area, upon detecting an input gesture or an information movement gesture on the first screen or if no gesture is detected on the first screen for a certain period of time, the controller 110 may determine that the user has finished viewing the partial information of the first screen. Alternatively or additionally, when confirming that the user has turned his or her gaze toward a different position by eye tracking, the controller 110 may determine that the user has finished viewing the partial information of the first screen. [0059]…While the partial information of the first screen hidden by the second screen is shown through the second screen by increasing the transparency of the second screen, upon detecting an input gesture or an information movement gesture on the first screen or if no gesture is detected on the first screen for a certain period of time, the controller 110 may determine that the user has finished viewing the partial information of the first screen. Alternatively or additionally, when confirming that the user has turned his or her gaze toward a different position by eye tracking, the controller 110 may determine that the user has finished viewing the partial information of the first screen. Accordingly, Kang teaches redirecting of the user input by allowing viewing an obscured screen/window and awaiting user input)
Kang fairly suggests or teaches as cited above, an application running on the electronic device and information corresponding to one or more user interface windows of a user interface managed by the application (([0047]… The information memory temporarily stores information generated during execution of the programs. [0047]…A controller 110 provides overall control to the device. [0049]… information based on at least one application is being displayed separately on the first and second screens. ), and redirecting… the user input at the location associated with the first -user interface window to a second user interface window managed by the application by allowing viewing an obscured screen/window and awaiting user input as shown in [0055] and [0059].
Kang does not specifically teach one or more windows/screens manage by an application.
However, Stecher clearly teaches one or more windows/screens manage by an application ([0010]…In FIG. 1, at stage "A," a first window 101 is positioned over a second window 102 in a user interface (e.g., on a desktop of an operating system application). The first window 101 and second window 102 can be controlled by a same application), and Stecher further teaches redirecting, by the system process and based on the information, the user input at the location associated with the first -user interface window to a second user interface window managed by the application ([0013]…At stage "C," in FIG. 2, a user action with the first window 101, with a keyboard, a mouse, or some other input, can transfer the focus for subsequent user input from the first window 101 to the second window 102 while the first window 101 remains affixed, in window layering order, above that of the second window 102. For example, at stage "C," in response to a user positioning a mouse pointer 211, and the user clicking and holding down a mouse button for a given period of time (e.g., for 2 seconds), a focus for the user input focus is transferred from the first window 101 to the second window 102, as described in FIG. 3. [0014]…FIG. 3 illustrates some examples of user interactions and commands with content on the second window 102 occur after the focus of user input is transferred to the second window 102. For example, at stage "D," a user clicks and drags the second graphical object 204 from one location on the second window 102 to a second location on the second window 102 while the first window 101 remains affixed above the second window 102. Further, a text cursor 210 appears on the second window 102 and disappears from the first window 101 as the focus of the user input transfers to the second window 102. A user, at stage "E," types via a keyboard, which typing modifies, adds and/or deletes textual characters, numbers, and other symbols from the second text 209 on the second window 102.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the teaching of Sttecher in the invention of Kang to include controlling interactions via a transparent overlaid window because doing so would improve usability/functionality by allowing the user to interact with an obscured window/screen.
Per claim 2, the modified Kang teaches the method of claim 1, comprises providing the other user input to the first user interface window (fig. 3A, step 302, No: NORMAL OPERATION; Fig. 3B; step 309; Fig. 4A, 402, No: NORMAL OPERATION; Fig. 4B, step 409; [0051]… The specific gesture detected on the second screen may be at least one of a hovering gesture, a gesture of inputting a specific key in the device, a motion gesture of the device, a touch, a user's motion detected by infrared rays, a user's eye movement, and the like. [0087].. the controller 110 determines that the hovering gesture is a request for controlling the second screen 162 at operation 308 and controls the information based on the second application on the second screen 162 at operation 309. [0096]…when the hovering gesture has been detected without the input of the button of the touch pen, the controller 110 determines that the hovering gesture is a request for controlling the second screen 162 at operation 408 and controls the information based on the second application on the second screen 162 at operation 409.).
Kang does not teach specifically teach receiving an other user input at the location associated with the first user interface window while the first user interface window is displayed and the second user interface window is not displayed.
However, Stecher further teaches controlling display of one or more windows (fig. 1 shows that the user can close a window by selecting “X” button on a window to close it (i.e. not displaying a window). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the teaching of Stecher in the invention of Kang to include a well-known feature of “X” button for closing window because doing so would improve usability/functionality by allowing the user to manage one or more open windows and allowing user interactions with an open window.
Per claim 5, the modified Kang teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the second user interface window is displayed to appear at least partially in front of the first user interface window (Kang, fig. 2A; [0041]… In various embodiments of the present disclosure, a second screen is displayed overlapped over a first window. If the first and second windows are regarded as layers, the first and second windows may be referred to as an underlying layer and an overlying layer, respectively. [0049]…In an embodiment of the present disclosure, while information based on at least one application is being displayed separately on the first and second screens, upon detecting a specific gesture on the second screen, the controller 110 controls display of partial information of the first screen hidden by the second screen by changing an attribute of the second screen, so that the partial information is viewable on the first screen.)
Per claim 6. the modified Kang teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the second user interface window is spatially separated from the first user interface window (Kang, fig. 2A; [0041]… In various embodiments of the present disclosure, a second screen is displayed overlapped over a first window. If the first and second windows are regarded as layers, the first and second windows may be referred to as an underlying layer and an overlying layer, respectively. [0049]…In an embodiment of the present disclosure, while information based on at least one application is being displayed separately on the first and second screens, upon detecting a specific gesture on the second screen, the controller 110 controls display of partial information of the first screen hidden by the second screen by changing an attribute of the second screen, so that the partial information is viewable on the first screen. ).
Per claim 7, the modified Kang teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the first user interface window and the second user interface window are displayed to appear at first and second respective locations that are remote from the electronic device, and wherein the first respective location of the first user interface window is closer to the electronic device than the second respective location of the second user interface window.
However, Stecher further teaches wherein the first user interface window and the second user interface window are displayed to appear at first and second respective locations that are remote from the electronic device, and wherein the first respective location of the first user interface window is closer to the electronic device than the second respective location of the second user interface window ([0022]… in FIG. 5, the first window 501 is overlaid onto a second window 502 and a third window 550. The first window 502 obscures a portion of the second window 502 and the third window 550. The second window 502 is also overlaid onto the third window 550. It is noted that the top layer, the first window 501 appears closer to the front of the display device.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the teaching of Stecher in the invention of Kang because doing so would improve usability by providing the user with an order of layering in a layered stack of overlaid windows and allowing quick user interactions with the stack of a plurality of overlaid windows.
Per claim 8, the modified the method of claim 1, further comprising, receiving the redirected user input by the first user interface window as disclosed above, but does not specifically teach responsive to receiving the redirected user input by the first user interface window, closing the first user interface window.
However, Stecher further teaches in fig. 1 a window with an “X” button to close a window. Thus, the user can choose to close a window by selecting “X” button to close a window after the controller receiving the redirected user input by the first user interface window associated with specific user interaction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the teaching of Stecher in the invention of Kang to include a well-known feature of “X” button for closing window because doing so would improve usability/functionality by allowing the user to manage one or more open windows and allowing user interactions with an open window.
Claims 11-12 and 15-18 are rejected under the same rationale as claims 5-8 respectively.
Claim 19 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1.
Per claim 20, the modified Kang teaches the electronic device of claim 19, wherein redirecting the user input at the location associated with the first user interface window to the second user interface window comprises providing, by the system process, an indication of the user input in association with a different location, the different location corresponding to the second user interface window (Kang, [0055]…While the partial information hidden by the second screen is being displayed on the first screen by moving the second screen out of the currently displayed area, upon detecting an input gesture or an information movement gesture on the first screen or if no gesture is detected on the first screen for a certain period of time, the controller 110 may determine that the user has finished viewing the partial information of the first screen. Alternatively or additionally, when confirming that the user has turned his or her gaze toward a different position by eye tracking, the controller 110 may determine that the user has finished viewing the partial information of the first screen. [0059]…While the partial information of the first screen hidden by the second screen is shown through the second screen by increasing the transparency of the second screen, upon detecting an input gesture or an information movement gesture on the first screen or if no gesture is detected on the first screen for a certain period of time, the controller 110 may determine that the user has finished viewing the partial information of the first screen. Alternatively or additionally, when confirming that the user has turned his or her gaze toward a different position by eye tracking, the controller 110 may determine that the user has finished viewing the partial information of the first screen.. Stecher, [0014]…FIG. 3 illustrates some examples of user interactions and commands with content on the second window 102 occur after the focus of user input is transferred to the second window 102. For example, at stage "D," a user clicks and drags the second graphical object 204 from one location on the second window 102 to a second location on the second window 102 while the first window 101 remains affixed above the second window 102. Further, a text cursor 210 appears on the second window 102 and disappears from the first window 101 as the focus of the user input transfers to the second window 102. A user, at stage "E," types via a keyboard, which typing modifies, adds and/or deletes textual characters, numbers, and other symbols from the second text 209 on the second window 102.).
Claim(s) 3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. (“Kang”, Pub. No. US 2014/0285422), Stecher (Pub. No. 2013/0104065), and Lankford et al (“Lankford”, Pub. No. 2012/0105486).
Per claim 3, the modified Kang teaches the method of claim 1, comprises providing the other user input to the first user interface window (fig. 3A, step 302, No: NORMAL OPERATION; Fig. 3B; step 309; Fig. 4A, 402, No: NORMAL OPERATION; Fig. 4B, step 409; [0051]… The specific gesture detected on the second screen may be at least one of a hovering gesture, a gesture of inputting a specific key in the device, a motion gesture of the device, a touch, a user's motion detected by infrared rays, a user's eye movement, and the like. [0087].. the controller 110 determines that the hovering gesture is a request for controlling the second screen 162 at operation 308 and controls the information based on the second application on the second screen 162 at operation 309. [0096]…when the hovering gesture has been detected without the input of the button of the touch pen, the controller 110 determines that the hovering gesture is a request for controlling the second screen 162 at operation 408 and controls the information based on the second application on the second screen 162 at operation 409.)
Kang does not teach further comprising: receiving an other user input at the location associated with the first user interface window while the first user interface window is displayed and the second user interface window is not displayed; and generating, by the system process responsive to the other user input at the location associated with the first user interface window while the first user interface window is displayed and the second user interface window is not displayed, a visual or audio effect for an element of the first user interface window, the visual or audio effect based on another definition previously provided to the system process by the application.
However, Stecher further teaches the first user interface window is displayed and the second user interface window is not displayed (fig. 1 shows that the user can close a window by selecting “X” icon on a window to close it (i.e. not displaying a window).
Lankford teaches receiving an other user input at the location associated with the first user interface window, and generating a visual or audio effect for an element of the first user interface window, the visual or audio effect based on another definition previously provided to the system process by the application ([0083]… Additional features associated with the subject zooming and selection technology are further directed to characteristics of a focus region. In one example, a graphical feedback element defining the focus region (e.g., an outlined rectangle or other shape, highlighted region, or other visual identifier) and/or any additional displayed visual feedback is configured to substantially match the area (including size and/or shape) defining one or more interface elements within either a user interface or magnified user interface (i.e. zoom window). [0086]…the visual feedback element defining the focus region (e.g., outlined box or highlighted region) or the additional feedback element optionally shown within the focus region (e.g., pointer-type device) may differ based upon the action to be initiated. Different feedback elements (or different colors, sizes or other features associated with the feedback elements) may be employed for different types of actions such as, for example, a left-click, right-click, zoom, and the like. [0091]…The visual feedback element could be any type of visual display features as previously described, including but not limited to a pointer placed directly on the user's gaze location or an overlying image or icon placed over all or a portion of an area surrounding the user's gaze location (e.g., a fixed or expanding circle having its center of origin substantially corresponding to the user's gaze location). The features described in this section may also apply to the display of a visual feedback element used to define a focus region (e.g., standard sized box outline or customized highlighted regions snapped to one or more interface elements). )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the teaching of Stecher and Lankford in the invention of the modified Kang because doing so would improve usability/functionality by allowing the user to manage one or more open windows and allowing user interactions with an open window, and providing a reliable means for activating a GUI control and accomplishing various tasks within a GUI with a better visual indication of what he/she is looking at
Claim 13 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 3.
Claim(s) 4, 9-10, 14 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. (“Kang”, Pub. No. US 2014/0285422), Stecher (Pub. No. 2013/01040654), and Henderek et al. (“Henderek”, Pat. No. US 11,604,510).
Per claim 4, the modified Kang teaches the method of claim 3, further comprising, the first user interface window and the second user interface window managed by the application are displayed by the electronic device (Kang, fig. 2A; [0055]…While the partial information hidden by the second screen is being displayed on the first screen by moving the second screen out of the currently displayed area, upon detecting an input gesture or an information movement gesture on the first screen or if no gesture is detected on the first screen for a certain period of time, the controller 110 may determine that the user has finished viewing the partial information of the first screen. Alternatively or additionally, when confirming that the user has turned his or her gaze toward a different position by eye tracking, the controller 110 may determine that the user has finished viewing the partial information of the first screen.), but does not teach while the first user interface window and the second user interface window managed by the application are displayed by the electronic device, abstaining from providing the visual or audio effect for the element of the first user interface window responsive to the user input received at the location associated with the first user interface window.
However, Henderek teaches while the first user interface window and the second user interface window managed by the application are displayed by the electronic device, abstaining from providing the visual or audio effect for the element of the first user interface window responsive to the user input received at the location associated with the first user interface window (col. 12, lines 12-26… Upon detecting the action at block 606, the computer 100 can delay, for a predetermined amount of time, at block 610. This delay can be utilized by the computer 100 to provide sufficient time for a user to alter action (e.g., decide not to move the cursor) and for the computer 100 to be certain of the user's intention. At block 612, if the computer 100 still detects the action (e.g., the user continues to touch the touch-sensitive device), the computer 100 can move the visual indicator 502 to the gaze target at block 614. If the action is not still detected, the computer 100 can, at block 602, do nothing, go back to having a contact-required input move the visual indicator 502 (e.g., cursor), or perform a click at or move the visual indicator 502 to its original location.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the teaching of Henderek in the invention of Kang to include a delay warp because doing so would provide sufficient time for a user to alter action (e.g., decide not to move the cursor) and for the computer to be certain of the user's intention.
Per claim 9, the modified Kang teaches the method of claim 1, comprising, receiving the redirected user input by the first user interface window as disclosed above, but does not specifically teach further comprising, responsive to receiving the redirected user input by the first user interface window, ignoring the user input.
However, Henderek teaches responsive to receiving the redirected user input by the first user interface window, ignoring the user input (col. 12, lines 12-26… Upon detecting the action at block 606, the computer 100 can delay, for a predetermined amount of time, at block 610. This delay can be utilized by the computer 100 to provide sufficient time for a user to alter action (e.g., decide not to move the cursor) and for the computer 100 to be certain of the user's intention. At block 612, if the computer 100 still detects the action (e.g., the user continues to touch the touch-sensitive device), the computer 100 can move the visual indicator 502 to the gaze target at block 614. If the action is not still detected, the computer 100 can, at block 602, do nothing, go back to having a contact-required input move the visual indicator 502 (e.g., cursor), or perform a click at or move the visual indicator 502 to its original location.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the teaching of Henderek in the invention of Kang to include a delay warp because doing so would provide sufficient time for a user to alter action (e.g., decide not to move the cursor) and for the computer to be certain of the user's intention.
Per claim 10, the modified Kang teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach receiving, by the system process while the first user interface window and the second user interface window managed by the application are displayed by the electronic device, an other user input at an other location unassociated with the first user interface window or the second user interface window; and abstaining from providing the other user input to the application.
Henderek teaches receiving, by the system process while the first user interface window and the second user interface window managed by the application are displayed by the electronic device, an other user input at an other location unassociated with the first user interface window or the second user interface window; and abstaining from providing the other user input to the application (fig. 5, shows cursor 502 at an empty location. col. 12, lines 12-26… Upon detecting the action at block 606, the computer 100 can delay, for a predetermined amount of time, at block 610. This delay can be utilized by the computer 100 to provide sufficient time for a user to alter action (e.g., decide not to move the cursor) and for the computer 100 to be certain of the user's intention. At block 612, if the computer 100 still detects the action (e.g., the user continues to touch the touch-sensitive device), the computer 100 can move the visual indicator 502 to the gaze target at block 614. If the action is not still detected, the computer 100 can, at block 602, do nothing, go back to having a contact-required input move the visual indicator 502 (e.g., cursor), or perform a click at or move the visual indicator 502 to its original location.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the teaching of Henderek in the invention of Kang to include a delay warp because doing so would provide sufficient time for a user to alter action (e.g., decide not to move the cursor) and for the computer to be certain of the user's intention.
Claims 14 and claim 18 are rejected under the same rationale as claims 4 and 9 respectively.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lewein et al. (Pat. No. 11,716,392) discloses a first window and a second window can be visible on the display, wherein the first window can include a video streaming from a streaming service and the second window can be a word processing document. The rank of the first window and the second window can be based on, for example, a gaze time that tracks how long the user's eyes have looked at one of the two windows over a predetermined time frame. The user may have the word processing document selected and active while the user scrolls through the document, but the user may actually be watching the video instead. In such a scenario, an accrued gaze time of the first window having the video can be, for example, 13 seconds out of a 15 second predetermined time frame, with the other 2 seconds in the predetermined time frame being attributed to looking at the first window having the word processing document. Thus, the rank of the first window having the video can be higher than the rank of the second window because the gaze time of the first window is higher than the gaze time of the second window. Notably, if there is only one open window, the rank of that window would be ranked as the top-ranked window (because it is the only window) regardless of/independent from other user input, such as gaze, selection, etc. (see [0119]).
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH T VU whose telephone number is (571)272-4073. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7AM - 3:30PM.
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, Fred Ehichioya can be reached at (571) 272-4034. 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.
/THANH T VU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2179
Prosecution Insights