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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/8/25, 12/31/25 and 1/12/26 are 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)(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.
Claims 61-67, 70, 73, 77, 91 and 92 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Whitney et al., United States Patent Publication 2015/0185837 (hereinafter “Whitney”).
Claim 61:
Whitney discloses:
A computer system configured to communicate with one or more input devices and one or more display generation components, comprising:
one or more processors (see paragraph [0038]). Whitney teaches one or more processors; and
memory storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more processors (see paragraph [0049]). Whitney teaches a memory subsystem for storing information, the one or more programs including instructions for:
while displaying, via the one or more display generation, a user interface components (see paragraph [0017]). Whitney teaches displaying a user interface:
in accordance with a determination that a first set of one or more conditions is met, the first set of one or more conditions including a presence not detected condition that is met when a user presence at the computer system is not detected via the one or more input devices (see paragraphs [0027] and [0028]). Whitney teaches determining if conditions are met for the watch to be in sleep mode because a presence is not detected:
displaying, via the one or more display generation components, a first user interface object; and/or ceasing display, via the one or more display generation components, of a second user interface object (see paragraphs [0027]). Whitney teaches when transitioning to sleep mode, some display of user interface objects are ceased.
Claim 62:
Whitney discloses:
the one or more programs further including instructions for:
while displaying, via the one or more display generation components, the user interface:
in accordance with a determination that a second set of one or more conditions is met, the second set of one or more conditions including a presence detected condition that is met when a user presence at the computer system is detected via the one or more input devices (see paragraph [0028]-[0029]). Whitney teaches determining that conditions are met when the user presence/gesture are detected:
displaying, via the one or more display generation components, a third user interface object; and/or ceasing display, via the one or more display generation components, of a fourth user interface object (see paragraphs [0027]-[0029]). Whitney teaches displaying a user interface object when the watch receives a nudge gesture to wake up.
Claim 63:
Whitney discloses:
wherein the computer system is a wearable device and wherein the computer system is being worn when the presence not detected condition is met (see paragraph [0015]). Whitney teaches wearing a watch in low-power mode.
Claim 64:
Whitney discloses:
wherein the first set of one or more conditions includes a proximity condition that is based on proximity of a user to the computer system (see paragraph [0020]). Whitney teaches the nudge wake gesture causes a proximity sensor to detect the close proximity of a surface, such as a portion of the wearer's body.
Claim 65:
Whitney discloses:
wherein the one or more input devices includes a visual sensor and wherein user presence at the computer system is detected and/or not detected via the visual sensor (see paragraph [0020]). Whitney teaches the nudge wake gesture causes a proximity sensor to detect the close proximity of a surface.
Claim 66:
Whitney discloses:
wherein the one or more input devices includes a visual sensor and wherein user presence at the computer system is detected and/or not detected via the visual sensor (see paragraph [0019]). Whitney teaches a light and a proximity sensor that can detect a presence.
Claim 67:
Whitney discloses:
wherein the visual sensor is an under-display visual sensor (see paragraph [0019]). Whitney teaches a light and a proximity sensor embedded in the watch.
Claim 70:
Whitney discloses:
detecting user input; and in response to detecting the user input, transitioning the computer system from a first power mode to a second power mode that is different from the first power mode (see paragraph [0021]). Whitney teaches when a wake gesture is detected, sensor-processing logic signal powers management logic to indicate that a wake gesture has been received. The wake gesture triggers the power management module to enable one or more of the multiple sub-components of the device.
Claim 73:
Whitney discloses:
in accordance with the determination that the first set of one or more conditions is met, changing a configuration of a displayed current time (see paragraph [0015]). Whitney teaches changing the configuration by display a user interface based on the wake of the watch.
Claim 77:
Whitney discloses:
in accordance with the determination that the first set of one or more conditions is met, modifying a background of the user interface (see paragraph [0022]). Whitney teaches enabling the display thus the background is modified.
Claims 91, 92:
Although Claim 91 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium and Claim 92 is a method claim, they are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as the system of Claim 1.
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.
Claims 68, 69, 71, 74, 75, 78, 80 and 81 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitney, in view of Kim et al., United States Patent Publication 2018/0367656 (hereinafter “Kim”).
Claim 68:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose detecting a face.
Kim discloses:
wherein user presence at the computer system is not detected via the one or more input devices based on a failure to detect a face via the one or more input devices (see paragraph [0010]). Kim teaches staying in locked state until a face is detected.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include detecting a face to change modes for the purpose of efficiently reducing the power consumption of mobile devices, as taught by Kim.
Claim 69:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose detecting a face.
Kim discloses:
detecting movement of the computer system; and in response to detecting the movement of the computer system, activating a visual sensor of the one or more input devices to capture visual data using the visual sensor, wherein the visual data is used to determine user presence (see paragraph [0010]). Kim teaches activate the camera in response to the raising gesture; detect a face within an image received via the camera; and release a locked state of the mobile terminal based on a face recognition of the detected face.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include detecting a face to change modes for the purpose of efficiently reducing the power consumption of mobile devices, as taught by Kim.
Claim 71:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose display user interface object in both states.
Kim discloses:
the first user interface object is a complication of a watch face; and the second user interface object is a complication of the watch face (see paragraphs [0156] and [0157]). Kim teaches displaying a locked screen and displaying an unlocked screen on the watch.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include displaying user interface objects in both locked and unlocked screens for the purpose of efficiently reducing the power consumption of mobile devices, as taught by Kim.
Claim 74:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose display user interface object in both states.
Kim discloses:
wherein the first user interface object is a complication and the second user interface object is a display of a current time (see paragraphs [0156] and [0157]). Kim teaches displaying a locked screen and displaying an unlocked screen on the watch; and
wherein displaying the first user interface object and ceasing display of the second user interface object includes replacing display of the complication with a display of the current time. (see paragraphs [0156] and [0157]). Kim teaches ceasing the display of the locked screen and displaying a display of user interface objects.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include displaying user interface objects in both locked and unlocked screens for the purpose of efficiently reducing the power consumption of mobile devices, as taught by Kim.
Claim 75:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose display user interface object in both states.
Kim discloses:
wherein ceasing display of the second user interface object includes ceasing display of first information of a complication while maintaining display of second information of the complication (see paragraphs [0156] and [0157]). Kim teaches ceasing the display of the locked screen content and displaying a display of user interface objects in the unlocked state.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include displaying user interface objects in both locked and unlocked screens for the purpose of efficiently reducing the power consumption of mobile devices, as taught by Kim.
Claim 78:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose detecting a face.
Kim discloses:
wherein the presence not detected condition is met when a face is not detected at the computer system via the one or more input devices (see paragraph [0010]). Kim teaches staying in locked state until a face is detected.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include detecting a face to change modes for the purpose of efficiently reducing the power consumption of mobile devices, as taught by Kim.
Claim 80:
Whitney discloses:
wherein the first set of one or more conditions includes a touch not detected condition that is met when a touch input is not detected via the one or more input devices (see paragraph [0026]). Whitney teaches a touch sensor used to detect touch to wake the wake, if not touch then sleep mode remains.
Claim 81:
Whitney discloses:
wherein a first change applied to the user interface based on a first presence-based state is reversed based on a second presence-based state that is different from the first presence-based state (see paragraph [0031]). Whitney teaches If the sensor logic determines that the sensor data collected by one or more of either the pressure sensor, the proximity sensor, and the light sensor does not correspond to a nudge wake gesture, the device remains in sleep mode.
Claims 72 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitney, in view of Jonsson et al., United States Patent Publication 20170285740 (hereinafter “Jonsson”).
Claim 72:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose changing the size of the content based on users presence and eye gaze.
Jonsson discloses:
in accordance with the determination that the first set of one or more conditions is met, changing a displayed size of a current time (see paragraphs [0011] and [0051]). Jonsson teaches based on the detected eye gaze,
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include changing the font size of the content based on users presence for the purpose of efficiently improving readability of the user, as taught by Jonsson.
Claims 76 and 82-86 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitney, in view of Mitchell et al., United States Patent Publication 20180061116 (hereinafter “Mitchell”).
Claim 76:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose an animation based on users eye gaze.
Mitchell discloses:
displaying, via the one or more display generation components, an animation of an objection based on user presence being detected (see paragraphs [0055] and [0056]). Mitchell teaches displaying an animation based on the detected eye gaze,
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include displaying animation based on users eye gaze for the purpose of efficiently improving focus of content using animations, as taught by Mitchell.
Claim 82:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose an animation based on users eye gaze.
Mitchell discloses:
detecting, via the one or more input devices, movement of a user relative to the computer system; and in response to detecting the movement of the user relative to the computer system, animating a change, via the one or more display generation components, of the user interface, wherein the change is based on the movement of the user relative to the computer system (see paragraphs [0055] and [0056]). Mitchell teaches displaying a change in animation based on the detected eye gaze,
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include displaying animation based on users eye gaze for the purpose of efficiently improving focus of content using animations, as taught by Mitchell.
Claim 83:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose an animation based on users eye gaze.
Mitchell discloses:
wherein the movement of the user relative to the computer system includes movement of eyes of the user (see paragraphs [0055] and [0056]). Mitchell teaches displaying a change in animation based on the detected eye gaze,
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include displaying animation based on users eye gaze for the purpose of efficiently improving focus of content using animations, as taught by Mitchell.
Claim 84:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose an animation based on users eye gaze.
Mitchell discloses:
wherein animating the change of the user interface includes animating a simulated parallax effect (see paragraphs [0055], [0056] and [0088]). Mitchell teaches the ability of animating using parallax,
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include displaying animation based on users eye gaze for the purpose of efficiently improving focus of content using animations, as taught by Mitchell.
Claim 85:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose an animation based on users eye gaze.
Mitchell discloses:
wherein animating the change of the user interface includes animating a simulated parallax effect (see paragraphs [0055], [0056] and [0088]). Mitchell teaches the ability of animating in VR using parallax. Characters can be animated in VR spaces.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include displaying animation based on users eye gaze for the purpose of efficiently improving focus of content using animations, as taught by Mitchell.
Claim 86:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose an animation based on users eye gaze.
Mitchell discloses:
wherein the movement of the user relative to the computer system is based on a position of a face of the user and/or left-right movement of the face of the user
(see paragraphs [0053]). Mitchell teaches movement based on tracking the position of the eye.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include displaying animation based on users eye gaze for the purpose of efficiently improving focus of content using animations, as taught by Mitchell.
Claim 79 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitney and Kim, in view of Mitchell et al., United States Patent Publication 20180061116 (hereinafter “Mitchell”).
Claim 79:
Whitney and Kim fail to expressly disclose an animation based on users eye gaze.
Mitchell discloses:
displaying, via the one or more display generation components, an animation of an objection based on user presence being detected (see paragraphs [0055] and [0056]). Mitchell teaches displaying an animation of an object based on the detected eye gaze and presence ,
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney and Kim to include displaying animation based on users eye gaze for the purpose of efficiently improving focus of content using animations, as taught by Mitchell.
Claims 87, 88, 89 and 90 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitney, in view of Olsson et al., United States Patent Publication 20140268054 (hereinafter “Olsson”).
Claim 87:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose scrolling content based on eye gaze.
Olsson discloses:
scrolling content based on a user presence being detected at the computer system (see paragraphs [0019] and [0027]). Olsson teaches scrolling content based on user eye gaze and face detection.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include scrolling content based on users eye gaze or facial detection for the purpose of efficiently being user-friendly with automatic scrolling, as taught by Olsson.
Claim 88:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose scrolling content based on eye gaze.
Olsson discloses:
scrolling content based on a gaze of a user of the computer system (see paragraphs [0019] and [0027]). Olsson teaches scrolling content based on user eye gaze and face detection.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include scrolling content based on users eye gaze or facial detection for the purpose of efficiently being user-friendly with automatic scrolling, as taught by Olsson.
Claim 89:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose scrolling content based on eye gaze.
Olsson discloses:
in accordance with a determination that the gaze is directed to the computer system, the computer system scrolls content; and in accordance with a determination that the gaze is not directed to the computer system, the computer system forgoes scrolling the content (see paragraphs [0031]). Olsson teaches scrolling content until the gaze is outside of the scroll zone, then terminate scrolling.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include scrolling content based on users eye gaze or facial detection for the purpose of efficiently being user-friendly with automatic scrolling, as taught by Olsson.
Claim 90:
Whitney fails to expressly disclose scrolling content based on eye gaze.
Olsson discloses:
in accordance with a set of one or more scroll conditions being met, wherein the set of one or more scroll conditions include a gaze condition that is met when a gaze of the user is directed to the computer system and a confirmation condition that is met when a confirmation input is received, the computer system scrolls content (see paragraphs [0031]). Olsson teaches scrolling content until the gaze is outside of the scroll zone, then terminate scrolling. The user can also alter the scroll zone as confirmation for the condition to be met.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Whitney to include scrolling content based on users eye gaze or facial detection for the purpose of efficiently being user-friendly with automatic scrolling, as taught by Olsson.
Conclusion
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 7/25/26
Prosecution Insights