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 .
This is in response to Application filed 07/24/24. Claims 1 – 21 have been examined and are pending.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kotler et al. US 20180225461 A1.
Regarding claims 1, and 12 Kotler anticipates a method for analyzing Web content, the method comprising:
receiving a request to validate accessibility compliance of a target User Interface (UI) component in the Web content [0072, see analytics model, user interface and website also see in 0075 breach protection and target system and compliance]; and
in response to the request, running executable code including (i) simulating dynamic user interaction with the target UI component, (ii) monitoring a reaction of the target UI component to the simulated user interaction, and (iii) validating the accessibility compliance of the target UI component based on the reaction to the simulated dynamic user interaction [0071 – 0075, shows simulating target system as user interfaces and user interactions and simulating scenarios as well as compliance].
Regarding claim 2 and 11 The method according to claim 1, wherein simulating the dynamic user interaction comprises modifying an object model of the Web content [0048, see editing tool in user interface].
Regarding claim 3 and 13. The method according to claim 1, wherein simulating the dynamic user interaction comprises simulating one or more user actions that navigate between elements of the target UI component [0076, see simulation and simulator nodes].
Regarding claim 4 and 14, the method according to claim 1, wherein the executable code comprises (i) one or more static evaluators that evaluate parameters of the target UI component at given points in time, and (ii) one or more dynamic evaluators that simulate the dynamic user interaction; and wherein the dynamic evaluators invoke the static evaluators [0075, dynamic and real generators].
Regarding claim 5 and 16, the method according to claim 1, wherein simulating the dynamic user interaction comprises adding to the Web content at least one additional element that precedes or follows the target UI component, and simulating one or more user actions that navigate between the additional element and the target UI component [0075 – 0076].
Regarding claims 6 and 17, the method according to claim 1, wherein receiving the request comprises receiving a type of the target UI component, and wherein running the executable code comprises selecting, based on the type, a test suite to be applied to the target UI component [0111, shows utilizing fuzzy testing i.e. test suite].
Regarding claims 7 and 18, the method according to claim 1, and comprising automatically identifying a type of the target UI component, wherein running the executable code comprises selecting a test suite to be applied to the target UI component based on the type [0111, shows utilizing fuzzy testing i.e. test suite].
Regarding claims 8 and 19, the method according to claim 1, wherein receiving the request comprises receiving a location indication indicative of a location of the target UI component in the Web content, and wherein running the executable code comprises identifying a root of the target UI component within the Web content based on the location indication [0012, see root node].
Regarding claim 9 and 20, the method according to claim 1, and comprising automatically identifying a location of a root of the target UI component within the Web content [0012].
Regarding claim 10, and 21, the method according to claim 1, wherein analysis of the Web content is performed in a non-browser environment, and wherein validating the accessibility comprises predicting an expected accessibility of the target UI component in a browser environment [0075, see predictive prevention].
Regarding claim 22, the system according to claim 12, wherein, to validate the accessibility, the one or more processors are configured to modify an event listener to collect information associated with the target UI component [0069, see simulator node and listens].
Correspondence Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Chuck Kendall whose telephone number is 571-272-3698. The examiner can normally be reached on 10:00 am - 6:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hyung Sough can be reached on 571-272-6799. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only [0060 – 0080].
For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/CHUCK O KENDALL/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2192
Prosecution Insights