DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-19 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 112(b)
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.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “in response to detecting the input, in accordance with a determination that the input meets display-activation criteria, gradually displaying a respective user interface on the display in accordance with the change in the characteristic of the contact.” The term “gradually” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim and the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the scope of the term. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(b).
Claims 2-17 are rejected for substantially the same reason indicated above for claim 1, at least due to their dependence on the claim.
Claims 18-19 are rejected for substantially the same reasons given above.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 101
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 101:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 19 is directed to a “computer readable storage medium.” The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium typically covers non-statutory transitory forms of signal transmission, such as, a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 84 USPQ2d 1495 (Fed. Cir. 2007). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a data storage device encompasses non-statutory transitory propagating signals per se. See Ex parte Mewherter, 107 USPQ2d 1857, 1862 (PTAB 2013) (precedential). The specification fails to provide a definition of “computer readable storage medium” that excludes transitory forms of signal transmission. Accordingly, the recited “computer readable storage medium” has been interpreted to include nonstatutory subject matter.
In order to obviate the rejection, it is recommended that the claim be amended to explicitly exclude transitory forms of signal transmission (e.g., by addition of the phrase “non-transitory”).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
Claims 1-2, 4-12, and 14-19 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Park et al., US 2013/0093707 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses a method, comprising:
At an electronic device with a display and a touch-sensitive surface that is distinct from the display, wherein the electronic device includes one or more sensors to detect a characteristic of contacts with the touch-sensitive surface. Park teaches a display (“display unit 120”) and a touch-sensitive surface (“touch sensing unit”). Park fig. 1, ¶¶ 27-33.
Detecting an input on the touch-sensitive surface, wherein detecting the input includes detecting a contact on the touch-sensitive surface and detecting a change in a characteristic of the contact. Park teaches detecting an unlock interaction that moves an unlock item downward. Park fig. 5, ¶ 52.
In response to detecting the input, in accordance with a determination that the input meets display-activation criteria, gradually displaying a respective user interface on the display in accordance with the change in the characteristic of the contact. Park teaches, as the unlock interaction moves the unlock item downward, gradually displaying a user interface (e.g., “execution screen 500”). Park fig. 5, ¶ 53.
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses wherein the respective user interface was not displayed on the display immediately prior to detecting the input on the touch-sensitive surface. Park fig. 5, ¶ 53.
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses wherein the display-activation criteria are met when the contact moves on the touch-sensitive surface by more than a predefined amount. Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 52-56.
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses wherein the respective user interface includes a plurality of interactive controls. Park fig. 5 (execution screen 500), ¶¶ 52-53.
Regarding claim 6, which depends on claim 5, Park discloses wherein gradually displaying a respective user interface on the display in accordance with the change in the characteristic of the contact includes: in accordance with a determination that the characteristic met or exceeded a first respective threshold, displaying a first subset of the plurality of interactive controls; and in accordance with a determination that the characteristic met or exceeded a second respective threshold, displaying a second subset of the plurality of interactive controls. Park teaches displaying a subset of controls based on the change in position of the unlock interaction. Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 52-56.
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses wherein the display is touch-sensitive and the display-activation criteria are met when a contact on the display moves from an edge of the display in a predefined direction by more than a predefined amount. Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 52-56.
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses including: in accordance with a determination that the input does not meet the display-activation criteria, maintaining a state of the display after detecting the input. Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 52-56.
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses wherein the change in the characteristic of the contact is a change in intensity of the contact. Park teaches a change in position of an unlock interaction. Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 52-56. This change in position may be considered a substitute/proxy for the force of a contact on the touch sensitive surface. See Specification ¶ 53.
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses wherein the change in the characteristic of the contact is a change in position of the contact on the touch-sensitive surface. Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 52-56.
Regarding claim 11, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses including, after at least partially displaying the respective user interface on the display: detecting a reversal of the change in the characteristic of the contact; and in response to detecting the reversal of the change in the characteristic of the contact, gradually ceasing to display the respective user interface. Park teaches ceasing display the user interface (e.g., “execution screen 500”) upon releasing the unlock interaction before completion. Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 54, 56.
Regarding claim 12, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses including, after at least partially displaying the respective user interface on the display: detecting a reversal of the change in the characteristic of the contact; and in response to detecting the reversal of the change in the characteristic of the contact: in accordance with a determination that the characteristic met or exceeded a respective threshold prior to detecting the reversal of the change in the characteristic of the contact, maintaining display of the respective user interface; and in accordance with a determination that the characteristic did not meet or exceed the respective threshold prior to detecting the reversal of the change in the characteristic of the contact, reversing the gradual display of the respective user interface by gradually ceasing to display the respective user interface. Park teaches ceasing display the user interface (e.g., “execution screen 500”) upon releasing the unlock interaction before the unlock condition for releasing the locking mode is satisfied. Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 54, 56.
Regarding claim 14, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses wherein: gradually displaying the respective user interface includes displaying an animation of the respective user interface gradually appearing on the display; and the animation progresses from a starting point to an ending point at a rate determined based on a current value of the characteristic. Park teaches animating the appearance of the user interface (e.g., “execution screen 500”). Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 52-56.
Regarding claim 15, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses wherein: gradually displaying the respective user interface includes: sliding the respective user interface onto the display from an edge of the display, or displaying an animation of the respective user interface gradually appearing on the display; and in accordance with a determination that the input on the pressure-sensitive surface does not meet the display-activation criteria, forgoing display of the respective user interface on the display. Park teaches animating the appearance of the user interface (e.g., “execution screen 500”). Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 52-56.
Regarding claim 16, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses wherein: gradually displaying the respective user interface includes displaying an animation of the respective user interface gradually appearing on the display; and the animation progresses from a starting point to an ending point in accordance with a progression of the respective characteristic from a first threshold to a second threshold. Park fig. 5, ¶¶ 52-56.
Regarding claim 17, which depends on claim 1, Park discloses wherein the respective user interface includes one or more of: media player controls and camera controls. Park teaches the gradually displayed user interface may be a home screen or an application screen. Park ¶ 57.
Claim 18 is drawn to an apparatus that implements the method recited in claim 1. Accordingly, this claim is rejected for substantially the same reasons as indicated in the above rejection of the corresponding claim.
Claim 19 is drawn to instructions stored in a medium that implement the method recited in claim 1. Accordingly, this claim is rejected for substantially the same reasons as indicated in the above rejection of the corresponding claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Park et al., US 2013/0093707 A1, in view of Smith, US 2016/0188181 A1.
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Park does not explicitly disclose, but Smith discloses wherein the touch-sensitive surface is pressure-sensitive and the display-activation criteria are met when the contact has an intensity above a respective intensity threshold. Smith teaches determining if an interaction has occurred within a user interface based on a contact pressure meeting a threshold. Smith ¶¶ 230-296, fig. 4.
It would have been obvious at the time of the invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify Park’s process of gradually displaying a user interface in response to touch input meeting criteria with Smith’s process of determining if a contact pressure meets a threshold. Such a modification would increase usability by filtering accidental input.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Park et al., US 2013/0093707 A1, in view of Lessing et al., US 2012/0236037 A1.
Regarding claim 13, which depends on claim 1, Park does not explicitly disclose, but Lessing discloses wherein gradually displaying the respective user interface includes sliding the respective user interface onto the display from an edge of the display. Lessing teaches gradually displaying a user interface by sliding a user interface from the edge of a display. Lessing ¶¶ 28, 45, figs. 6, 15.
It would have been obvious at the time of the invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify Park’s process of gradually displaying a user interface in response to user input with Lessing’s process of sliding a user interface onto a display from an edge of the display. Such a modification would increase usability by allowing a user to rapidly preview the information in the user interface. See Lessing ¶ 30.
Conclusion
Although particular portions of the prior art may have been cited in support of the rejections, the specified citations are merely representative of the teachings. Other passages and figures in the cited prior art may apply. Accordingly, Applicant should consider the entirety of the cited prior art for potentially teaching all or part of the claims.
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Lee et al., US 2011/0028186 A1, discloses a using a sliding gesture to unlock a screen.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Asher D Kells whose telephone number is (571)270-7729. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri., 8 a.m. - 4 p.m..
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, Kieu Vu can be reached at 571-272-4057. 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.
Asher D. Kells
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2171
/Asher D Kells/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights