DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. “Splitting of content across two separate applications” stated in claim 8. The specification describes splitting content across regions of a Braille display, but does not describe splitting content from two separate applications across the two regions.
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.
Claim 13 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.
The term “static and dynamic content” in claim 13 is a relative term which render the claims indefinite. The terms are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8-10, 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 10,971,034 to Datray et al. (hereinafter Datray).
Regarding claim 1, Datray teaches A system for enhancing accessibility for low vision users through a Braille display, comprising: a Braille display capable of presenting a predetermined number of different characters; a split line feature, integrated within the Braille display or managed by a software application, dividing the Braille display into two distinct regions (See FIG. 2B, element 14);
a processor, communicatively coupled with the Braille display, capable of controlling independently the content displayed in each region of the Braille display (See FIG. 2C, element 22 and 24);
and a source of information, communicatively coupled with the processor, capable of providing at least two different sets of data to the processor, wherein the processor is configured to send the two different sets of data to the two distinct regions of the Braille display simultaneously, wherein the split line feature enables the low vision user to access and understand two different pieces of content simultaneously on the Braille display (See FIG. 2E and 2F, elements 18).
Regarding claim 2, Datray teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to manage the independent regions such that whether a single line display or a multiline display is connected, the regions are handled transparently, and interaction with the display via keyboard input is interpreted given the context of the application state and focus (Col 3, Line 31-38 “dynamic partitioning of a braille display for primary and ancillary content”).
Regarding claim 3, Datray teaches the system of claim 1, wherein a container object serves as an intermediary between the Braille subsystem and its child objects, each child object representing an individual line or region of the Braille display (Col 10, Line 8-13 “partitioning braille display lines into separate regions”).
Regarding claim 4, Datray teaches the system of claim 3, wherein the container object combines all dots from all lines and forwards a combined representation to the original single line display driver, and delegates interactions from the display to the appropriate child region object based on the specific location on the display where the interaction originated (See FIG 2E and 2F, elements 18, 22 and 24).
Regarding claim 6, Datray teaches the system of claim 1, further including a focus-setting mechanism configured to allow users to manipulate the placement of content within the regions via display hotkeys or a button within a dialog (See FIG 2C, elements 22 and 14).
Regarding claim 8, Datray teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to enable splitting of content across two separate applications (See FIG 2F, elements 22 and 24).
Regarding claim 9, Datray teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to simulate a two-line display when a user engages a dialog for multiline views while using a single-line display (See FIG 2B, elements 18, 22 and 24).
Regarding claim 10, Datray teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the first region of the split line feature displays attribute indicators related to the text in the second region, the attribute indicators being static while the text in the second region may change (See FIG 2B, elements 22 and 24).
Regarding claim 12, Datray teaches wherein the first region of the split line feature presents a static variant of Braille translation, providing an alternative understanding of the text displayed in the second region (See FIG. 2B, elements 14 and 16 which present a body of text along with an alternative understanding of the text displayed in a separate region of the braille reader).
Regarding claim 13, Datray teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to manage the static and dynamic content in the two distinct regions independently, allowing updates to the dynamic content without altering the static content (See Column 6, lines 64-75 “multiple braille display regions dedicated to different types of content”).
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) 5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Datray.
Regarding claim 5, Datray teaches the invention substantially as described above, including wherein the split line feature is configured to divide a line of Braille display into two distinct regions of equal size (see Fig. 2B, elements 22 and 24), but lacks in explicitly teaching the regions are separated by a distinct region separator dot pattern. Regardless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date to modify Datray to include a distinct region separator dot pattern in order to quickly indicate to the user the distinction between Braille segments.
Regarding claim 7, Datray teaches the invention as described above, but lacks in explicitly teaching wherein the focus-setting mechanism allows the user to set questions to appear on one region and answers on the other region. However, Datray recognizes that the invention can be used for a variety of electronic documents such as a webpage, a PDF document, a word processor document, an electronic table, an electronic presentation, an email, or any other document or application having alphanumeric content (Column 3, lines 40-44). Given that Datray contemplates virtually any type of electronic document, including websites, one of ordinary skill would have reason to apply a variety of different content to the Braille reader. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date to modify Datray to provide the focus-setting mechanism allowing the user to set questions to appear on one region and answers on the other region in order to allow a user to test themselves on study topics and thereby aid in memorization.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Datray in view of US 20150332607 to Gardner, Jr. et al. (hereinafter Gardner).
Regarding claim 11, Datray teaches attribute indicators that include, but are not limited to, text formatting attributes and text style attributes (see Fig. 2B showing a superscript “1” for a footnote, which is a text formatting attribute and text style attribute). However, Datray lacks in explicitly teaching the attribute includes text color attributes. In a related disclosure, Gardner teaches detecting hue and color information and providing it in a Braille format (See Gardner claim 2, “detecting hue and color information within a bitmap image and rendering hue and color within the tactile document”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date to modify the system of Datray to represent text attributes that are color attributes, as taught by Gardner, in order to organize visual color information in a way that a blind person could distinguish its content.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SENIYA BAIG whose telephone number is (571)270-0447. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30am-5:00pm, Friday 7:30am-4:00pm.
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, Danniell Negron can be reached at 571-272-7559. 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.
/S.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/WILLIAM H MCCULLOCH JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights