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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on December 9, 2024, April 21, 2025, and June 03, 2026 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on February 17, 2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CHINA 202210146506.8 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 1-3, 6, 11-14, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vieira (US 2013/0316682).
Regarding claim 1, Vieira teaches a system, comprising a first electronic device (FIG. 1, controlled devices 20, FIG. 7 requestor, [0054] “the controlled device 20 associated with the requestor”) and a second electronic device (FIG. 1 authorizer devices 18, FIG. 7, authority 1, 2, [0038] “parent or other authority figure (authorizer devices 18)”)
wherein the first electronic device is configured to send first indication information to the second electronic device, wherein the first indication information indicates that an application of the first electronic device is using a first resource ([0038] “Mobile devices 10 which are to be monitored or controlled (controlled devices 20) by another entity such as an employer, parent or other authority figure (authorizer devices 18), can be operable to send requests 28 to the authority figure to gain access to desired media content via the wireless network 12.” [0070] “The prompt 232 in this example includes a message 234 indicating that: "Child A has requested approval for CONTENT A", wherein CONTENT A may provide a brief description, title, or other identifier related to the media access request. In other examples, the message 234 may indicate that Child A is attempting to call Friend X, or Child A is attempting to use a browser… the request is associated with access to a media service”. FIG. 7 - requester sends request 134 to Authority 2);
the second electronic device is configured to output second prompt information, which is used to prompt a user whether to terminate permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource (FIG. 13, [0070] “The prompt 232 shown in FIG. 13 enables the authority to select a view button 236 to view the content associated with the request 28, to select an approve button 238 to approve the request 28, or a deny button 240 to deny the request 28”);
the second electronic device is further configured to detect an input of the user for terminating the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource (FIG. 13, [0070] “The prompt 232 shown in FIG. 13 enables the authority to select a view button 236 to view the content associated with the request 28, to select an approve button 238 to approve the request 28, or a deny button 240 to deny the request 28.” [0074] “the media access control module 68 may then determine, at 270, whether or not to deny the request to others. If denied, an instruction may be sent to one or more other controlled devices 20 to deny the same content, at 272”);
the second electronic device is further configured to send second indication information to the first electronic device in response to detecting the input of the user, wherein the second indication information indicates the first electronic device to terminate the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource ([0074] “the media access control module 68 may then determine, at 270, whether or not to deny the request to others. If denied, an instruction may be sent to one or more other controlled devices 20 to deny the same content, at 272”. FIG. 7, Authority 2 sends response 144 to Requestor ); and
the first electronic device is further configured to terminate, in response to the second indication information, the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource (abstract “first mobile device receives a response via the P2P messaging protocol, and enables or denies access to the media according to the response”).
Regarding claim 2, Vieira teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein the second electronic device is further configured to display a second indicator in a status bar of the second electronic device in response to the first indication information, wherein the second indicator indicates a type of the first resource, or the second indicator indicates the type of the first resource and a type identifier of the first electronic device (FIG. 13 shows message "Child A has requested approval for CONTENT A" [0070] “The prompt 232 in this example includes a message 234 indicating that: "Child A has requested approval for CONTENT A", wherein CONTENT A may provide a brief description, title, or other identifier related to the media access request. In other examples, the message 234 may indicate that Child A is attempting to call Friend X, or Child A is attempting to use a browser during school hours, etc.”).
Regarding claim 3, Vieira teaches claim 2 and further teaches wherein the second electronic device is further configured to display a setting bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the second indicator ([0055] “For example, the response 30 may indicate that text from a web page can be accessed but not images or videos. Similarly, if the request 28 is generic, e.g., "can I contact my friend?"; the response 30 can be structured to provide an approval with conditions. For example, a parent may not allow a child to contact their friend by phone, but may permit them to send a P2P message 40 or email message. As such, it can be appreciated that the requests 28 and responses 30 can be configured not only to enable an authority to approve or deny media content or access to media or a service, but also to provide conditional responses 30 or selections from a list of options. This approval may also apply to the amount of media content allowed. For example, a parent may allow a child to phone a friend but for a limited amount of time”), wherein the second prompt information is displayed in the setting bar (FIG. 13 shows button 236, 238, 240);
the second electronic device is further configured to display a window in response to detecting an operation of the user on the second prompt information, wherein the window comprises a terminate control, and the terminate control is used to trigger termination of the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource ([0055] “For example, the response 30 may indicate that text from a web page can be accessed but not images or videos. Similarly, if the request 28 is generic, e.g., "can I contact my friend?"; the response 30 can be structured to provide an approval with conditions. For example, a parent may not allow a child to contact their friend by phone, but may permit them to send a P2P message 40 or email message. As such, it can be appreciated that the requests 28 and responses 30 can be configured not only to enable an authority to approve or deny media content or access to media or a service, but also to provide conditional responses 30 or selections from a list of options. This approval may also apply to the amount of media content allowed. For example, a parent may allow a child to phone a friend but for a limited amount of time”); and
the second electronic device is further configured to send the second indication information to the first electronic device in response to an operation of the user on the terminate control ([0074] “the media access control module 68 may then determine, at 270, whether or not to deny the request to others. If denied, an instruction may be sent to one or more other controlled devices 20 to deny the same content, at 272”).
Regarding claim 6, Vieira teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein the first electronic device is further configured to send the first indication information to the second electronic device in response to detecting that a preset condition is met, wherein the preset condition comprises at least one of the following: a distance between the first electronic device and the second electronic device is less than or equal to a preset distance; the first electronic device and the second electronic device are logged in with a same account; the first electronic device and the second electronic device are connected to a same Wi-Fi network; a short-range connection has been established between the first electronic device and the second electronic device ([0039] “a local or otherwise short-range connection 34 between the controlled device 20 and the authorizer device 18, e.g., wherein two devices are within the same Wi-Fi network or such devices are within Bluetooth range, can also be used to send requests 28 to the corresponding authority figures to gain access to desired media content.”); the second electronic device is in a worn state; the first electronic device is in an unlocked state, and the first electronic device is provided with a password lock; the second electronic device is in an unlocked state, and the second electronic device is provided with a password lock; the first electronic device is not being operated; the application runs in a background of the first electronic device; or the application runs in a foreground of the first electronic device, and the first electronic device is not being operated.
Regarding claim 11, Vieira teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein the first electronic device is further configured to: in response to the second indication information, permanently or once terminate the permission for the application to use the first resource (FIG. 14, [0071] “A confirm button 248 is provided to enable Parent A to confirm their previous response 30 and a change button 250 is provided to enable Parent A to reconsider and change their response 30.” Response change indicates a “deny” can be changed).
Regarding claim 12, Vieira teaches a cross-device application management method, wherein the method is applied to a second electronic device (FIG. 1 authorizer devices 18, FIG. 7, authority 1, 2, [0038] “parent or other authority figure (authorizer devices 18)”), which is connected to a first electronic device (FIG. 1, controlled devices 20, FIG. 7 requestor, [0054] “the controlled device 20 associated with the requestor”), and the method comprises:
receiving first indication information sent by the first electronic device, wherein the first indication information indicates that an application of the first electronic device is using a first resource ([0038] “Mobile devices 10 which are to be monitored or controlled (controlled devices 20) by another entity such as an employer, parent or other authority figure (authorizer devices 18), can be operable to send requests 28 to the authority figure to gain access to desired media content via the wireless network 12.” [0070] “The prompt 232 in this example includes a message 234 indicating that: "Child A has requested approval for CONTENT A", wherein CONTENT A may provide a brief description, title, or other identifier related to the media access request. In other examples, the message 234 may indicate that Child A is attempting to call Friend X, or Child A is attempting to use a browser… the request is associated with access to a media service”. FIG. 7 - requester sends request 134 to Authority 2);
outputting second prompt information, wherein the second prompt information is used to prompt a user whether to terminate permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource (FIG. 13, [0070] “The prompt 232 shown in FIG. 13 enables the authority to select a view button 236 to view the content associated with the request 28, to select an approve button 238 to approve the request 28, or a deny button 240 to deny the request 28”);
detecting an input of the user for terminating use of the first resource by the application of the first electronic device (FIG. 13, [0070] “The prompt 232 shown in FIG. 13 enables the authority to select a view button 236 to view the content associated with the request 28, to select an approve button 238 to approve the request 28, or a deny button 240 to deny the request 28.” [0074] “the media access control module 68 may then determine, at 270, whether or not to deny the request to others. If denied, an instruction may be sent to one or more other controlled devices 20 to deny the same content, at 272”); and
sending second indication information to the first electronic device in response to detecting the input of the user, wherein the second indication information indicates the first electronic device to terminate the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource ([0074] “the media access control module 68 may then determine, at 270, whether or not to deny the request to others. If denied, an instruction may be sent to one or more other controlled devices 20 to deny the same content, at 272”. FIG. 7, Authority 2 sends response 144 to Requestor.” Abstract - “first mobile device receives a response via the P2P messaging protocol, and enables or denies access to the media according to the response”.
Regarding claim 13, Vieira teaches claim 12 and further teaches 1
displaying a second indicator in a status bar of the second electronic device in response to the first indication information, wherein the second indicator indicates a type of the first resource, or the second indicator indicates a type of the first resource and a type identifier of the first electronic device (FIG. 13 shows message "Child A has requested approval for CONTENT A" [0070] “The prompt 232 in this example includes a message 234 indicating that: "Child A has requested approval for CONTENT A", wherein CONTENT A may provide a brief description, title, or other identifier related to the media access request. In other examples, the message 234 may indicate that Child A is attempting to call Friend X, or Child A is attempting to use a browser during school hours, etc.”).
Regarding claim 14, Vieira teaches claim 13 and further teaches wherein the outputting the second prompt information comprises: displaying a setting bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the second indicator ([0055] “For example, the response 30 may indicate that text from a web page can be accessed but not images or videos. Similarly, if the request 28 is generic, e.g., "can I contact my friend?"; the response 30 can be structured to provide an approval with conditions. For example, a parent may not allow a child to contact their friend by phone, but may permit them to send a P2P message 40 or email message. As such, it can be appreciated that the requests 28 and responses 30 can be configured not only to enable an authority to approve or deny media content or access to media or a service, but also to provide conditional responses 30 or selections from a list of options. This approval may also apply to the amount of media content allowed. For example, a parent may allow a child to phone a friend but for a limited amount of time”), wherein the second prompt information is displayed in the setting bar (FIG. 13 shows button 236, 238, 240); and
the detecting the input of the user for terminating use of the first resource by the application of the first electronic device comprises: displaying a window in response to detecting an operation of the user on the second prompt information, wherein the window comprises a terminate control, and the terminate control is used to trigger termination of the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource ([0055] “For example, the response 30 may indicate that text from a web page can be accessed but not images or videos. Similarly, if the request 28 is generic, e.g., "can I contact my friend?"; the response 30 can be structured to provide an approval with conditions. For example, a parent may not allow a child to contact their friend by phone, but may permit them to send a P2P message 40 or email message. As such, it can be appreciated that the requests 28 and responses 30 can be configured not only to enable an authority to approve or deny media content or access to media or a service, but also to provide conditional responses 30 or selections from a list of options. This approval may also apply to the amount of media content allowed. For example, a parent may allow a child to phone a friend but for a limited amount of time”); and detecting an operation of the user on the terminate control (FIG. 13, [0070] “The prompt 232 shown in FIG. 13 enables the authority to select a view button 236 to view the content associated with the request 28, to select an approve button 238 to approve the request 28, or a deny button 240 to deny the request 28”).
Regarding claim 17, Vieira teaches an electronic device (FIG. 29), comprising: one or more processors; one or more memories; and one or more computer programs, wherein the one or more computer programs are stored in the one or more memories, the one or more computer programs comprise instructions, which upon executed by the one or more processors ([0105]), cause the electronic device to perform:
receiving first indication information sent by the first electronic device, wherein the first indication information indicates that an application of the first electronic device is using a first resource ([0038] “Mobile devices 10 which are to be monitored or controlled (controlled devices 20) by another entity such as an employer, parent or other authority figure (authorizer devices 18), can be operable to send requests 28 to the authority figure to gain access to desired media content via the wireless network 12.” [0070] “The prompt 232 in this example includes a message 234 indicating that: "Child A has requested approval for CONTENT A", wherein CONTENT A may provide a brief description, title, or other identifier related to the media access request. In other examples, the message 234 may indicate that Child A is attempting to call Friend X, or Child A is attempting to use a browser… the request is associated with access to a media service”. FIG. 7 - requester sends request 134 to Authority 2);
outputting second prompt information, which is used to prompt a user whether to terminate permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource (FIG. 13, [0070] “The prompt 232 shown in FIG. 13 enables the authority to select a view button 236 to view the content associated with the request 28, to select an approve button 238 to approve the request 28, or a deny button 240 to deny the request 28”);
detecting an input of the user for terminating use of the first resource by the application of the first electronic device (FIG. 13, [0070] “The prompt 232 shown in FIG. 13 enables the authority to select a view button 236 to view the content associated with the request 28, to select an approve button 238 to approve the request 28, or a deny button 240 to deny the request 28.” [0074] “the media access control module 68 may then determine, at 270, whether or not to deny the request to others. If denied, an instruction may be sent to one or more other controlled devices 20 to deny the same content, at 272.”); and
sending second indication information to the first electronic device in response to detecting the input of the user, wherein the second indication information indicates the first electronic device to terminate the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource ([0074] “the media access control module 68 may then determine, at 270, whether or not to deny the request to others. If denied, an instruction may be sent to one or more other controlled devices 20 to deny the same content, at 272”. FIG. 7, Authority 2 sends response 144 to Requestor.” Abstract “first mobile device receives a response via the P2P messaging protocol, and enables or denies access to the media according to the response”).
Regarding claim 18, Vieira teaches claim 17 wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the instructions to cause the electronic device to perform:
displaying a second indicator in a status bar of the second electronic device in response to the first indication information, wherein the second indicator indicates a type of the first resource, or the second indicator indicates the type of the first resource and a type identifier of the first electronic device (FIG. 13 shows message "Child A has requested approval for CONTENT A" [0070] “The prompt 232 in this example includes a message 234 indicating that: "Child A has requested approval for CONTENT A", wherein CONTENT A may provide a brief description, title, or other identifier related to the media access request. In other examples, the message 234 may indicate that Child A is attempting to call Friend X, or Child A is attempting to use a browser during school hours, etc.”).
Regarding claim 19, Vieira teaches claim 18 further teaches wherein the outputting the second prompt information comprises:
displaying a setting bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the second indicator ([0055] “For example, the response 30 may indicate that text from a web page can be accessed but not images or videos. Similarly, if the request 28 is generic, e.g., "can I contact my friend?"; the response 30 can be structured to provide an approval with conditions. For example, a parent may not allow a child to contact their friend by phone, but may permit them to send a P2P message 40 or email message. As such, it can be appreciated that the requests 28 and responses 30 can be configured not only to enable an authority to approve or deny media content or access to media or a service, but also to provide conditional responses 30 or selections from a list of options. This approval may also apply to the amount of media content allowed. For example, a parent may allow a child to phone a friend but for a limited amount of time”), wherein the second prompt information is displayed in the setting bar (FIG. 13 shows button 236, 238, 240); and
wherein the detecting the input of the user for terminating use of the first resource by the application of the first electronic device comprises: displaying a window in response to detecting an operation of the user on the second prompt information, wherein the window comprises a terminate control, and the terminate control is used to trigger termination of the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource ([0055] “For example, the response 30 may indicate that text from a web page can be accessed but not images or videos. Similarly, if the request 28 is generic, e.g., "can I contact my friend?"; the response 30 can be structured to provide an approval with conditions. For example, a parent may not allow a child to contact their friend by phone, but may permit them to send a P2P message 40 or email message. As such, it can be appreciated that the requests 28 and responses 30 can be configured not only to enable an authority to approve or deny media content or access to media or a service, but also to provide conditional responses 30 or selections from a list of options. This approval may also apply to the amount of media content allowed. For example, a parent may allow a child to phone a friend but for a limited amount of time”); and
detecting an operation of the user on the terminate control (FIG. 13, [0070] “The prompt 232 shown in FIG. 13 enables the authority to select a view button 236 to view the content associated with the request 28, to select an approve button 238 to approve the request 28, or a deny button 240 to deny the request 28”).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4, 5, 8-10, 15, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vieira in view of Harb (US 2019/0272385).
Regarding claim 4, Vieira teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein the second electronic device is further configured implement one of the following (a), (b) or (c)
display a terminate control in a notification bar (FIG. 13 shows messages including “DENY” button 240) {in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar}, wherein the terminate control is used to trigger termination of the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource, and the second prompt information is displayed in the notification bar (FIG. 4 – second display includes option to deny the request 416), and
(a) sending the second indication information to the first electronic device in response to detecting an operation of the user on the terminate control ([0074] “the media access control module 68 may then determine, at 270, whether or not to deny the request to others. If denied, an instruction may be sent to one or more other controlled devices 20 to deny the same content, at 272”. Abstract - “first mobile device receives a response via the P2P messaging protocol, and enables or denies access to the media according to the response”); or
displaying a control bar in response to detecting an operation of opening the control bar by the user, wherein the second prompt information and a second control are displayed in the control bar, and the second control is used to disable or enable use of a first resource of a same type as the first resource,
displaying a setting bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the second control, wherein detailed information of the second prompt information is displayed in the setting bar, and
displaying a first window in response to detecting an operation of the user on the detailed information displayed in the setting bar, wherein the first window comprises the terminate control, and
sending the second indication information to the first electronic device in response to detecting the operation of the user on the terminate control; or
(b) displaying a second window in response to the first indication information, wherein the second prompt information and a terminate control are displayed in the second window, and
(c) sending the second indication information to the first electronic device in response to detecting the operation of the user on the terminate control.
Vieira does not teach display a terminate control in a notification bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar
However, Harb teaches a terminate control in a notification bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar (FIG. 4, [0069] “Display 400 includes parental control module 402 of the media guidance application indicating that a user has requested to access media asset 404, “Game of Thrones.” For example, the media guidance application receives a notification containing a request by the first user 310 to view media asset 404 and prompts the second user for identification 408 before allowing the user to choose whether or not to approve the request, in order to ensure the user with authority to approve access to the media asset is the one using the user equipment device.” [0072] “Display 400 includes message 410 informing the user which identifier, corresponding to a profile, was received by the media guidance application. For example, the media guidance application generates a message that user 410 currently identified, based on the received identifier is Mom. The media guidance application generates for display on display 400 the notification that the first user wishes to access blocked media asset 412, For example, the media guidance application generates for display that user John would like to access, “Game of Thrones.” In some embodiments, the media guidance application may generate for display an option to unblock the media asset 414 for access by the first user on the first user equipment device and an option to deny the request 416 and leave the media asset blocked. These options operate in the same manner as options 208 and 210 described in FIG. 2”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature a terminate control in a notification bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar, as taught by Harb in Vieira to allow only authorized person to access the parental control system.
Regarding claim 5, Vieira teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein the first electronic device is further configured to send third indication information to the second electronic device, wherein the third indication information indicates that the first electronic device has terminated the permission for the application to use the first resource (FIG. 7, after receiving response message 144, Requestor sends update message 152 to Authority 2. [0058] “The P2P messaging system 40 delivers the response 30, at 144, which is received by the requestor, at 146, and processed by the requestor, at 148.” [0059] “an update can be generated and sent by the requestor, at 150, e.g., to confirm receipt of the response 30. Such an update may already exist as part of the protocol used by the P2P messaging system 40 or may be generated specifically for the request/response method shown herein. The update in this example is delivered by the P2P messaging system 40, at 152 to both Authority 1, at 154, and Authority 2, at 156.” ); {and the second electronic device is further configured to: in response to the third indication information, no longer output the second prompt information}
Vieira does not teach the second electronic device is further configured to: in response to the third indication information, no longer output the second prompt information.
However, the Examiner submits such implementation is common to indicate an operation, in this case – denying a content request, has been completed. For example, Harb discloses [0060] “The media guidance application may additionally generate for display on display 200 an option to deny the request 210. In some embodiments, the option to deny the request 210 may be an option to close the notification, where closing the notification acts as an implicit denial of the request.” It should be noted, Vieira teaches a response and an update confirming the response being received in [0058] and [0059]). Thus Harb and Vieira in combination teaches the second electronic device is further configured to: in response to the third indication information, no longer output the second prompt information.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature the second electronic device is further configured to: in response to the third indication information, no longer output the second prompt information to allow the user to move on with subsequent operations.
Regarding claim 8, Vieira teaches claim 1 but does not teach wherein the first electronic device is further configured to display a first indicator in a status bar of the first electronic device, wherein the first indicator indicates a type of the first resource.
Harb teaches wherein the first electronic device is further configured to display a first indicator in a status bar of the first electronic device, wherein the first indicator indicates a type of the first resource (FIG. 3, [0065] “The media guidance application generates for display on display 300 a selectable option to notify the approver 306. For example, upon selection by the user of selectable option 306, the media guidance application determines a second user to transmit the request to”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature wherein the first electronic device is further configured to display a first indicator in a status bar of the first electronic device, wherein the first indicator indicates a type of the first resource to ensure a content must be approved by a parent.
Regarding claim 9, Vieira teaches claim 8 but Vieira does not teach wherein when the second indicator indicates the type of the first resource, the first indicator and the second indicator have different display effects.
Harb teaches wherein when the second indicator indicates the type of the first resource, the first indicator and the second indicator have different display effects (FIG. 3, “program” represent type of content).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature wherein when the second indicator indicates the type of the first resource, the first indicator and the second indicator have different display effects to ensure a content must be approved by a parent.
Regarding claim 10, Vieira teaches claim 9 but Vieira does not teach wherein a display location of the first indicator relative to the status bar of the first electronic device is different from a display location of the second indicator relative to the status bar of the second electronic device; or a display color of the first indicator is different from a display color of the second indicator.
Harb teaches wherein a display location of the first indicator relative to the status bar of the first electronic device is different from a display location of the second indicator relative to the status bar of the second electronic device; or a display color of the first indicator is different from a display color of the second indicators (FIG. 3, “program” is located at different location from “Game of Thrones”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature wherein a display location of the first indicator relative to the status bar of the first electronic device is different from a display location of the second indicator relative to the status bar of the second electronic device; or a display color of the first indicator is different from a display color of the second indicators to ensure a content must be approved by a parent.
Regarding claim 15, Vieira teaches claim 12 and further teaches wherein the outputting second prompt information comprising one of the following (a), (b) or (c):
(a) wherein the outputting the second prompt information comprises: displaying the second prompt information in a notification bar (FIG. 4 – second display includes option to deny the request 416),
wherein
the detecting the input of the user for terminating use of the first resource by the application of the first electronic device comprises: displaying a terminate control in the notification bar {in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar}, wherein the terminate control is used to trigger termination of the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource, and detecting an operation of the user on the terminate control (FIG. 4 – second display includes option to deny the request 416); or
wherein the outputting the second prompt information comprises:
(b) displaying a control bar in response to detecting an operation of opening the control bar by the user, wherein the second prompt information and a second control are displayed in the control bar, and the second control is used to disable or enable use of a first resource of a same type as the first resource,
wherein the detecting the input of the user for terminating the use of the first resource by the application of the first electronic device comprises:
displaying a setting bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the second control, wherein detailed information of the second prompt information is displayed in the setting bar, displaying a window in response to detecting an operation of the user on the detailed information displayed in the setting bar, wherein the window comprises a terminate control, and detecting the operation of the user on the terminate control; or the outputting second prompt information comprises:
(c) displaying a window in response to the first indication information, wherein the second prompt information and a terminate control are displayed in the window, and
Wherein the detecting the input of the user for terminating the use of the first resource by the application of the first electronic device comprises: detecting the operation of the user on the terminate control.
Vieira does not teach display displaying a terminate control in a notification bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar
However, Harb teaches displaying a terminate control in a notification bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar (FIG. 4, [0069] “Display 400 includes parental control module 402 of the media guidance application indicating that a user has requested to access media asset 404, “Game of Thrones.” For example, the media guidance application receives a notification containing a request by the first user 310 to view media asset 404 and prompts the second user for identification 408 before allowing the user to choose whether or not to approve the request, in order to ensure the user with authority to approve access to the media asset is the one using the user equipment device.” [0072] “Display 400 includes message 410 informing the user which identifier, corresponding to a profile, was received by the media guidance application. For example, the media guidance application generates a message that user 410 currently identified, based on the received identifier is Mom. The media guidance application generates for display on display 400 the notification that the first user wishes to access blocked media asset 412, For example, the media guidance application generates for display that user John would like to access, “Game of Thrones.” In some embodiments, the media guidance application may generate for display an option to unblock the media asset 414 for access by the first user on the first user equipment device and an option to deny the request 416 and leave the media asset blocked. These options operate in the same manner as options 208 and 210 described in FIG. 2”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature to display a terminate control in a notification bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar, as taught by Harb in Vieira to allow only authorized person to access the parental control system.
Regarding claim 16, Vieira teaches claim 13 and further teaches receiving third indication information sent by the first electronic device, wherein the third indication information indicates that the first electronic device has terminated the permission for the application to use the first resource (FIG. 7, after receiving response message 144, Requestor sends update message 152 to Authority 2. [0058] “The P2P messaging system 40 delivers the response 30, at 144, which is received by the requestor, at 146, and processed by the requestor, at 148.” [0059] “an update can be generated and sent by the requestor, at 150, e.g., to confirm receipt of the response 30. Such an update may already exist as part of the protocol used by the P2P messaging system 40 or may be generated specifically for the request/response method shown herein. The update in this example is delivered by the P2P messaging system 40, at 152 to both Authority 1, at 154, and Authority 2, at 156.” ); {and in response to the third indication information, no longer outputting the second prompt information}
Vieira does not teach in response to the third indication information, no longer outputting the second prompt information.
However, the Examiner submits such implementation is common to indicate an operation, in this case – denying a content request, has been completed. For example, Harb discloses [0060] “The media guidance application may additionally generate for display on display 200 an option to deny the request 210. In some embodiments, the option to deny the request 210 may be an option to close the notification, where closing the notification acts as an implicit denial of the request.” It should be noted, Vieira teaches a response and an update confirming the response being received in [0058] and [0059]). Thus Harb and Vieira in combination teaches in response to the third indication information, no longer outputting the second prompt information.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature in response to the third indication information, no longer outputting the second prompt information to allow the user to move on with subsequent operations.
Regarding claim 20, Vieira teaches claim 17 and further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the instructions to cause the electronic device to perform one of the following (a), (b), or (c):
(a) in outputting the second prompt information, the electronic device is configured to: display the second prompt information in a notification bar (FIG. 4 – second display includes option to deny the request 416),
in detecting the input of the user for terminating the use of the first resource by the application of the first electronic device, the electronic device is configured to: display a terminate control in the notification bar {in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar}, wherein the terminate control is used to trigger termination of the permission for the application of the first electronic device to use the first resource and detect an operation of the user on the terminate control (FIG. 4 – second display includes option to deny the request 416), or
in outputting the second prompt information, the electronic device is configured to:
(b) display a control bar in response to detecting an operation of opening the control bar by the user, wherein the second prompt information and a second control are displayed in the control bar, and the second control is used to disable or enable use of a first resource of a same type as the first resource,
in detecting the input of the user for terminating the use of the first resource by the application of the first electronic device, the electronic device is configured to
displaying a setting bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the second control, wherein detailed information of the second prompt information is displayed in the setting bar,
displaying a first window in response to detecting an operation of the user on the detailed information displayed in the setting bar, wherein the first window comprises the terminate control, and
detecting an operation of the user on the terminate control; or
in outputting the second prompt information, the electronic device is configured to
(c) display a second window in response to the first indication information, wherein the second prompt information and the terminate control are displayed in the window, and
in detecting the input of the user for terminating the use of the first resource by the application of the first electronic device, the electronic device is configured to
detecting an operation of the user on the terminate control.
Vieira does not teach display to display a terminate control in a notification bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar
However, Harb teaches to display a terminate control in a notification bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar (FIG. 4, [0069] “Display 400 includes parental control module 402 of the media guidance application indicating that a user has requested to access media asset 404, “Game of Thrones.” For example, the media guidance application receives a notification containing a request by the first user 310 to view media asset 404 and prompts the second user for identification 408 before allowing the user to choose whether or not to approve the request, in order to ensure the user with authority to approve access to the media asset is the one using the user equipment device.” [0072] “Display 400 includes message 410 informing the user which identifier, corresponding to a profile, was received by the media guidance application. For example, the media guidance application generates a message that user 410 currently identified, based on the received identifier is Mom. The media guidance application generates for display on display 400 the notification that the first user wishes to access blocked media asset 412, For example, the media guidance application generates for display that user John would like to access, “Game of Thrones.” In some embodiments, the media guidance application may generate for display an option to unblock the media asset 414 for access by the first user on the first user equipment device and an option to deny the request 416 and leave the media asset blocked. These options operate in the same manner as options 208 and 210 described in FIG. 2”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature to display a terminate control in a notification bar in response to detecting an operation of the user on the notification bar, as taught by Harb in Vieira to allow only authorized person to access the parental control system.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vieira in view of Cranfill et al. (US 2019/0347181, “Cranfill”).
Regarding claim 7, Vieira teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein the first electronic device is further configured to disable a first control in response to the second indication information, to terminate the permission for the application to use the first resource (abstract “first mobile device receives a response via the P2P messaging protocol, and enables or denies access to the media according to the response”) {wherein the first control is displayed in a control bar of the first electronic device, or the first control is displayed in a setting bar of the first electronic device}.
Vieira does not teach wherein the first control is displayed in a control bar of the first electronic device, or the first control is displayed in a setting bar of the first electronic device.
Cranfill teaches wherein the first control is displayed in a control bar of the first electronic device, or the first control is displayed in a setting bar of the first electronic device (FIG. 14J, [0524] “The electronic device 500 presents an indication 1498-24 that the change to the restriction setting was denied by a parent (e.g., “Dad denied the device downtime setting change”). Further, when the parent denies the setting change made at the child device, the child device continues to operate in accordance with the settings before they were changed”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature the second electronic device is further configured to: in response to the third indication information, no longer output the second prompt information, as taught by Cranfill to allow the user to move on with subsequent operations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Martin et al. (US 2017/0289621) discloses method for allowing access to different versions of the media asset.
Hampson et al. (US 2017/0177891) discloses systems and methods of selection and approval of media content.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUOC THAI NGOC VU whose telephone number is (571)270-5901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached at 571-272-7915. 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.
/QUOC THAI N VU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights