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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This non-final office action is in response to the Application filed on 10/26/2024, which is a CON of PCT/CN2023/077640 Filing Date 02/22/2023 with priority to CN 202210161533.2 Filing Date 02/22/2022.
Claim(s) 1-20 are pending for examination. Claim(s) 1, 10, 11 is/are independent claim(s).
Title of the Invention
37 C.F.R. 1.72(a) states: "The title of the invention may not exceed 500 characters in length and must be as short and specific as possible" (emphasis added). Thus, the title of the invention is not sufficiently descriptive.
A new title is required that is more clearly and more specifically indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Didrickson; Kristof et al. US Pub. No. 2022/0036311 (Didrickson).
Claim 1:
Didrickson teaches:
An information processing method, characterized in that it comprises:
displaying a first document [¶ 0079-82, 135-136] (Figs. 5, 11; document is displayed); and
adding a document template attribute to the first document in response to a first operation event on the first document [¶ 0097] (select a “create a new reusable component” option (e.g., from a drop-down menu)) [¶ 0085] (toolbar also includes an interactive new collaborative content item icon 528 for creating a new collaborative content item), and displaying a first control in an associated area of the first document or an associated area of a content page of the first document, wherein the first control is used for creating a document by using the first document as a template after the first control is triggered [¶ 0135-138] (FIG. 11 depicts creating and editing a reusable component).
Claim 2:
Didrickson teaches:
The method according to claim 1, characterized in that the adding a document template attribute to the first document in response to a first operation event on the first document comprises:
adding a document template attribute to the first document in response to a second control associated with the first document shifting from a first state to a second state, wherein the second control has the first state and the second state, so that the first document has a document attribute when the second control is in the first state, and the first document has both the document attribute and the document template attribute when the second control is in the second state [¶ 0085] (user interface state, toolbar) [¶ 0135-138] (FIG. 11 depicts creating and editing a reusable component, including a different “state” for different times in the creation process) [¶ 0085] (toolbar also includes an interactive new collaborative content item icon 528 for creating a new collaborative content item) [¶ 0085, 130, 0155-156] (icon may be displayed differently, different color, this could be an “attribute”, highlighting could also be an “attribute”, bolded could also be an “attribute”).
Claim 3:
Didrickson teaches:
The method according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises: adding a template tag to the first document, wherein the template tag is used for identifying the first document as a document template [¶ 0085] (toolbar also includes an interactive “favorites” icon 518 which, if selected, tags, marks, or otherwise designates the collaborative content item as one of the editing user's favorites) [¶ 0074] (content tags indicating categories for the metadata) [¶ 0061] (tags or labels).
Claim 4:
Didrickson teaches:
The method according to claim 3, characterized in that it comprises:
displaying the template tag in an associated area of a title of the first document, wherein the template tag is used for identifying the first document as the document template [¶ 0120-123] (Fig. 8, popup with list of reusable components) [¶ 0131-134] (Fig. 10, catalog of reusable components).
Claim 5:
Didrickson teaches:
The method according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises at least one of the following:
displaying a second document created by using the first document as a template in response to a second operation event on the first document [¶ 0131-134] (Fig. 10, catalog of reusable components); or
modifying the content in the first document in response to a first modifying operation; and applying the modified content of the first document to the second document in response to a third operation event on the first document [¶ 0061] (collaborative content items editor) [¶ 0135-138] (FIG. 11 depicts creating and editing a reusable component, including a different “state” for different times in the creation process).
Claim 6:
Didrickson teaches:
The method according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises:
displaying the first document in a document classification of a document database, and displaying the first document in a document template classification [¶ 0131-134] (Fig. 10, catalog of reusable components, including folders for teams, a catalog with folder for Team A, could be a classification).
Claim 7:
Didrickson teaches:
The method according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises:
displaying the document template information in an associated area of the first document or an associated area of a content page of the first document, wherein the document template information comprises at least one of a creator or the use information [¶ 0116] (the name of the user who created it).
Claim 8:
Didrickson teaches:
The method according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises at least one of the following:
adding the first document into a target folder in response to a fourth operation event on the first document [¶ 0108] (title and folder information) [¶ 0031, 48, 50, 52, 85, 98, 108] (folder);
adding the first document to a quick access portal in response to a fifth operation event on the first document [¶ 0085] (toolbar also includes an interactive “favorites” icon 518 which, if selected, tags, marks, or otherwise designates the collaborative content item as one of the editing user's favorites);
adding the first document to a group notice in response to a sixth operation event on the first document [¶ 0131-134] (Fig. 10, catalog of reusable components, including folders for teams, a catalog with folder for Team A, could be a classification);
adding the first document to a user name card in response to a seventh operation event on the first document [¶ 0116] (the name of the user who created it); or
determining a target object and sharing the first document to the target object in response to an eighth operation event on the first document [¶ 0046-48] (sharing content items).
Claim 9:
Didrickson teaches:
The method according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises:
creating a third document by using the first document as a template in response to a trigger operation on the first control [¶ 0104-125] (FIG. 7, FIG. 8 and FIG. 9 illustrate user interfaces and associated processes for using an inline reusable component selection expression to select and insert a reusable component into a collaborative content item); and
synchronizing the content of the third document to the first document in response to a ninth operation event on the third document [¶ 0052] (automatically synchronizes content from one or more client devices) [¶ 0126-130] (a reusable component inserted into a collaborative content item can be in one of various different tethering modes).
Claims 10-20:
Claim(s) 10 and 11 is/are substantially similar to claim 1 and is/are rejected using the same prior art and the same reason, rationale and/or motivation as used above.
Claim 1 is a “method” claim, claim 10 is a “system” claim and claim 11 is a “medium” claim, but the steps or elements of each claim are essentially the same.
Claim(s) 12, 17 is/are substantially similar to claim 2 and is/are rejected using the same prior art and the same reason, rationale and/or motivation as used above.
Claim(s) 13, 18 is/are substantially similar to claim 3 and is/are rejected using the same prior art and the same reason, rationale and/or motivation as used above.
Claim(s) 14, 19 is/are substantially similar to claim 4 and is/are rejected using the same prior art and the same reason, rationale and/or motivation as used above.
Claim(s) 15, 20 is/are substantially similar to claim 5 and is/are rejected using the same prior art and the same reason, rationale and/or motivation as used above.
Claim(s) 16 is/are substantially similar to claim 6 and is/are rejected using the same prior art and the same reason, rationale and/or motivation as used above.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Please See PTO-892: Notice of References Cited.
Evidence of the level skill of an ordinary person in the art for Claim 1:
Jimenez Salgado; Rolando et al. US 20200053176 teaches: reusable chunk, chunk may include any type of data such as text, graphic, table, or any other type of information that may in inserted into a document of any type, such as a word processing document, spreadsheet.
Pande; Vaibhav Pradip et al. US 20220284176 teaches: conversion of documents to reusable content types.
Gururajan; Arunkumar et al. US 20170220545 teaches: generation of document templates based on recognized composition element patterns in a group of clustered documents.
Jwalanna; Anil US 20140365555 teaches: update to the dynamic content block is automatically synchronizing to the second client application, folder, template.
Gadiya; Rohan et al. US 20220156456 teaches: convert document to template, synchronizes content.
Beausoleil; Sean et al. US 9298355 teaches: new content item in shared folder 214 to be synchronized with the corresponding shared folders 234 and 244.
Jones, Brian et al. US 20040162833 database will automatically update corresponding parts of the document, and updates to parts of the document will automatically update the corresponding data in the database.
Citations to Prior Art
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for all that it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed were instead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968". In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323,75 USPQ2d 1213,1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264,23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807,10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385,1390,163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN J SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-3825. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11:00 - 7:30 EST.
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, ADAM QUELER can be reached at (571) 272-4140. 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.
/Benjamin Smith/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172 Direct Phone: 571-270-3825
Direct Fax: 571-270-4825
Email: benjamin.smith@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights