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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 8-11, 13-19, and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-3, 10, 13, and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over a combination of Bernstein et al. (US 20160277802), Bilbrey et al. (US 2011/0164163), and Verma et al. (US 10015554).
Regarding claim 1, Bernstein teaches a method for information interaction, comprising:
displaying a video image in a video image display area ([0055], “FIG. 2B illustrates an example user interface 201 of a beginning portion of a broadcast via a social media network, in accordance with an implementation. The user interface 201 may be generated by an interactive streaming application installed on the consumer computing device. The user interface 201 may include a viewing area 245, in which the broadcaster can see the video stream.” Figs. 2A-2C); and
determining a message and displaying the message in a message display area ([0056], “FIG. 2C illustrates an example user interface 202 of a broadcast that includes engagement representations, according to an implementation. In the example of FIG. 2C, three viewers have joined the broadcast, as illustrated by updated viewer indication 230. The three viewers have provided engagements in the form of signals of appreciation represented by icons 250 and comments 255. The icons 250 are an example of a type of engagement representation. The social media server may provide indications of the engagements and the video interaction engine may trigger display of the representations of the engagement representations, such as icons 250 and comments 255. Each of the icons 250 represents a single signal of appreciation from one of the three viewers. The appearance of the icons (e.g., color such as yellow hearts vs. pink hearts, or fill such as stripe fill vs. dotted fill) may serve to differentiate the source of the signal of appreciation.” Figs. 2A-2C);
wherein projection of the message display area in the plane where the video image display area is located is located on a left side and/or a right side of a preset central area of the video image display area ([0056], “The icons 250 are an example of a type of engagement representation. The social media server may provide indications of the engagements and the video interaction engine may trigger display of the representations of the engagement representations, such as icons 250 and comments 255.” Figs. 2A-2C), and
wherein the message display area is located in front of the video image display area ([0056], “FIG. 2C illustrates an example user interface 202 of a broadcast that includes engagement representations, according to an implementation. In the example of FIG. 2C, three viewers have joined the broadcast, as illustrated by updated viewer indication 230. The three viewers have provided engagements in the form of signals of appreciation represented by icons 250 and comments 255. The icons 250 are an example of a type of engagement representation. The social media server may provide indications of the engagements and the video interaction engine may trigger display of the representations of the engagement representations, such as icons 250 and comments 255. Each of the icons 250 represents a single signal of appreciation from one of the three viewers. The appearance of the icons (e.g., color such as yellow hearts vs. pink hearts, or fill such as stripe fill vs. dotted fill) may serve to differentiate the source of the signal of appreciation.” Figs. 2A, 3B-3B, 4C-4D).
Bernstein does not expressly teach orthographic projection of the target message display area. Bernstein also does not expressly teach that the message display area is located in front of the video image display area in a direction of Z axis and is spaced apart from the video image display area by a distance along the Z axis. Bernstein also does not expressly teach that the message display area and the video image display area are not on a same display plane.
Bilbrey teaches an orthographic projection rendering ([0032], “Second display area 204 of the split screen display can show computer-generated imagery of the objects (e.g., buildings) in the images (e.g., live video) of display area 202. In some implementations, the computer-generated imagery can be created on the fly or can be retrieved from a repository. For example, once the live video has been identified as downtown San Francisco, computer-generated imagery of downtown San Francisco can be downloaded from a network resource. Alternatively, known real-time rendering techniques can be used to generate 3D computer-generated imagery that can be navigated by the user. For example, 3D models of recognized objects of downtown San Francisco can be constructed out of geometrical vertices, faces, and edges in a 3D coordinate system. The models can be rendered using known real-time rendering techniques (e.g., orthographic or perspective projection, clipping, screen mapping, rasterizing) and transformed into the current view space of the live video camera.”).
In view of Bilbrey’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bernstein to include orthographic projection of the target message display area. The modification would serve to enhance depiction of graphical elements in a user interface. The modification would thereby improve the user experience.
The combination teaches the limitations specified above; however, the combination does not expressly teach that the message display area is located in front of the video image display area in a direction of Z axis and is spaced apart from the video image display area by a distance along the Z axis. The combination also does not expressly teach that the message display area and the video image display area are not on a same display plane.
Verma teaches a display area located in front of a video image display area in a direction of Z axis and is spaced apart from the video image display area by a distance along the Z axis, and the display area and the video image display area are not on a same display plane (Col. 10, line 58 to col. 11, line 3, “In some implementations, presentation of the content 104 may continue while the user interface is being presented. At 306, the media device 106 may be configured to depict the items indicated by the item data 116, while the media device 106 continues the presentation of the content 104. For example, the media device 106 may be configured to depict a user interface indicative of the available items 118 as an overlay during presentation of the content 104. In one implementation, the overlay may be the user interface being presented a greater layer along a Z axis relative to a layer used to present the content 104, thus appearing to be above or on top of the presentation.” Fig. 1).
In view of Verma’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination wherein the message display area is located in front of the video image display area in a direction of Z axis and is spaced apart from the video image display area by a distance along the Z axis, and the message display area and the video image display area are not on a same display plane. The modification would serve facilitate user identification and interaction with messaging content. The modification would additionally facilitate management and/or processing of graphical elements.
Regarding claim 13, Bernstein teaches an electronic device, comprising: at least one memory and at least one processor; and wherein the memory is configured to store program codes, and the processor is configured to call the program codes stored in the memory (Bernstein: [0099]-[0099]). The rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC §103 is similarly applied to the remaining limitations of claim 13.
Regarding claim 14, Bernstein teaches a non-transitory computer storage medium, wherein, the non-transitory computer storage medium has program codes stored thereon, which when executed by a computer device (Bernstein: [0099]-[0099]), causes the computer device to perform a method (Bernstein: [0099]-[0099]). The rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC §103 is similarly applied to the remaining limitations of claim 14.
Regarding claims 2 and 15, the combination further teaches wherein, the orthographic projection is located entirely or partially in the video image display area (Bernstein: [0056], “The icons 250 are an example of a type of engagement representation. The social media server may provide indications of the engagements and the video interaction engine may trigger display of the representations of the engagement representations, such as icons 250 and comments 255.” Figs. 2A-2C; Bilbrey: [0032]).
Regarding claims 3 and 16, the combination teaches wherein displaying the message in the message display area comprises: moving the message toward the message display area (Bernstein: [0056], “In other words, after an icon appears in the viewing area 245, the system may be configured to make the icon move (for example, floating up) and then fade out and disappear from the viewing area 245 after a predetermined time.” [0061], Figs. 2C, 3B).
Regarding claim 10, the combination teaches wherein the message includes at least one of: an emoticon message, a picture message, a virtual item, or a text message (Bernstein: [0032], “For example, a signal of appreciation may be represented by an icon. The icon may be a heart shape, a star shape, a smiley face shape, or some other shape.”).
Claim(s) 4-5 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over a combination of Bernstein, Bilbrey, Verma, and Rodriguez et al. (US 2018/0367483).
Regarding claims 4 and 17, the combination teaches the limitations specified above; however, the combination does not expressly teach wherein, in response to the message originating from a current client, the message moves along a first path; and in response to the message originating from a client other than the current client, the message moves along a second path.
Rodriguez teaches, in response to a message originating from a current client, the message moves along a first path; and in response to the message originating from a client other than the current client, the message moves along a second path ([0395], “In this example, several chat users have input messages in the chat conversation, as shown by messages 1006 input from three chat users different than the first user and displayed in the display area 1004. Chat messages 1008 have been input by the first user and displayed in the chat interface in display area 1004. In this example, chat messages from other users are identified by a graphical user identifier and chat messages input by the first user are displayed right-justified on the display screen.” Fig. 10).
In view of Rodriguez’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination wherein, in response to the message originating from a current client, the message moves along a first path; and in response to the message originating from a client other than the current client, the message moves along a second path. The modification would serve to facilitate identification of the source of messages. The modification would thereby improve the user experience.
Regarding claims 5 and 18, the combination teaches wherein, the first path is a path between a message editing interface and the message display area; the message editing interface is used to edit and send the message (Rodriguez: [0395], “In this example, several chat users have input messages in the chat conversation, as shown by messages 1006 input from three chat users different than the first user and displayed in the display area 1004. Chat messages 1008 have been input by the first user and displayed in the chat interface in display area 1004. In this example, chat messages from other users are identified by a graphical user identifier and chat messages input by the first user are displayed right-justified on the display screen.” Fig. 10).
Claim(s) 6 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over a combination of Bernstein, Bilbrey, Verma, Rodriguez, and Baron et al. (US 2009/0063995).
Regarding claims 6 and 19, the combination teaches the limitations specified above; however, the combination does not expressly teach wherein, the second path is a random path other than the first path.
Baron teaches randomly placing graphical elements in a graphical user interface ([0053], “The bubble messages appear as text in speech bubbles that pop out of users' avatars. The bubble messages are placed randomly about an area of the GUI 203a, appearing and then fading away after a short period.”).
In view of Baron’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination wherein the second path is a random path other than the first path. The modification would serve to enable users to express thoughts without expecting or requiring a response due to the undirected and temporary format of the messages (see Baron: [0053]).
Claim(s) 8 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over a combination of Bernstein, Bilbrey, Verma, Aisemberg (US 2018/0341373), and Cupala et al. (US 2013/0325954).
Regarding claims 8 and 21, the combination teaches wherein, in response to two or more identical first messages being determined from the same client within a preset time period, moving paths of the two or more identical first messages are the same.
Aisemberg teaches wherein, in response to messages being determined from a same client within a preset time period, moving paths of messages are the same ([0070], “Assume that the people portion 708 includes a person indicator 710 associated with the sender-user (Amy) who sent the original message to Chad, that original message consisting of a static heart emoji.” [0071], “The notification presentation component 118 displays this notification 712 above the person indicator 710 associated with the sender-user, Amy.” Fig. 7).
In view of Aisemberg’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination wherein, in response to first messages being determined from the same client within a preset time period, moving paths of the first messages are the same. The modification would serve to further aid in determining the source of messaging content.
While the combination teaches the moving paths being in response to first messages being determined from the same client within a preset time period, the combination does not expressly teach, in response to two or more identical first messages being determined from the same client within a preset time period, moving paths of the two or more identical first messages are the same.
Cupala teaches, in response to two or more identical messages being determined within a preset time period, presentation of the two or more identical messages is the same ([0084], “When the emote is identical, the two avatars and user information may be combined in a single feed 810 item as depicted in FIG. 8. As can be seen, feed item 810 indicates that KPMGLITTER and MATSLY both cheered. Their corresponding icons are both shown as part of the feed item. When different emotes are input by different users nearly simultaneously, separate feed items may be created for each.” Figs. 8-9).
In view of Cupala’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination wherein, in response to two or more identical first messages being determined from the same client within a preset time period, moving paths of the two or more identical first messages are the same. The modification would serve to further facilitate user navigation and operation of the user interface.
Regarding claim 9, the combination teaches further comprising: displaying a third identifier corresponding to the two or more identical first messages in the message display area, the third identifier being used to display a number of the first messages currently arriving at the message display area (Cupala: [0084], “When the emote is identical, the two avatars and user information may be combined in a single feed 810 item as depicted in FIG. 8. As can be seen, feed item 810 indicates that KPMGLITTER and MATSLY both cheered. Their corresponding icons are both shown as part of the feed item. When different emotes are input by different users nearly simultaneously, separate feed items may be created for each.” Figs. 8-9; Bernstein: [0056]).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over a combination of Bernstein, Bilbrey, Verma, and Aisemberg.
Regarding claim 11, the combination teaches the limitations specified above; however, the combination does not expressly teach wherein the message is displayed with a user identifier of a user sending the message.
Aisemberg teaches wherein a message is displayed with a user identifier of a user sending a message ([0070], “Assume that the people portion 708 includes a person indicator 710 associated with the sender-user (Amy) who sent the original message to Chad, that original message consisting of a static heart emoji.” [0071], “The notification presentation component 118 displays this notification 712 above the person indicator 710 associated with the sender-user, Amy.” Fig. 7).
In view of Aisemberg’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination wherein the message is displayed with a user identifier of a user sending the message. The modification would serve to identification of viewers and their interactions with content. The modification would thereby improve the user experience.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL R TELAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5940. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at (571) 272-4195. 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.
/MICHAEL R TELAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426
Prosecution Insights