DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant's Communication received 10/18/2024 for 18858208. Claims 1-13 and 15-21 are presented.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 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 statement (IDS) submitted on 10/28/2024 and 03/28/2025 was filed before the mailing of a first Office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the "in response to an area deletion request for the display frame from the viewing user, obtaining a first target display area corresponding to the area deletion request; and deleting the first target display area from the display frame; and/or, in response to an area dragging request for the display frame from the viewing user, obtaining a second target display area corresponding to the area dragging request; and changing a display position of the second target display area in the display frame in accordance with the dragging request" (claims 4, 19), "a case where the display frame is a list, adding the second display area at the adding position of the display frame in accordance with the preset display pattern of the second display area comprises: in a case where the second display area is displayed in a column of the list, adding the second display area at the adding position in form of row in accordance with preset rendering parameters and default description information; or, in a case where the second display area is displayed in a row of the list, adding the second display area at the adding position in form of column in accordance with preset rendering parameters and default description information" (claims 5, 20), "in response to a request for commenting a target comment content displayed on the comment interface from the second user, displaying a comment editing box; obtaining a second comment content input by the second user in the comment editing box; and in response to an operation of posting the second comment content by the second user, displaying the second comment content in an area associated with the target comment content" (claim 11), "obtaining the target information created by the first user in a second page view" (claim 12), "wherein the second page view and the first page view are different pages on the same client; or the second page view and the first page view are different pages on different clients" (claim 13) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 8 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities.
Claims 8 and 10 recite "an upper-level user of first user" and "a lower-level user of first user" which have been interpreted as "an upper-level user of --the-- first user" and "a lower-level user of --the-- first user" for purposes of consistent antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 8, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 8 and 10 recite the relative terms "upper-level user" and "lower-level user" which render the claim indefinite. The terms "upper-level user" and "lower-level user" 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. The identity of the second user has been rendered indefinite by the use of "upper-level" and "lower-level", because it is not possible to determine what type of user would be considered upper-level or lower-level.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the same client". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-8, 12-13, and 15-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claim recites a method for processing a task, comprising: obtaining target information created by a first user; and displaying, based on the target information, at least one of the target information in a first page view and displaying target description information corresponding to the at least one of the target information; wherein the target description information is created by a user having permission to target information.
The limitation of obtaining target information created by a first user, displaying, based on the target information, at least one of the target information in a first page view and displaying target description information corresponding to the at least one of the target information; wherein the target description information is created by a user having permission to target information, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, "obtaining", "creating", and "displaying" in the context of this claim encompasses a human user being tasked and authorized to manage project information, formulating tasks and task information for the project, and manually writing down task and task information on a whiteboard or notepad and presenting the task information to project team members.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the "Certain methods of organizing human activity" grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites displaying target information in a first page view. The display and page view are recited at a high level of generality and recited so generically that they represent no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception on a computer [MPEP 2106.05(f)]. These limitations can also be viewed as nothing more than an attempt to generally link the use of the judicial exception to the technological environment of a computer [MPEP 2106.05(h)].
The "first page view" limitation represents extra-solution activity because it is a mere nominal or tangential addition to the claim, amounting to mere data output [MPEP 2106.05(g)]. Even when viewed in combination, the additional elements in this claim do no more than automate the personal interactions between humans, using the computer components as a tool.
Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a display and page view amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept.
The displaying limitation, as discussed above, represents mere data output and is a nominal or tangential addition to the claim. Further, both of these elements are well-understood, routine and conventional. With respect to the "displaying" limitation, the courts have similarly found limitations directed to displaying a result, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional. [MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), "presenting offers and gathering statistics"].
Considering the additional elements individually and in combination and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
The dependent claims also recite limitations of generating a display frame including a first display area used for displaying target information and second display area used for displaying target description information (claims 2, 17); changing the display frame in response to an area editing request from a viewing user (claims 3, 18); adding a display area at a requested position of the display frame in response to an area addition request requesting a display area from a viewing user, deleting a display area from the display frame in response to an area deletion request of a requested area from the viewing user, or changing a display position of an area in the display frame in response to an area dragging request describing an area from the viewing user (claims 4, 19); adding a row or column at a position in a list display frame (claims 5, 20); first target information corresponding to and associated with second target information through content (claims 6, 21); state information and target description information (claim 7); determining to display a first page based on determining an identity of a second user in response to receiving a request to access the first page view (claim 8); hiding target information based on determining a second user does not have permission to access target information (claim 9); obtaining target information created by the first user (claim 12); that are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover managing personal interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components encompassing a human project manager manually writing down task and task description information on different areas of a whiteboard or notepad and presenting the task information to project team members; updating, adding, removing, or changing writing on the whiteboard or notepad based on a request from a team member viewing the whiteboard or notepad; formulating tasks and task content information; revealing or hiding task information on the whiteboard or notepad to another user based on the project manager determining whether another user has permission to view task information and thus fall within the "Certain methods of organizing human activity" grouping of abstract ideas.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The dependent claims recite additional limitations including the first page view (claims 2, 8-10, 17, 13), a second page view (claims 12, 13), and a client (claim 13) that are recited at a high level of generality and recited so generically that they represent no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception on a computer [MPEP 2106.05(f)] and generally link the use of the judicial exception to the technological environment of computer systems [MPEP 2106.05(h)] and do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The dependent claims also recite additional limitations of the first page view (claims 2, 8-10, 13, 17) and a second page view (claims 12, 13) that represent insignificant extra-solution activity including nominal or tangential additions to the claim, amounting to mere data output [MPEP 2106.05(g)]. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The dependent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements of storing data and data display are recited at a high level of generality which are well-understood, routine, or conventional activities [MPEP 2106.05(d))(II), "presenting offers and gathering statistics", "electronic recordkeeping", and "storing and retrieving information in memory"] and remain insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration [MPEP 2106.05(g)]. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components, linking the use of an exception to a technological field of use, and insignificant extra-solution activity cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim 15 recites method steps substantially similar to those recited in claim 1 and recite an abstract idea. While the claim recites additional elements of an electronic device, processor, memory, and executable instructions, the elements are recited at a high level of generality and recited so generically that they represent no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception on a computer [MPEP 2106.05(f)] and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of electronic device, processor, memory, and executable instructions amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. Considering the additional elements individually and in combination and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 16 recites method steps substantially similar to those recited in claim 1 and recite an abstract idea. While the claim recites additional elements of a storage medium, computer processor, and executable computer program, the elements are recited at a high level of generality and recited so generically that they represent no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception on a computer [MPEP 2106.05(f)] and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a storage medium, computer processor, and executable computer program amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. Considering the additional elements individually and in combination and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-13 and 15-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Haramati et al. (US 20210150489 A1().
As to claim 1, Haramati discloses a method for processing a task [para 0255-0256, computing device executes project software], comprising:
obtaining target information created by a first user [para 0181, 0377, user defines project information (read: target information)]; and
displaying, based on the target information, at least one of the target information in a first page view and displaying target description information corresponding to the at least one of the target information [Fig. 5A, para 0256-0257, 0264, 0278, device generates web page (read: first page view) displaying table with task characteristic (read: one of the target information) of project information and data (read: target description information) indicating task characteristic];
wherein the target description information is created by a user having permission to target information [para 0377, owner accesses project table to define project information].
As to claim 2, Haramati discloses the method of claim 1, wherein displaying the at least one of the target information in the first page view and displaying the target description information corresponding to the at least one of the target information comprises:
generating in the first page view a display frame including a first display area and at least one second display area, the first display area corresponding to the at least one second display area and being used for displaying the target information, and the second display area being used for displaying the target description information [Fig. 5A, para 0256-0259, 0264, device displays web page including table (read: display frame) with column headings (read: first display area) identifying project task characteristic and columns (read: second display area) with data indicating task characteristic].
As to claim 3, Haramati discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising:
changing the display frame in response to an area editing request from a viewing user [para 0259-0262, user (read: viewing user) interacting with user interface provides input (read: area editing request) customizing table].
As to claim 4, Haramati discloses the method of claim 3, wherein changing the display frame in response to the area editing request from the viewing user comprises:
in response to an area addition request for the display frame from the viewing user, obtaining an adding position corresponding to the area addition request [para 0259, 0262-0263, 0267, user interacting with application user interface provides input to add column (read: area addition request) to table (read: adding position)]; and
adding a second display area at the adding position of the display frame in accordance with a preset display pattern of the second display area [para 0259, 0262-0263, add column to table with default column heading (read: preset display pattern), note strikethrough indicates non-selected alternatives]; and/or
As to claim 5, Haramati discloses the method of claim 4, wherein in a case where the display frame is a list [Fig. 5A, para 0225, table includes list presenting data in vertical dimensions], adding the second display area at the adding position of the display frame in accordance with the preset display pattern of the second display area [para 0259, 0262-0263, note the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim does not require the contingent limitation of "adding the second display area at the adding position of the display frame in accordance with the preset display pattern of the second display area" to be performed if the conditional "in a case where the display frame is a list" does not occur (see MPEP 2111.04), nevertheless note user input adds column to table with default column heading] comprises:.
in a case where the second display area is displayed in a row of the list, adding the second display area at the adding position in form of column in accordance with preset rendering parameters and default description information [Fig. 5A, para 0253, 0262-0264, note the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim does not require the contingent limitation of "adding the second display area at the adding position in form of column in accordance with preset rendering parameters and default description information" to be performed if the conditional "in a case where the second display area is displayed in a row of the list" does not occur (see MPEP 2111.04), nevertheless note table includes column with task row and user input adds column to table with default column heading (read: description information) and font (read: preset rendering parameters) from column store].
As to claim 6, Haramati discloses the method of claim 1,
wherein the target information comprises first target information and second target information [Fig. 5A, para 0256-0257, 0264, project information includes task characteristic heading (read: first target information) and row data (read: second target information) for task characteristic],
wherein each of the first target information corresponds to at least one second target information and the first target information is associated with the second target information in contents [Fig. 5A, para 0256-0257, 0264, characteristic heading indicates data type (read: contents) for task characteristic].
As to claim 7, Haramati discloses the method of claim 6, wherein.
the first target information corresponds to at least one of state information [Fig. 5A, para 0256-0257, 0264, task characteristic heading includes Status column]; and
the second target information corresponds to at least one of state information [Fig. 5A, para 0256-0257, 0264, task row data includes status of each task and task characteristic data].
As to claim 8, Haramati discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
in response to receiving a request for accessing the first page view of the first user from a second user, determining whether an identity of the second user belongs to at least one of: [para 0278, 0362, 0368-0370, determine user role (read: identity) as project team member subscribed (read: other target information) to (read: aligned with) board table applied to user (read: second user) accessing web page displaying table],
in a case where the identity of the second user belongs to at least one of: [para 0368-0371, 0374-0375, regulate user access permission to viewing web page displaying table information based on user role of project team member subscribed to board table].
As to claim 9, Haramati discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
in response to a second user conforming to an identity having access to the first page view, determining whether the second user has permission to access the target information [para 0278, 0362, 0368-0370, determine user access permission to view table information based on access assigned to role of user (read: second user) accessing web page displaying table]; and
in a case where the second user does not have permission to access the target information, hiding the target information to which the second user has no permission from the second user [Fig. 20, para 0358-0359, 0369-0370, restrict table access including hiding viewing access to user who does not have permission to access table].
As to claim 10, Haramati discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising:
in a case where the identity of the second user belongs to at least one of: [para 0368-0371, 0374-0375, regulate permission access including editing table content to user with role of project team member subscribed to board table], [Figs. 5A-5B, para 0260-0262, 0344-0347, 0401-0403, add column (read: comment interface) of status datatype based on user with role granted permission access selecting command (read: target content) prompted from web page displaying table];
obtaining a first comment content input by the second user in a comment input area of the comment interface [para 0344-0345, 0402-0403, receive user changing status (read: first comment content input) of task status cell by accessing cell menu (read: comment input area)]; and
in response to an operation of posting the first comment content by the second user, displaying the first comment content in the comment interface [Fig. 27, para 0278, 0344-0345, 0398-0399, display status value in task status cell based on user interaction with cell to input task status].
As to claim 11, Haramati discloses the method of claim 10, further comprising:
in response to a request for commenting a target comment content displayed on the comment interface from the second user, displaying a comment editing box [Fig. 27, para 0403-0404, 0430, display menu (read: comment editing box) based on user activating (read: request) menu by clicking cell displaying status value (read: target comment content) in task status cell];
obtaining a second comment content input by the second user in the comment editing box [Figs. 27-28, para 0411-0412, 0430, user specifies animation (read: second comment content) provided by menu]; and
in response to an operation of posting the second comment content by the second user, displaying the second comment content in an area associated with the target comment content [Fig. 30, para 0431-0433, display animation in second cell (read: area) displaying static data based on user selecting animation for inclusion in second cell].
As to claim 12, Haramati discloses the method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the target information created by the first user comprises:
obtaining the target information created by the first user in a second page view [para 0553, user define project notification requirements with new webpage (read: second page view)].
As to claim 13, Haramati discloses the method of claim 12, wherein,
the second page view and the first page view are different pages on the same client [para 0181, 0553-0534, user defines project information including notification requirements on different web pages using device (read: client)];
As to claim 15, Haramati discloses an electronic device, wherein the electronic device comprises: a processor; a memory for storing instructions executable by the processor; wherein the processor reads the executable instructions from the memory and performs the executable instructions to wherein the processor reads the executable instructions from the memory and performs the executable instructions [Fig. 1, para 0192-0194, device including processor and memory storing instructions executed by processor] to: perform limitations substantially similar to those recited in claim 1 and is rejected under similar rationale.
As to claims 17-21, Haramati discloses the electronic device of claim 15 performing limitations substantially similar to those recited in claims 2-6, respectively, and are rejected under similar rationale.
As to claim 16, Haramati discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer-readable storage medium is stored with a computer program, and when executed by a computer processor, the computer program causes the computer processor [Fig. 1, para 0192-0194, memory stores instructions executed by device processor] to: perform limitations substantially similar to those recited in claim 1 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Torman et al. (US 20150106736 A1) generally discloses view permission of board information given user role access permissions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDA HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-5240. The examiner can normally be reached M-F between 9am-5pm.
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.
/LINDA HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172
Prosecution Insights