Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is responsive to the 7/20/2026 communication(s). As per the claims filed 10/21/2024:
Claims 1-12, 16-23 are pending.
Claim(s) 1,16, 21 is/are independent claim(s).
Note Regarding Prior Art
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Note Regarding 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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8-10, 12, 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Taro Eguchi et al.(US PG Pub No 2018/0052963; Published: 02/22/2018)(hereinafter: Eguchi).
Eguchi was cited in the IDS filed 10/21/2024.
Claim 1:
As per independent claim 1, Eguchi discloses a method comprising: outputting, by one or more processors of a computing device and for display by a display device, a graphical user interface [[0069] FIG. 7 shows a configuration of display control of a touch panel monitor. A display controller 130 displays ultrasound images, various buttons (icons) for operations, a virtual trackpad, a virtual keyboard, and others on the touch panel monitor 78. For example, the display controller 130 displays the virtual keyboard in a display area where an ultrasound image is displayed on the touch panel monitor 78.];
determining, by the one or more processors, that a first portion of the graphical user interface includes content having at least a threshold probability of being viewed by a user of the computing device, wherein the graphical user interface further includes a second portion, wherein the first portion and second portion are non-overlapping portions of the graphical user interface [[0107] Referring to FIGS. 15A and 15B, the fourth display example of a virtual keyboard is described. In the fourth display example, the display position of the virtual keyboard is changed depending on the position of a point of interest which is set for an ultrasound image (for example, a sample volume used in a Doppler measurement) and the position of a region of interest (ROI).[0108] When a user provides instructions to set a region of interest, the display controller 130 displays a region of interest 234 on the ultrasound image 232, for example, as shown in FIG. 15A. The display position, shape, and size of the region of interest 234 are designated by, for example, a user]. Interface includes the user defining an area of interest and other areas that are not overlapping. and
outputting, by the one or more processors and for display by the display device, an updated graphical user interface including a graphical keyboard such that a less than majority of the graphical keyboard visually overlays the first portion of the graphical user interface [[0108] the display controller 130 displays the virtual keyboard 212 in the lower area in the display area 78A. When the region of interest 234 is displayed in the lower area in the display area 78A in accordance with instructions from the user, the display controller 130 displays the virtual keyboard 212 in the upper area in the display area 78A. As such, the vertical position of the virtual keyboard 212 is selected in accordance with the vertical position (in the height direction) of the region of interest 234.].
Claim 2:
As per claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Eguchi discloses wherein the second portion of the graphical user interface does not include content having at least the threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device [[0107] When a user provides instructions to set a region of interest, the display controller 130 displays a region of interest 234 on the ultrasound image 232, for example, as shown in FIG. 15A. The display position, shape, and size of the region of interest 234 are designated by, for example, a user] any portion outside the region of interest would be considered as to not have content having at least a threshold probability of being viewed.
Claim 8:
As per claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Eguchi discloses further comprising: determining, by the one or more processors, whether a video or image is included in the graphical user interface; and responsive to determining that a video or image is included in the graphical user interface, determining, by the one or more processors, that the video or image includes content that satisfies the threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device. [[0107] When a user provides instructions to set a region of interest, the display controller 130 displays a region of interest 234 on the ultrasound image 232, for example, as shown in FIG. 15A. The display position, shape, and size of the region of interest 234 are designated by, for example, a user]. An ultrasound image/video is presented in the interface, portion of the image satisfies the threshold probability.
Claim 9:
As per claim 9, which depends on claim 1, Eguchi discloses further comprising: determining, by the one or more processors, whether a third portion of the graphical user interface includes an active text field, [[0080] fig 9, portion of display with active text fields] wherein the active text field is a text field having a current cursor focus [see fig 9] Text fields 140-144 would have to have active cursor focus in order to be filled. and responsive to determining that the third portion includes the active text field, determining, by the one or more processors, that the third portion includes content that satisfies the threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device [[0080] the example shown in FIG. 9, because the input fields 140 to 144 are displayed in the upper portion in the display area, the virtual keyboard 212 is displayed in the lower portion in the display area. When the input fields 140 to 144 are displayed in the lower portion in the display area, the virtual keyboard 212 may be displayed in the upper portion in the display area]. Virtual keyboard not displayed in areas of focus.
Claim 10:
As per claim 10, which depends on claim 9, Eguchi discloses further comprising: determining, by the one or more processors, whether a fourth portion of the graphical user interface includes content that satisfies the threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device, wherein the fourth portion is located adjacent to the active text field; [see fig 9, [0080]] Text fields 140-144 would have to have active cursor focus in order to be filled, user focus must be on the input fields, thus satisfying a threshold probability. and responsive to determining that the fourth portion does not include content that satisfies the threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device, outputting, by the one or more processors and for display by the display device, an updated graphical user interface including a graphical keyboard such that a majority of the graphical keyboard visually overlays the fourth portion of the graphical user interface [[0080] the example shown in FIG. 9, because the input fields 140 to 144 are displayed in the upper portion in the display area, the virtual keyboard 212 is displayed in the lower portion in the display area. When the input fields 140 to 144 are displayed in the lower portion in the display area, the virtual keyboard 212 may be displayed in the upper portion in the display area]. The keyboard is displayed on a portion that does not include the text fields. User interface in fig 9 shows keyboard on a fourth portion not covering the area of focus.
Claim 12:
As per claim 12, which depends on claim 1, Eguchi discloses further comprising: determining, by the one or more processors, whether a third portion of the graphical user interface includes blank space; and responsive to determining that the third portion of the graphical user interface includes blank space, determining, by the one or more processors, that the third portion does not include content that satisfies the threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device. [[0107] Referring to FIGS. 15A and 15B, the fourth display example of a virtual keyboard is described. In the fourth display example, the display position of the virtual keyboard is changed depending on the position of a point of interest which is set for an ultrasound image (for example, a sample volume used in a Doppler measurement) and the position of a region of interest (ROI).[0108] When a user provides instructions to set a region of interest, the display controller 130 displays a region of interest 234 on the ultrasound image 232, for example, as shown in FIG. 15A. The display position, shape, and size of the region of interest 234 are designated by, for example, a user]. Only the selected area includes an area of interest, the remaining interface, blank or not has no probability of being viewed after the user has made the selection.
Claim 16:
As per independent claim 16, it recites a computing device comprising: a display device; one or more processors; and a memory that stores instructions, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform the method of claim 1, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above. See Eguchi figs 4-5.
Claim 17:
As per claim 17, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 2 above.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 4-6, 19, 20, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eguchi in view of Arthur Weinberger et al. (US PG Pub No. 2014/0049462; Published: 02/20/2014)(hereinafter: Weinberger).
Claim 4:
As per claim 4, which depends on claim 1, Eguchi discloses
determining, by the one or more processors, that the respective portion of the content of the graphical user interface is part of the second portion of the graphical user interface. device [[0107] When a user provides instructions to set a region of interest, the display controller 130 displays a region of interest 234 on the ultrasound image 232, for example, as shown in FIG. 15A. The display position, shape, and size of the region of interest 234 are designated by, for example, a user] any portion outside the region of interest would be considered as to not have content having at least a threshold probability of being viewed.
Eguchi discloses a region of interest and a region outside the region of interest. However, Eguchi failed to specifically disclose: wherein the content included in the first portion of the graphical user interface is a first portion of content from a plurality of portions of content included in the graphical user interface, the method further comprising: determining, by the one or more processors, whether the user has viewed a respective portion of content from the plurality of portions of content within a threshold amount of time and responsive to determining that the user has not viewed the respective portion within the threshold amount of time.
Weinberger in the same field of determining a portion of a user interface of interest to a user discloses wherein the content included in the first portion of the graphical user interface is a first portion of content from a plurality of portions of content included in the graphical user interface, the method further comprising: determining, by the one or more processors, whether the user has viewed a respective portion of content from the plurality of portions of content within a threshold amount of time[[0037] In box 506, whether the GUI element remains the same or the subject of the user's gaze for a predetermined threshold of time is determined. In one implementation, the predetermined threshold of time might be a couple seconds or longer,]; and responsive to determining that the user has not viewed the respective portion within the threshold amount of time, [[0040] In box 606, a decision occurs of whether or not the same UI element has been detected, returned, found or selected for longer than (or greater than or equal to) a predetermined threshold of time. [0041] In box 608, which is the result if the answer is "No" to box 606, the clock waits a sampling period, which may be measured in milliseconds, before returning to box 602 in order to start the process all over again].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Eguchi’s point of interest to determine whether the user has viewed a respective portion of content from the plurality of portions of content within a threshold amount of time and responsive to determining that the user has not viewed the respective portion within the threshold amount of time as disclosed by Weinberger. The motivation for doing so would have been to indirectly use the user’s information to determine areas of focus, thus offering a more streamlined and efficient interface.
Claim 5:
As per claim 5, which depends on claim 1, Eguchi discloses determining, by the one or more processors, that the portion of the content of the graphical user interface includes content having at least a threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device. [[0107] When a user provides instructions to set a region of interest, the display controller 130 displays a region of interest 234 on the ultrasound image 232, for example, as shown in FIG. 15A. The display position, shape, and size of the region of interest 234 are designated by, for example, a user] user designates areas of high probability of usage.
Eguchi discloses a region of interest and a region outside the region of interest. However, Eguchi failed to specifically disclose wherein determining that the first portion of the graphical user interface includes content having at least the threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device comprises: tracking, by the one or more processors, eye movements of the user; determining, by the one or more processors and based on the eye movements, a probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device for at least a portion of the content of the graphical user interface;
determining, by the one or more processors, whether the probability satisfies the threshold probability; and responsive to determining that the probability satisfies the threshold probability.
Weinberger in the same field of determining a portion of a user interface of interest to a user discloses wherein determining that the first portion of the graphical user interface includes content having at least the threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device comprises: tracking, by the one or more processors, eye movements of the user; wherein determining that the first portion of the graphical user interface includes content having at least the threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device comprises: tracking, by the one or more processors, eye movements of the user [[0038] FIG. 6 is another example process for providing window selection based on sensor data such as eye tracking Process 600 may also be performed in any order, and may not necessarily be limited to the order shown in FIG. 6. In box 602, any existing off-the-shelf eye tracking software or motion detecting software is used to determine the coordinates (e.g., (x,y) representation of coordinates) of the user's gaze.];
determining, by the one or more processors and based on the eye movements, a probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device for at least a portion of the content of the graphical user interface[[0037] In box 506, whether the GUI element remains the same or the subject of the user's gaze for a predetermined threshold of time is determined. In one implementation, the predetermined threshold of time might be a couple seconds or longer,]
determining, by the one or more processors, whether the probability satisfies the threshold probability; and responsive to determining that the probability satisfies the threshold probability [[0040] In box 606, a decision occurs of whether or not the same UI element has been detected, returned, found or selected for longer than (or greater than or equal to) a predetermined threshold of time. [0042] In box 610, which is the result if the answer is "Yes" to box 606, the focus is given to the selected UI element. If the UI element is part of a window or a window, for example, then the "active" window becomes that window].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Eguchi’s point of interest to track, by the one or more processors, eye movements of the user, determine, by the one or more processors and based on the eye movements, a probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device for at least a portion of the content of the graphical user interface and to determine, by the one or more processors, whether the probability satisfies the threshold probability; and responsive to determining that the probability satisfies the threshold probability as disclosed by Weinberger. The motivation for doing so would have been to indirectly use the user’s information to determine areas of focus, thus offering a more streamlined and efficient interface.
Claim 6:
As per claim 6, which depends on claim 1, Eguchi discloses responsive to determining that the number does not satisfy the threshold number, determining, by the one or more processors, that the third portion does not include content satisfying the threshold probability of being viewed by the user of the computing device. [[0107] When a user provides instructions to set a region of interest, the display controller 130 displays a region of interest 234 on the ultrasound image 232, for example, as shown in FIG. 15A. The display position, shape, and size of the region of interest 234 are designated by, for example, a user] any portion outside the region of interest would be considered as to not have content having at least a threshold probability of being viewed.
Eguchi discloses a region of interest and a region outside the region of interest. However, Eguchi failed to specifically disclose further comprising: tracking, by the one or more processors, eye movements of the user; determining, by the one or more processors and based on the eye movements of the user, a number of times the user looks at content included in a third portion of the graphical user interface; determining, by the one or more processors, whether the number satisfies a threshold number.
Weinberger in the same field of determining a portion of a user interface of interest to a user discloses
tracking, by the one or more processors, eye movements of the user [[0038] FIG. 6 is another example process for providing window selection based on sensor data such as eye tracking Process 600 may also be performed in any order, and may not necessarily be limited to the order shown in FIG. 6. In box 602, any existing off-the-shelf eye tracking software or motion detecting software is used to determine the coordinates (e.g., (x,y) representation of coordinates) of the user's gaze.];
determining, by the one or more processors and based on the eye movements of the user, a number of times the user looks at content included in a third portion of the graphical user interface; determining, by the one or more processors, whether the number satisfies a threshold number. [[0037] In box 506, whether the GUI element remains the same or the subject of the user's gaze for a predetermined threshold of time is determined. In one implementation, the predetermined threshold of time might be a couple seconds or longer, [0040] In box 606, a decision occurs of whether or not the same UI element has been detected, returned, found or selected for longer than (or greater than or equal to) a predetermined threshold of time. [0042] In box 610, which is the result if the answer is "Yes" to box 606, the focus is given to the selected UI element. If the UI element is part of a window or a window, for example, then the "active" window becomes that window]. Timer starts counting only if the user’s gaze is focused on a UI element at least one time, so Weinberger’s method meets the threshold of at least once.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Eguchi’s point of interest to track, by the one or more processors, eye movements of the user, determine, by the one or more processors and based on the eye movements of the user, a number of times the user looks at content included in a third portion of the graphical user interface; and to determine by the one or more processors, whether the number satisfies a threshold number as disclosed by Weinberger. The motivation for doing so would have been to indirectly use the user’s information to determine areas of focus, thus offering a more streamlined and efficient interface.
Claim 19:
As per claim 19, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 4 above.
Claim 20:
As per claim 20, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 5 above.
Claim 23:
As per claim 23, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 4 above
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 7, 11, 18, 22 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the cited prior art of record, alone or in any reasonable combination discloses the subject matter of the above mentioned claims.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOWARD CORTES whose telephone number is (571)270-1383. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott T Baderman can be reached on (571)272-3644. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HOWARD CORTES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights