DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the application filed 10/25/2024.
Claims 1-17, 20 and 21 are pending. Claims 18 and 19 are canceled and Claims 1-4, 11-13, 17, 20 and 21 are currently amended by preliminary amendment.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 15 recites the limitation "the number of unread messages.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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)(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.
Claims 1, 3, 12-15, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xu, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2023/0213973 (“Xu”).
With regard to Claim 1, Xu teaches a method for message processing, comprising:
displaying a predetermined message identifier in a target interface, wherein at least one of predetermined media content and target resource information is presented in the target interface, and the predetermined message identifier is set to indicate that an unread message currently exists ([0249] describes that a user is watching a video or reading a file on a device. A notification can be displayed, where Figs. 13b and 13c show a notification of an incoming unread message. Figs. 13b and 13c and [0250] show the message identifier, as well as touch points which are displayed and with which a user can interact while viewing the media content); and
in response to a triggering operation for the predetermined message identifier, presenting a message interaction area in the target interface, and presenting the unread message sent by at least one sender in the message interaction area, wherein the message interaction area is set for message interaction between a current user and the at least one sender of the unread message ([0249] describes that an operation on a touch point in the interface can view or split the application interface corresponding to the notification. [0117] describes that Fig. 3e shows a view where a user can read and respond to the message; 3f shows the split screen, where the messaging application interface is opened alongside the originally displayed interface).
Claim 20 recites a device comprising at least one processor; a storage device configured to store at least one program (Fig. 1, processor 110, memory 121. [0075] describes the processor invoking a program stored in the memory 121), wherein the at least one program, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to implement the method of Claim 1, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 21 recites a non-transitory readable storage medium containing a computer program which ([0074]-[0075]), when executed by a computer processor, implements the method of Claim 1, and the claim is likewise rejected.
With regard to Claim 3, Xu teaches that the message interaction area is located on an upper layer of the target interface, and a size of the message interaction area is smaller than a size of the target interface. Fig. 3e shows the message area overlaid on an upper layer over a portion of the target interface. Fig. 3f shows the screen split, within which the message area takes up a smaller area than the target interface of, e.g., Fig. 13a, which occupies the entire screen.
With regard to Claim 12, Xu teaches that displaying the predetermined message identifier in the target interface of the predetermined application comprises: in response to detecting that an unread message exists in the predetermined application during the predetermined application presenting the target interface, displaying the predetermined message identifier in the target interface. [0249] describes that the touch points and notification are displayed when an unread message is received.
With regard to Claim 13, Xu teaches that displaying the predetermined message identifier in the target interface comprises: displaying the predetermined message identifier in a first predetermined area in the target interface, and adjusting a display area of a predetermined control from a second predetermined area to a third predetermined area, wherein the second predetermined area is associated with the first predetermined area. [0249] describes that when the device is in landscape mode, the notification is displayed at the top and the touch controls along the side. [0254] describes that in portrait mode, the touch controls can also be displayed along a side, thereby adjusting the position of the associated touch control.
With regard to Claim 14, Xu teaches that the predetermined message identifier is set to indicate that an unread message of a predetermined message type currently exists. Fig. 13b shows that the message notification includes an icon for the messaging application.
With regard to Claim 15, Xu teaches presenting the number of the unread messages in an associated area of the predetermined message identifier. Fig. 13b presents one u7nread message, when that message is received.
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.
Claims 2, 4-8, 10, 11, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu, in view of Sirpal, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2017/0317960 (“Sirpal”).
With regard to Claim 2, Xu, in view of Sirpal teaches that a number of the sender is at least two, and presenting the message interaction area in the target interface and presenting the unread message sent by at least one sender in the message interaction area comprises: presenting a first message interaction area corresponding to a first sender in the target interface, and presenting an unread message sent by the first sender in the first message interaction area, wherein the first sender is determined according to a predetermined manner, and the first message interaction area is set for message interaction between the current user and the first sender.
Xu teaches at [0117] that the system opens a message interaction area overlaid on or in split screen with the originally displayed interface. Sirpal teaches at [0032] that a conversation window includes graphical elements for other conversations, in addition to an active one. The graphical element for other conversations can have indicators displayed therewith, indicating unread or recent messages from those conversations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Xu to use the message interaction area described in Sirpal. Sirpal describes at [0003] that a shortcoming in the prior art is that user interfaces are limited in functionality and control with regard to multiple communication sessions. Therefore, one of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by providing a message interaction area that provides better access to and management of multiple conversations.
With regard to Claim 4, Sirpal teaches presenting a set of object identifiers in a target area of the target page interface, wherein the target area is located outside of the message interaction area, and the set of object identifiers comprise an object identifier corresponding to at least one sender. [0033] describes that the contact display elements are displayed in a top bar of the interface area, separate from the message interaction area.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Xu to use the message interaction area described in Sirpal. Sirpal describes at [0003] that a shortcoming in the prior art is that user interfaces are limited in functionality and control with regard to multiple communication sessions. Therefore, one of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by providing a message interaction area that provides better access to and management of multiple conversations.
With regard to Claim 5, Sirpal teaches that the set of object identifiers comprises a second object identifier and a first object identifier corresponding to the first sender, wherein a first display manner for the first object identifier is different from a second display manner for the second object identifier, and the second object identifier comprises an object identifier other than the first object identifier in the set of object identifiers. Fig. 5 shows that each contact has a different icon associated therewith, as well as its own notification icon.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Xu to use the message interaction area described in Sirpal. Sirpal describes at [0003] that a shortcoming in the prior art is that user interfaces are limited in functionality and control with regard to multiple communication sessions. Therefore, one of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by providing a message interaction area that provides better access to and management of multiple conversations.
With regard to Claim 6, Sirpal teaches presenting, in an associated area of the object identifier, the number of unread messages from a sender corresponding to the object identifier. [0033] describes that each contact icon includes a graphical element notifying the user of the number of unread messages from that contact.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Xu to use the message interaction area described in Sirpal. Sirpal describes at [0003] that a shortcoming in the prior art is that user interfaces are limited in functionality and control with regard to multiple communication sessions. Therefore, one of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by providing a message interaction area that provides better access to and management of multiple conversations.
With regard to Claim 7, Sirpal teaches, in response to a first predetermined gesture operation by the current user on the target area, performing display adjustment on the set of object identifiers, wherein the display adjustment comprises at least one of changing a display position of the object identifier, updating the object identifier, decreasing an object identifier, and increasing an object identifier. [0031] describes that a user can perform gestures to add or remove contacts from the contact display area. As shown by Figs. 5 and 6, different numbers of contacts in the display area cause other contact images to change display position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Xu to use the message interaction area described in Sirpal. Sirpal describes at [0003] that a shortcoming in the prior art is that user interfaces are limited in functionality and control with regard to multiple communication sessions. Therefore, one of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by providing a message interaction area that provides better access to and management of multiple conversations.
With regard to Claim 8, Sirpal teaches, in response to a triggering operation for a target object identifier in the set of object identifiers, switching the first message interaction area to a second message interaction area, wherein the second message interaction area is set for message interaction between the current user and a sender corresponding to the target object identifier. [0032] describes that he displayed graphical elements in the interface associated with other conversations with other users are selectable to switch between the conversations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Xu to use the message interaction area described in Sirpal. Sirpal describes at [0003] that a shortcoming in the prior art is that user interfaces are limited in functionality and control with regard to multiple communication sessions. Therefore, one of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by providing a message interaction area that provides better access to and management of multiple conversations.
With regard to Claim 10, Sirpal teaches in response to a third predetermined gesture operation by the current user on the target area, switching a current message interaction area to a fourth message interaction area, wherein a sender corresponding to the fourth message interaction area is different from a sender corresponding to the current message interaction area. [0032] describes that he displayed graphical elements in the interface associated with other conversations with other users are selectable to switch between the conversations. As shown in Fig. 5, 5 such elements are visible, allowing a gesture operation on each which switches to a corresponding message area.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Xu to use the message interaction area described in Sirpal. Sirpal describes at [0003] that a shortcoming in the prior art is that user interfaces are limited in functionality and control with regard to multiple communication sessions. Therefore, one of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by providing a message interaction area that provides better access to and management of multiple conversations.
With regard to Claim 11, Sirpal teaches in response to switching between message interaction areas, adjusting a display position of an object identifier corresponding to the switched message interaction area in the target area. [0048] describes that a contact display element can be updated in response to a user selection of the content element.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Xu to use the message interaction area described in Sirpal. Sirpal describes at [0003] that a shortcoming in the prior art is that user interfaces are limited in functionality and control with regard to multiple communication sessions. Therefore, one of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by providing a message interaction area that provides better access to and management of multiple conversations.
With regard to Claim 16, Sirpal teaches presenting the unread message sent by the at least one sender in the message interaction area comprises: presenting, in the message interaction area, the unread message sent by the at least one sender and a historical interaction message corresponding to the at least one sender, wherein the historical interaction message comprises a historical message interacted between the current user and the at least one sender. Fig. 5 shows that a message area includes the latest received message, as well as the history of previous messages between users.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Xu to use the message interaction area described in Sirpal. Sirpal describes at [0003] that a shortcoming in the prior art is that user interfaces are limited in functionality and control with regard to multiple communication sessions. Therefore, one of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by providing a message interaction area that provides better access to and management of multiple conversations.
With regard to Claim 17, Sirpal teaches that the method further comprises, after presenting the message interaction area in the target page interface and presenting the unread message sent by the at least one sender in the message interaction area: in response to a close operation input by the current user for the message interaction area, canceling the presentation of the message interaction area, and resuming the presentation of the target page interface. [0031] describes that a back element can be selected to exit the messaging application.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Xu to use the message interaction area described in Sirpal. Sirpal describes at [0003] that a shortcoming in the prior art is that user interfaces are limited in functionality and control with regard to multiple communication sessions. Therefore, one of skill in the art would have sought the modification, to improve user experience by providing a message interaction area that provides better access to and management of multiple conversations.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu, in view of Sirpal, and in view of Lim, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2019/0014065 (“Lim”).
With regard to Claim 9, Lim teaches, in response to a second predetermined gesture operation by the current user on a current message interaction area, switching the current message interaction area to a third message interaction area, wherein a sender corresponding to the third message interaction area is different from a sender corresponding to the current message interaction area. Lim teaches at [0031] that a device stores a plurality of message threads, each of which can have different receiving devices. [0114] describes that a user can input swipes to navigate between different message threads, where Fig. 10 shows the swipe input made to the message interaction area.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to combine Lim with Xu and Sirpal. One of skill in the art would have sought the combination, to improve user experience by providing an additional simple input type for navigating between message threads, thereby increasing convenience to the user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH D BLOOMQUIST whose telephone number is (571)270-7718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30-5 PM.
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, Kieu Vu can be reached at 571-272-4057. 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.
/KEITH D BLOOMQUIST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
7/24/2026
Prosecution Insights