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 .
This office action is in response to amendments filed on October 28, 2024.
Claim 8 has been canceled.
Claims 9 and 10 have been amended.
Claims 11-21 have been added.
Claims 1-7 and 9-21 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609(C), the applicant’s submission of the Information Disclosure Statement dated October 28, 2024 is acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending. As required by M.P.E.P 609, a copy of the PTOL-1449 initialed and dated by the examiner is attached to the office action.
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.
Claims 11 and 13-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 11, the claim depends on canceled claimed 8. As it is unclear which claim the claim depends upon, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the claim is interpreted as depending on device claim 9.
Regarding claims 13-14, the claims recite “The device of claim 10”, however, claim 10 is a medium claim. As it is unclear if the claims should depend on claim 10, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the claim is interpreted as depending on device claim 12.
Regarding claims 15-16, the claims depends on canceled claimed 8. As it is unclear which claim the claims depends upon, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the claim is interpreted as depending on device claim 9.
Regarding claim 17, the claim recite “The medium of claim 15”, however, claim 15 is a device claim. As it is unclear if the claim should depend on claim 15, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the claim is interpreted as depending on medium claim 10.
Regarding claim 18, the claim recite “The medium of claim 16”, however, claim 16 is a device claim. As it is unclear if the claim should depend on claim 16, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the claim is interpreted as depending on medium claim 17.
Regarding claim 19, the claims recite “The medium of claim 17 … the predetermined decision line … the sliding distance ”, however, claim 17 does not recite a predetermined decision line nor a sliding distance. As it is unclear if the claim should depend on claim 17, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the claim is interpreted as depending on medium claim 18, which recites a predetermined decision line and a sliding distance.
Regarding claim 20, the claims recite “The medium of claim 17 … the predetermined decision line … the sliding distance ”, however, claim 17 does not recite a predetermined decision line. As it is unclear if the claim should depend on claim 17, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the claim is interpreted as depending on medium claim 18, which recites a predetermined decision line.
Regarding claim 21, the claim recite “The medium of claim 15”, however, claim 15 is a device claim. As it is unclear if the claim should depend on claim 15, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the claim is interpreted as depending on medium claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 9-11, 15-17, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Prakash et al. (US20130145303A1).
Regarding claim 1, Prakash teaches a method for information display, comprising:
determining a current display state of a top information area displayed on a target page (a notification bar that may generally be provided at an edge (often, but not exclusively, the top edge) of a display screen ... the user is informed of activities that may occur in relation to any of a number of classes of notifications or applications ... FIG. 3, which includes FIGS. 3A to 3D, illustrates an example of operation of the notification manager 88 and the corresponding display activity that is provided … FIG. 3B illustrates an extension of the notification bar 110)([0019], [0044], and [0045]; a notification bar displays information on a target page (i.e., user interface) based on current state (i.e., extended or retracted), an exemplary presentation of information in a top area in an retracted state is shown in Figure 3A);
in response to sliding on the target page, determining a target state of the top information area based on the sliding and the current display state (The notification bar may both advance and retract responsive to the user “pulling” on the notification blind or responsive to the user providing some other input indicative of an intent to advance or retract the notification bar)([0019]; a sliding (e.g., pulling) gesture indicates a desire to present a target (e.g., advanced/expanded) state); and
updating to display a changed effect of the top information area under the sliding, to cause the top information area to change from the current display state to the target state, and displaying a detail information area on the target page based on the changed effect; the detail information area being associated with a display location of the top information area on the target page (by pulling down the notification bar 110 ... the user may be enabled to extend the notification bar 110 to display one or more levels of information. FIG. 3B illustrates an extension of the notification bar 110 ... FIG. 3C illustrates the extension of the further extension of the notification bar 110 to include a notification class for additional information in a fourth level 150)([0045] and [0046]; Figures 3B and 3C – updating the notification bar to present detailed (i.e., additional) information on the user interface in response to a pulling gesture is shown).
Regarding claim 2, Prakash teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the current display state comprises a contracted state or an expanded state (FIG. 3, which includes FIGS. 3A to 3D, illustrates an example of operation of the notification manager 88 and the corresponding display activity that is provided)([0044]; Figures 3A-3D – display states including contracted and expanded are shown); and determining the target state of the top information area based on the sliding and the current display state comprises: in response to the current display state being the contracted state and the sliding being indicative of expanding the top information area, or in response to the current display state being the expanded state and the sliding being indicative of contracting the top information area, determining a sliding parameter corresponding to the sliding to determine the target state of the top information area using the sliding parameter (to pass along the data corresponding to the touch event (e.g., location of touch, length of touch ... touch pressure, speed of movement, direction of movement ... etc.) to the gesture classifier 86 for gesture classification ... there may be a threshold drag length associated with extending from one level to another)([0039] and [0052]; a sliding parameter (e.g., length, speed, etc.) of a sliding gesture is determined and utilized to determine a target (e.g., advanced/expanded) state).
Regarding claim 6, Prakash teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the current display state comprises an initial state; and determining the target state of the top information area based on the sliding and the current display state comprises: in response to the sliding being indicative of displaying the top information area, determining that the target state of the top information area is an expanded state; or in response to the sliding being indicative of contracting the top information area, determining that the target state of the top information area is a contracted state (FIG. 3, which includes FIGS. 3A to 3D, illustrates an example of operation of the notification manager 88 and the corresponding display activity that is provided ... extension of the notification bar 110 may be handled based on the extension of the notification bar 110 (e.g., with a drag operation on the touch screen display 68) relative to various threshold)([0044] and [0052]; Figure 3A-3D – presenting an initial state and target advanced/expanded state in response to sliding gesture is shown).
Regarding claim 7, Prakash teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to the current display state of the top information area being a contracted state, and the sliding being indicative of displaying the detail information area, updating the displaying of the detail information area based on a sliding parameter corresponding to the sliding (FIG. 3, which includes FIGS. 3A to 3D, illustrates an example of operation of the notification manager 88 and the corresponding display activity that is provided ... extension of the notification bar 110 may be handled based on the extension of the notification bar 110 (e.g., with a drag operation on the touch screen display 68) relative to various threshold)([0044] and [0052]; Figure 3A-3D – presenting an initial contacted (i.e., advanced) state and updating to display additional information is shown).
Regarding device claims 9, 11, 15, and 16, the claims generally correspond to method claims 1, 2, 6, and 7, respectively, and recites similar features in device form; therefore, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding medium claims 10, 17, and 21, the claims generally correspond to method claims 1, 2, and 6, respectively, and recites similar features in medium form; therefore, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
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.
Claims 3-5, 12-14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prakash in further view of Cho (US20140184526A1) and Ying et al. (US20130111395A1).
Regarding claim 3, Prakash teaches the method as applied above, wherein the sliding parameter comprising sliding distance or sliding speed is used to determine target user interface state (to pass along the data corresponding to the touch event (e.g., location of touch, length of touch ... touch pressure, speed of movement, direction of movement ... etc.) to the gesture classifier 86 for gesture classification)([0039).
Prakash differs from the claim in that Prakash fails to teach positioning a line based on a boundary location of an area in a contracted state or an expanded state. However, positioning a line based on a boundary location of an area in a contracted state or an expanded state is taught by Cho (FIG. 4 is a view illustrating expansion in the size of a first display screen ... boundary line 2200 may be represented in the form of a line such as a solid line, a dotted line, etc., in the form of a boundary between content displayed in the first display screen 2000 and content displayed in the second display screen 2100 ... gesture signal 4000 for expansion or screen change may be input by a leftward sliding touch starting from the start touch 4100-1 to the end touch 4100-2 across the imaginary boundary line 2200 … As illustrated in the left side of FIG. 7-(b), the multi-touch gesture signal 4000 for reduction may be input ... set a new imaginary boundary line at a position of the end touch of the multi-touch gesture signal 4000 for reduction, so as to reduce the size of the entire display screen)([0017], [0044], [0060], [0096]; Figures 4 and 7B – positioning a line based on a boundary location of an area in contracted/expanded state is shown).
The examiner notes Prakash and Cho teach a method for controlling presentation of a user interface based on gestural parameters. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Prakash to include the positioning of Cho such that a line is positioned based on a boundary location of an area in a contracted state or an expanded state. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of providing user feedback for expanding/contracting areas.
Prakash-Cho differs from the claim in that Prakash-Cho fails to teach determining user interface state based on sliding speed such that when the speed is greater than a threshold, user interface is in a display state and when the speed is less than the threshold, a determination is made if sliding crosses a line.
However, determining user interface state based on sliding speed such that when the speed is greater than a threshold, user interface is in a display state and when the speed is less than the threshold, a determination is made if sliding crosses a line is taught by Ying (Referring now to FIG. 6, several illustrative input gestures are shown, with each gesture producing a different transition animation. Each of the input gestures is a swipe gesture, and a swipe gesture can include touchdown location ... speed across the screen, and liftoff location ... Gesture 1 shows a swipe gesture crossing the flip axis at velocity X. Since X is a relatively fast velocity and the gesture crosses the flip axis, the transition animation from page 1 to page 2 can be executed ... Gesture 4 shows a swipe gesture that does not cross the flip axis, and is executed at velocity Z, a relatively slow velocity ... As a result, the page will fall back down ... Gesture 5 shows a swipe gesture that crosses the flip axis at velocity Z, a relatively slow speed. In response to this gesture, the physics module can instruct the inflight module to execute the transition)([0048], [0052], [0055], and [0056]; Figure 6 – determining user interface state based on gesture speed including determining whether a slow gesture crosses a line (i.e., flip axis) is shown).
The examiner notes Prakash, Cho, and Ying teach a method for controlling presentation of a user interface based on gestural parameters. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Prakash-Cho to include the determining of Ying such that user interface state is determined based on sliding speed such that when the speed is greater than a threshold, user interface is in a display state and when the speed is less than the threshold, a determination is made if sliding crosses a line. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of improving presentation control by providing additional control parameters.
Regarding claim 4, Prakash-Cho-Ying teach the method of claim 3, wherein determining whether the sliding is indicative of crossing the predetermined decision line based on the sliding distance in the sliding parameter comprises: determining a sliding variation distance of the boundary location of the top information area by using the sliding distance; determining whether the sliding variation distance is greater than a separation distance between the boundary location of the top information area in the current display state and a boundary location of the predetermined decision line; and in response to the sliding variation distance being less than the separation distance, determining that the sliding is indicative of non-crossing the predetermined decision line, otherwise, determining that the sliding is indicative of crossing the predetermined decision line (Cho - If the sliding distance of the multi-touch gesture signal 4000 exceeds the preset sliding distance, the screen adjustment module 1100 may change the first display screen to the entire display screen illustrated in FIG. 4-(d) ... FIG. 4-(c) is a view illustrating the case in which the size of the first display screen, which has been expanded as illustrated in FIG. 4(b), is again expanded based on the sliding distance)([0069] and [0070]; Figure 4 – determining if sliding distance crosses (i.e., greater than distance between boundary of an area and a threshold) is shown)).
Regarding claim 5, Prakash-Cho-Ying teach the method of claim 3, wherein determining the target state based on the determining result comprises: in response to the determining result being that the sliding is indicative of non-crossing the predetermined decision line, determining that the target state is the current display state; or in response to the determining result being that the sliding is indicative of crossing the predetermined decision line, determining that the target state is the contracted state or the expanded state different from the current display state (Ying - Referring now to FIG. 6, several illustrative input gestures are shown, with each gesture producing a different transition animation. Each of the input gestures is a swipe gesture, and a swipe gesture can include touchdown location ... speed across the screen, and liftoff location ... Gesture 1 shows a swipe gesture crossing the flip axis at velocity X. Since X is a relatively fast velocity and the gesture crosses the flip axis, the transition animation from page 1 to page 2 can be executed ... Gesture 4 shows a swipe gesture that does not cross the flip axis, and is executed at velocity Z, a relatively slow velocity ... As a result, the page will fall back down ... Gesture 5 shows a swipe gesture that crosses the flip axis at velocity Z, a relatively slow speed. In response to this gesture, the physics module can instruct the inflight module to execute the transition)([0048], [0052], [0055], and [0056]; Figure 6 – determining whether to change user interface state based on if a gesture crosses flip axis is shown).
Regarding device claims 12, 13, and 14, the claims generally correspond to method claims 3, 4, and 5, respectively, and recites similar features in device form; therefore, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding medium claims 18, 19, and 20, the claims generally correspond to method claims 3, 4, and 5, respectively, and recites similar features in medium form; therefore, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider the reference fully when responding to this action. The document cited therein and enumerated below teaches a method and apparatus for gestural input to control expanding and shrinking of an area.
US20130067421A1
US20150062027A1
US20150350147A1
US20170123624A1
US20180101297A1
US20210026529A1
US20210191612A1
US9619076B2
US9971500B2
US10788979B2
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Yongjia Pan whose telephone number is (571)270-1177. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman can be reached at 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 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.
/YONGJIA PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights