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 non-final and is in response to the claims filed December 11, 2024 via preliminary amendment. Claims 1-10 and 12-21 are currently pending, of which claims 5-10, 12, and 13 are currently amended. Claim 11 has been canceled and claims 14-21 are newly presented.
Examiner’s Note
The prior art rejections below cite particular paragraphs, columns, and/or line numbers in the references 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.
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.
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) 1-7, 10, and 12-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shih et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0201062; retrieved from IDS filed December 11, 2024; hereinafter, “Shih”).
As per claim 1, Shih teaches a chat list display method, comprising:
displaying a chat list in an unfolded state in a chat interface, wherein the chat list has at least one chat item displayed therein (See Shih Fig. 22A and paras. [0346-347]: chat list of multiple messages); and
in response to a first trigger operation for a first chat item in the chat list, displaying chat content of a first chat corresponding to the first chat item in the chat interface, and switching the chat list from the unfolded state to a folded state, wherein a display size of the chat list in the folded state is less than a display size of the chat list in the unfolded state (See Shih Figs. 22A-22B and paras. [0088] and [0346-348]: chat list of multiple messages, where a message can be interacted with and the previously smaller/collapsed messages are expanded based on the selected conversation. The size of the display of the messages is smaller in the folded states versus the unfolded state).
As per claim 2, Shih further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein displaying the chat content of the first chat corresponding to the first chat item in the chat interface comprises: displaying the chat content of the first chat corresponding to the first chat item in a first area of the chat interface (See Shih Figs. 22A-22B and paras. [0347-348]: displaying the chat content of the selected chat).
As per claim 3, Shih further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein switching the chat list from the unfolded state to the folded state comprises: controlling the chat list to move to a second area of the chat interface, and switching the chat list from the unfolded state to the folded state during a moving process of the chat list (See Shih Figs. 22A-22B and paras. [0338] and [0348]: displaying the chat content in collapsed conversation view, which is thus moved from the original expanded list position. But additionally, “[a] user can expand a unified header including identifying information for a collection of messages in the threaded conversation by selecting and expanding the unified header in the threaded conversation”).
As per claim 4, Shih further teaches the method according to claim 3, further comprising: in response to the chat list moving to the second area, displaying the chat list in the folded state in the second area (See Shih Fig. 22B and paras. [0347-348]: displaying the collapsed conversation list 2213 in a second area above the original expanded list position).
As per claim 5, Shih further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: after switching the chat list from the unfolded state to the folded state, in response to an unfolding operation for the chat list, switching the chat list from the folded state to the unfolded state (See Shih Figs. 22A-22B and paras. [0338] and [0348]: displaying the chat content in collapsed conversation view, which is thus moved from the original expanded list position. But additionally, “[a] user can expand a unified header including identifying information for a collection of messages in the threaded conversation by selecting and expanding the unified header in the threaded conversation”. Therefore, the expanded/collapsed states of the messages can be switched back and forth).
As per claim 6, Shih further teaches the method according to claim 5, wherein switching the chat list from the folded state to the unfolded state comprises: switching the chat list from the folded state to the unfolded state, and keeping displaying a current chat content displayed in the chat interface; or switching the chat list from the folded state to the unfolded state, and canceling displaying a current chat content displayed in the chat interface (See Shih Figs. 22A-22B and paras. [0338] and [0348]: displaying the chat content in collapsed conversation view, which is thus moved from the original expanded list position. But additionally, “[a] user can expand a unified header including identifying information for a collection of messages in the threaded conversation by selecting and expanding the unified header in the threaded conversation”).
As per claim 7, Shih further teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising: in response to a second trigger operation for a second chat item in the chat list, keeping displaying the chat list, and displaying chat content of a second chat corresponding to the second chat item in the chat interface (See Shih Figs. 22A-22E and paras. [0348-352]: opening new conversation content in response to user selection).
As per claim 10, Shih further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein in response to the chat list being in the unfolded state, the chat list has a first chat identifier of a chat corresponding to the chat item, a second chat identifier, target chat information and sending time information of the target chat information displayed therein; and in response to the chat list being in the folded state, the chat list has only the first chat identifier of the chat corresponding to the chat item displayed therein (See Shih Figs. 22A-22D and para. [0350]: status display includes the sender’s name and the date sent).
As per claim 12, the claim is directed to an electronic device that implements the same features as the method of claim 1, and is therefore rejected for at least the same reasons therein. Furthermore, Shih teaches an electronic device, comprising: at least one processor; and a memory in communication connection with the at least one processor, wherein, the memory stores a computer program executable by the at least one program, and the computer program is executed by the at least one processor, to cause the at least one processor to implement said method (See Shih para. [0088]).
As per claims 13-19, the claims are directed to a computer readable medium that implements the same features as the method of claims 1-7, respectively, and are therefore rejected for at least the same reasons therein. Furthermore, Shih teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, wherein the computer program is configured to cause a processor to implement said method(s) (See Shih para. [0088]).
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.
Claim(s) 8, 9, 20, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shih as applied above, and further in view of Yerli (U.S. 2013/0219299).
As per claim 8, Shih teaches the method according to claim 1. However, Shih does not explicitly teach displaying a cancelling operation, nor redisplaying the chat list while keeping a current chat content displayed.
Yerli teaches at least one of the following: in response to a display cancel operation for the chat list, canceling displaying the chat list, and keeping displaying a current chat content displayed in the chat interface; or in response to a list display operation for the chat list, re-displaying the chat list, and keeping displaying a current chat content displayed in the chat interface (See Yerli Figs. 4, 5, 11, and paras. [0039-40] and [0046]: multiple chat windows can be presented. “Upon a user interaction with an “x” symbol of the chat slot 403 in the expanded state, the slot is minimized to slot 503, as shown in FIG. 5.” Therefore, as a user has multiple chat windows, they can cancel the display of one and still maintain display of other current chat content).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the chat windows and interfaces of Shih with the closing of windows of Yerli. One would have been motivated to combine these references because both references disclose manipulating chat/messaging interface windows, and Yerli further enhances the user experience of Shih by allowing increased flexibility to organize simultaneous windows in a limited window display area (See Yerli paras. [0008-09]).
As per claim 9, Shih further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein displaying the chat list in the unfolded state in the chat interface comprises: in response to a chat interface display operation acting on [a media content] presentation page, displaying the chat interface in [the media content] presentation page, and displaying the chat list in the unfolded state in the chat interface (See Shih Figs. 22A-22B and paras. [0345-347]: opening messages from a default viewing page, with the chatlist originally presented in the unfolded state).
However, while Shih teaches the chat interface, Shih does not explicitly teach a media content presentation page.
Yerli teaches (See Yerli Figs. 4, 5, 11, and 22, and paras. [0021-22], [0039-40], and [0055-56]: multiple windows presented, including chat windows and also media windows and content. The media content can be playing and the chat interfaces can be accessed at the user’s whim. All is displayed on the browser window. Interacting with the chats would also unfold the chats of Shih).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Shih with the teachings of Yerli for at least the same reasons as discussed above in claim 8.
As per claims 20 and 21, the claims are directed to a computer readable medium that implements the same features as the method of claims 8 and 9, respectively, and are therefore rejected for at least the same reasons therein.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas Klicos whose telephone number is (571)270-5889. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00 AM-5:00 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, 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.
/NICHOLAS KLICOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights