DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Herein after “it would have been obvious” should be read as “it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention”.
The prior office action was directed to the original claim resubmitted 4/22/25 in response to formal requirements instead of the pending claims submitted in the preliminary 12/18/24. Therefore, the prior office action is withdrawn and a new action is provided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 27 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.
In regards to claim 27: a sixth battery level information is introduced without introducing a third battery level information, a fourth battery level information, or a fifth battery level information. There is no meaning to “taking the sixth battery-level information as third initial battery-level information” since there is no introduced third initial battery-level information. It appears claim 27 was meant to be dependent on claim 26 instead of claim 20.
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) 1, 4, 8, 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oishi PN 2015/0058617 in view of Li et al PN 2014/0115308.
In regards to claims 1, 19-20: Oishi teaches a method for displaying a battery level ([0008] “Further, many of the battery-powered information processing devices have a function of displaying remaining battery capacity. Various suggestions have been made for a timing of updating the display of the remaining battery capacity or a method for displaying the remaining battery capacity more accurately”)), performed by a terminal device (information processing device 100), the terminal device comprising a first operating system (102a or 351a) and a second operating system (102b or 351b); the method comprising: obtaining first battery-level information ([0289] “Further, the calculation unit 343 may calculate the initial value of the virtual remaining capacity value that corresponds to the OS 351a and the initial value of the virtual remaining capacity value that corresponds to the OS 351b, in step S101. Then, the profiles 341a and 342b may report the calculated initial value to the OSs 35 la and 351b, respectively”), wherein the first battery-level information is battery-level information before the first operating system is started (initial value); determining, by the second operating system, first initial battery-level information based on the first battery-level information (initial value of second operating system); and displaying the first initial battery-level information in the second operating system ([0008] “Further, many of the battery-powered information processing devices have a function of displaying remaining battery capacity. Various suggestions have been made for a timing of updating the display of the remaining battery capacity or a method for displaying the remaining battery capacity more accurately”). Oishi teaches both operating systems running at the same time thus not "switched" from the first operating system to the second operating system. Li et al teaches switching between two operating systems ([0004] “To satisfy the different demands of the user, there is proposed a computer with two operating systems, which have different characteristics. For example, one operating system may be the Window. RTM. 7 operating system with a relative powerful processing capacity, while the other operating system may be the Android. RTM. operating system with a relative weak processing capacity that needs less resource and power consumption. However, when the computer performs a switching between the two operating systems, since it is needed to put the current running operating system in a sleep state, load the system files of the second operating system from the memory into the system memory, and then run the second operating system. That is, the currently running operating system should first save the field, for example, it stores the data of the currently running applications into the memory of the computer, and then starts up the other operating system and restores the applications that were stored into the memory manually by the user in the other operating system. In turn, this results in a long time taken for the switching between the two operating systems, a tedious operation, and the processing performed on different partitions on the hard disk".). Li et al teaches switches between the two operating systems with one requiring less power consumption the one that has the lower power consumption (Android) will be identified as the claimed first operating system and the one that requires greater power (Windows) will be identified as the claimed second operating system. It would have been obvious to modify Li et al to display the power level information by the active operating system because this would allow a user to know the remaining battery capacity of the computer system.
In regards to claims 4, 8: Oishi teaches initial power level for both the first and the second operating systems. Li et al teaches switching from the first to the second operating system and switching back from the second to the first operating system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to display the initial power for the first operating system and the initial power for the second operating system as well as the initial power level for switching back and displaying the second initial power level when switching back.
In regards to claim 21: Li et al teaches switches between the two operating systems with one requiring less power consumption the one that has the lower power consumption (Android) will be identified as the claimed first operating system and the one that requires greater power (Windows) will be identified as the claimed second operating system.
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oishi PN 2015/0058617 in view of Li et al PN 2014/0115308. as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of van Phuoc et al PN 5,633,573.
In regards to claim 27: Oishi teaches displaying power level. Oishi however does not expressly state the power level is in response to detecting a power-on instruction. Van Phuoc et al teaches (Column 15 line 66 et. seq. “As shown in FIG. 3, the battery operating system 10' will first perform an initialization routine 100 that is initiated upon system power up, enabled by a power ON signal/reset impulse signal 11, or, enabled by a wakeup from STANDBY signal 13 which is generated after the microprocessor has determined that it should exit the standby mode”).Figure 3 shows steps 154, 156 that displays the power level. (Column 7 line 66 et. seq. “The LEDS 34 may be used to represent a relative state of charge (SOC) in a logic scheme as follows: if the state of charge is greater than 75% (or less than 100%) then all 4 LEDS are illuminated; if the SOC is from 50% to 75%, then 3 LEDS are illuminated; if SOC is from 25% to 50%, then 2 LEDS are illuminated; if SOC is from 10% to 25%, then 1 LED is illuminated, and if SOC is less than 10%, a single LED is flashing. As mentioned above, relative SOC is remaining capacity relative to last full capacity”). It would have been obvious to display the power level upon detecting power on instruction because this would provide the power level to the user as soon as possible.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Oishi teaches simply reading the power level (remaining battery capacity) from the acquisition unit 342 to display therefore there is no reason to request or send or calculate used power from the power level information from one operating system to the other operating system. The examiner was also unable to fine recording the battery power level at the time one of the plural operating systems in a was shutdown.
Claims 2-3, 5-7, 9-10, 22-26, 28 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Plural references are cited for teaching displaying power level upon powering on.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL R MYERS whose telephone number is (571)272-3639. The examiner can normally be reached telework M-F start 7-8 leave 4-5.
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, Jaweed Abbaszadeh can be reached at 571-270-1640. 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.
/Paul R. MYERS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2176
Prosecution Insights