DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
2. The specification is objected to for the following:
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed
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.
3. Claims 1, 4, 6, 11, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yen, Li (TW201040825A, published on Nov. 16, 2010).
As in Claim 1, Yen teaches a computer operating system, comprising:
a control host (FIG. 1, par. 13, a computer system 100);
a display device connected to the control host (FIG. 1, par. 13, the computer system 100 includes a display unit 110 (e.g., a liquid crystal display (LCD), a plasma display, a cathode ray tube (CRT), or a thin film transistor (TFT) display, and various video display devices)); and
a mouse connected to the control host (FIG. 1, pars. 13-16, an input device 120 (e.g., a mouse) connect to the computer system), which is used to generate a first mouse icon on the display device and generate a second mouse icon on the display device when the first mouse icon exists, wherein a pattern of the first mouse icon is different from a pattern of the second mouse icon (FIGS. 2-4 and at least pars.19-21, for example, a first cursor 302 and second cursor 304 can be independently displayed within the word application 310 as show in in FIG. 3. For another example, the system displays a first cursor 420 in a window 400 and a second cursor 422 in a window 410, and a pattern of the first icon 420 (e.g., color) is different from a pattern of the second cursor 422).
As in Claim 4, Yen teaches all the limitations of Claim 1. Yen further teaches that the control host generates the second mouse icon at a designated position of the display device (at least pars.19-21) .
As in Claim 6, Yen teaches all the limitations of Claim 1. Yen further teaches that the display device is used to display at least two working windows, the control host generates the first mouse icon and the second mouse icon respectively within the at least two windows (FIGS. 2-4 and at least pars.19-21, see rejection of the claim 1 above).
Claim 11 is substantially similar to Claim 1 and rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 14 is substantially similar to Claim 4 and rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 16 is substantially similar to Claim 6 and rejected under the same 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.
4. Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yen, Li (TW201040825A, published on Nov. 16, 2010) in view of Poerschke et al. (US 2018/0028917 A1).
As in Claim 2, Yen teaches all the limitations of Claim 1. Yen does not teach
a press-key used to generate a control signal to the control host, wherein the control host generates the second mouse icon when the press-key is pressed, so that the second mouse icon disappears when the press-key is released or another press-key is triggered.
However, in the same field of the invention, Poerschke teaches a press-key used to generate a control signal to the control host, wherein the control host generates the second mouse icon when the press-key is pressed, so that the second mouse icon disappears when the press-key is released or another press-key is triggered (pars. 52-54 and 87, cursors (e.g., a secondary cursor) can be displayed with input (e.g., clicking a mouse button) and the secondary cursor can be removed with input; further see pars. 71, 82).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method for displaying two cursors in the windows, as taught by Yen, and to provide the cursor or secondary cursor with the pressing input, as taught by Poerschke. The motivation is to provide a secondary cursor with pressing input for user’s convenience.
Claim 12 is substantially similar to Claim 2 and rejected under the same rationale.
5. Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yen, Li (TW201040825A, published on Nov. 16, 2010) in view of Ohashi, Shumpei (US 2025/0069748 A1).
As in Claim 3, Yen teaches all the limitations of Claim 1. Yen does not teach that the second mouse icon at a position of the first mouse icon.
However, in the same filed of the invention, Ohashi teaches that the second mouse icon at a position of the first mouse icon (FIGS. 8 and 12, pars. 41 and 64, in response to user input, the pointers P1 and P2 can be moved such that they overlap or have the same substantially matching positions).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method for displaying two cursors in the windows, as taught by Yen, and to provide the way to overlap the first and second pointers, as taught by Ohashi. The motivation is to align a first pointer with a second pointer so that they overlap and indicate the corresponding pointer position on the display.
Claim 13 is substantially similar to Claim 3 and rejected under the same rationale.
6. Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yen, Li (TW201040825A, published on Nov. 16, 2010) in view of Chiu et al. (US 2023/0100689 A1).
As in Claim 5, Yen teaches all the limitations of Claim 1. Yen does not teach a camera used to capture a user image information, wherein the control host generates the second mouse icon at a designated position of the display device according to the user image information.
However, in the same field of the invention, Chiu teaches camera used to capture a user image information, wherein the control host generates the second mouse icon at a designated position of the display device according to the user image information (FIGS. 11A-11G (pars. 230-250), FIGS, 15A-15E (pars. 340-356), and FIGS. 17A-17E (pars. 412-445), for example, multiple cursors associated with different objects/interfaces can be moved with gaze information -e.g., cursor 1106a and 1106b on object 1104a and cursor 1106c on object 1104 in FIGS. 11A-11E).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method for displaying two cursors in the windows, as taught by Yen, and to move multiple cursors on multiple objects/windows/interfaces with gaze information, as taught by Chiu. The motivation is to enable intuitive, gaze-directed cursor control and selection of content across different virtual windows or interfaces, reducing the need for additional manual input.
Claim 15 is substantially similar to Claim 5 and rejected under the same rationale.
7. Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yen, Li (TW201040825A, published on Nov. 16, 2010) in view of Chen, Kuan-Ju (US 2024/0403073 A1).
As in Claim 7, Yen teaches all the limitations of Claim 6. Yen does not teach that the control host moves one of the at least one working windows on which the first mouse icon or the second mouse icon is located to a topmost layer.
However, in the same filed of the invention, Chen teaches that the control host moves one of the at least one working windows on which the first mouse icon or the second mouse icon is located to a topmost layer (par. 42, the cursor can be appeared at a topmost window/layered window as the focused window with user input).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method for displaying two cursors in the windows, as taught by Yen, and to display the cursor at the topmost window, as taught by Chen. The motivation is to easily identify or switch the focused window based on the pointer location.
Claim 17 is substantially similar to Claim 7 and rejected under the same rationale.
8. Claims 8-9 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yen, Li (TW201040825A, published on Nov. 16, 2010) in view of Xiong et al. (US 2024/0045557 A1).
As in Claim 8, Yen teaches all the limitations of Claim 1. Yen does not teach that the display device comprises a first display device and a second display device respectively connected to the control host; the control host generates the first mouse icon on the first display device and generates the second mouse icon on the second display device.
However, in the same field of the invention, Xiong teaches that the display device comprises a first display device and a second display device respectively connected to the control host (pars. 80-84 and 251-257, multiple devices/display devices, such as electronic devices 100, 200, and 300); the control host generates the first mouse icon on the first display device and generates the second mouse icon on the second display device (pars. 251-257, cursor 916 on electronic device 100, cursor 917 on electronic device300, and cursor 918 on electronic device 200).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method for displaying two cursors in the windows, as taught by Yen, and to display multiple cursors on multiple devices, as taught by Xiong. The motivation is to allow the user to control and visually track the pointer on each respective device .
As in Claim 9, Yen-Xiong teaches all the limitations of Claim 8. Yen-Xiong further teaches that the first display device is used to display a first working window, the second display device is used to display a second working window, and the control host generates the first mouse icon and the second mouse icon respectively within the first and second windows (Xiong, pars. 251-257, cursor 916 on electronic device 100, cursor 917 on electronic device300, and cursor 918 on electronic device 200 ).
Claim 18 is substantially similar to Claim 8 and rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 19 is substantially similar to Claim 9 and rejected under the same rationale.
9. Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yen, Li (TW201040825A, published on Nov. 16, 2010) in view of Xiong et al. (US 2024/0045557 A1) and further in view of Chiu et al. (US 2023/0100689 A1).
As in Claim 10, Yen-Xiong teaches all the limitations of Claim 9. Yen-Xiong further teaches that the control host generates the first mouse icon at a designated position of the first display device and the second mouse icon at a designated position of the second display device respectively (pars. 80-84 and 251-257).
Yen-Xiong does not explicitly teach comprising a camera used to capture a user image information and the generated first mouse icon at a designated position and the second mouse icon at a designated position according to the user image information.
However, in the same field of the invention, Chiu teaches comprising a camera used to capture a user image information (at least pars. 102-106, 184, 187-189 a camera is used to capture a user image information, such as user’s hand, finger, gaze, etc.) and the generated first mouse icon at a designated position and the second mouse icon at a designated position according to the user image information (FIGS. 11A-11G (pars. 230-250), FIGS, 15A-15E (pars. 340-356), and FIGS. 17A-17E (pars. 412-445)).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method for displaying two cursors in the windows, as taught by Yen, in view of Xiong’s teachings, and to move multiple cursors on multiple objects/windows/interfaces with gaze information, as taught by Chiu. The motivation is to enable intuitive, gaze-directed cursor control and selection of content across different virtual windows or interfaces, reducing the need for additional manual input.
Claim 20 is substantially similar to Claim 10 and rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rinna Yi whose telephone number is (571) 270-7752 and fax number is (571) 270-8752. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30am-5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Fred Ehichioya can be reached on (571) 272-4034.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center or Private PAIR to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center or the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/RINNA YI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2179
Prosecution Insights