DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the following communication: The claims filed on 09/16/2024. This action is made non-final.
Claims 1-22 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 21 and 22 are independent claims.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
With respect to claim 22, a “computer readable storage medium” is being recited; however, the Applicant’s specification suggests that the computer readable storage medium does not limit to non-transitory medium only (see Specification paragraph 0007; where “a non-transitory computer readable storage medium” is recited). This subject matter is not limited to that which falls within a statutory category of invention because it is not limited to a process, a machine, manufacture, or a composition of matter.
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 1-2, 4, 6, 12-13, 18, 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonansea et al. (US 2008/0276170 A1; hereinafter Bonansea) in view of Matthews et al. (US 2006/0123353 A1; hereinafter Matthews).
As to claim 1, Bonansea teaches:
A method (see ¶ 0018), comprising:
at a computer system that is in communication with a display generation component (see Fig. 1 and ¶ 0018-0022. ¶ 0026; generating and managing the user interface 202 including the status gadget holder 205 and set of status gadgets 210):
displaying, via the display generation component, a status bar that includes one or more status icons, wherein a first status icon of the one or more status icons indicates a state of a first function of the computer system (see Fig. 2 and ¶ 0022-0025; A rectangular bar, referred to as the status gadget holder 205 {~status bar} is situated at the top of the user interface 202. The status gadget holder 205 contains or encloses a set 210 of status gadgets {~status icons}, which are persistently displayed status notifications with respect to the current state of a running application or device component. ¶ 0024; each of the status gadgets 212, 214 . . . 230 comprises a status indicator, such as an icon, that provides information concerning the current status of a system/device component or an active software application. For example, status gadget 228, represented by a telephone icon, provides information regarding the status of a telephony application, such as whether an incoming call is being received or whether a voice mail has been saved);
displaying outside of the status bar, via the display generation component, a user interface [of respective software executing on the computer system] (see ¶ 0033; a user may be currently using a first application while the sliplet indicates an incoming text message from another application. See Fig. 2 and ¶ 0025-0028; the user interface 202. A user may scroll through further application not currently shown on the user interface 202 may activating a button which allows applications to be unfolded, for example, by cycling through);
detecting an occurrence of an alert (see ¶ 0029; In one example, the status manager receives information from a schedule application that the time for a scheduled event is approaching and causes an event status gadget 216 shown as a clock to flash, change color, enlarge or change in some other way to provide an alarm notification of the upcoming event to the user); and
in response to detecting the occurrence of the alert, while continuing to display the user interface of the respective software outside of the status bar, displaying in the status bar an indication of the alert (see ¶ 0029; In one example, the status manager receives information from a schedule application that the time for a scheduled event is approaching and causes an event status gadget 216 shown as a clock to flash, change color, enlarge or change in some other way to provide an alarm notification of the upcoming event to the user. See ¶ 0033; a user may be currently using a first application while the sliplet indicates an incoming text message from another application), including:
in accordance with a determination that the alert corresponds to the first status icon of the one or more status icons in the status bar, updating the first status icon to include an indication of an occurrence of the alert (see ¶ 0029; In one example, the status manager receives information from a schedule application that the time for a scheduled event is approaching and causes an event status gadget 216 shown as a clock to flash, change color, enlarge or change in some other way to provide an alarm notification of the upcoming event to the user. The examiner’s note: the “updating the first status…” only occurs when the contingent limitation “determination” is true; that is IF the determination is not True, nothing is executed);
detecting an input directed to the status bar (see Fig. 5 and ¶ 0030-0031; user input when the user focuses on and selects a status gadget); and
in response to detecting the input directed to the status bar (see Fig. 5 and ¶ 0030-0031; the user can select the gadget):
in accordance with a determination that the input is directed to the first status icon in the status bar, performing a first operation (see Fig. 5 and ¶ 0030-0032; once an individual status gadget is selected, whereupon perform a simple state change, or display a sliplet, depending upon the function of the selected status gadget; The sliplet includes detailed status information, interaction options that affect the application referenced by the selected, or links to navigate to the full instantiation of the referenced application. The examiner’s note: the contingent limitation “updating the first status…” only occurs when the contingent limitation “in accordance with” is True); and
in accordance with a determination that the input is directed to a second status icon in the status bar, wherein the second status icon is different from the first status icon, forgoing performing the first operation (see Fig. 5 and ¶ 0030-0032; when the user focuses upon and selects a status gadget, in this case status gadget 228, which is shown shaded and enlarged due to the selection. Also, as shown, other status gadgets in the set 210 (e.g., 212, 214) may be made to disappear from view upon the selection of another of the status gadgets).
As rejected above, Bonansea discloses: displaying outside of the status bar a user interface (see ¶ 0033, 0025-0028). However, Bonansea does not expressly teach that the displayed user interface is of respective software executing on the computer system.
This deficient limitation is disclosed by Matthews. Specifically, Matthews discloses a status bar (see Fig. 3 and ¶ 0062-0063; ~task bar 310, MRU 320, and widgets tool bar 340); further comprising:
displaying outside of the status bar a user interface of respective software executing on the computer system (see Fig. 4 and ¶ 0084; rich presentation taskbar buttons {~icons}; the rich presentation taskbar button in this example contains information or control display elements that are associated with a corresponding application that provides a user with the ability to control the operation or functionality of the corresponding application. The display 401 contains open windows. In this example, a file folder (e.g., "My Documents" window 402) and a word processing application window 403 is present on the display 401. Each of the windows, i.e., the "My Documents" window 402 and the word processing application window 403, is associated with a simple taskbar button (404 and 405, respectively)).
Both references are related to status bar user interface; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bonansea with the teachings of Matthews to provide a method that allows the user to interact with status icons displayed in the status bar as claimed. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination because of the overlapping subject matter, and the advantages described in Matthews that provides enhanced information that may be customized to the specific application or may be tailored to the needs of the user (Matthews: see ¶ 0094).
As to claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews further teach: wherein, in response to detecting the occurrence of the alert, while continuing to display the user interface of the respective software outside of the status bar, displaying in the status bar an indication of the alert includes: in accordance with a determination that the alert corresponds to the second status icon of the one or more status icons in the status bar, updating the second status icon to include an indication of an occurrence of the alert (Bonansea: see ¶ 0029; In one example, the status manager receives information from a schedule application that the time for a scheduled event is approaching and causes an event status gadget 216 shown as a clock to flash, change color, enlarge or change in some other way to provide an alarm notification of the upcoming event to the user. See ¶ 0033; a user may be currently using a first application while the sliplet indicates an incoming text message from another application. Examiner’s Notes: Scheduled application is just an example, the skilled artisan would realize that other event can occur such as status of telephone application as illustrated in Fig. 2 item 228. The examiner further notes the contingent limitations “in accordance with a determination that”).
As to claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews further teach: wherein: updating the first status icon to include the indication of the occurrence of the alert includes updating the first status icon while maintaining a position of the first status icon relative to other status icons in the status bar (Bonansea: see ¶ 0024, 0029; The status gadgets 212, 214 . . . 230 indicate changes of state by changing in appearance (e.g., flashing, changing color, enlarging, etc.)).
As to claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews further teach: wherein performing the first operation in accordance with a determination that the input is directed to the first status icon in the status bar includes displaying, outside of the status bar, a user interface for a respective application that is associated with the first status icon (Bonansea: see Fig. 5 and ¶ 0032; the sliplet is a rectangular dialog box positioned adjacent (or attached) to and underneath the status gadget holder 205. The sliplet may also be formed and positioned in other ways. The sliplet includes detailed status information, interaction options that affect the application referenced by the selected, or links to navigate to the full instantiation of the referenced application).
As to claim 12, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews further teach: wherein detecting the occurrence of the alert comprises detecting occurrence of a first alert; displaying in the status bar the indication of the alert includes displaying a respective alert icon indicative of the first alert; and the method includes, concurrently displaying in the status bar, the respective alert icon indicative of the first alert and one or more additional alert icons indicative of one or more alerts different from the first alert (Bonansea: see Fig. 2 and Fig. 5 and ¶ 0023-0024; a set of 210 of status gadgets, which are persistently displayed status notifications with respect to the current state of a running application or device component).
As to claim 13, the rejection of claim 12 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews further teach: concurrently displaying in the status bar, the respective alert icon indicative of the first alert and the one or more additional alert icons indicative of one or more alerts different from the first alert includes: displaying a second alert icon indicative of a second alert that is different from the one or more status icons and that indicates a state of a second function of the computer system; and displaying a third alert icon indicative of a third alert that corresponds to a third status icon of the one or more status icons, including updating the third status icon to include an indication of an occurrence of the third alert (Bonansea: see Fig. 2 and Fig. 5 and ¶ 0023-0024; a set of 210 of status gadgets, which are persistently displayed status notifications with respect to the current state of a running application or device component).
As to claim 18, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews further teach:
while displaying the indication of the alert: while the display generation component is in a first orientation, displaying the status bar, including the one or more status icons and the indication of the alert, at a first position of the display generation component in the first orientation (see Fig. 2 and ¶ 0022; A rectangular bar, referred to as the status gadget holder 205 is situated at the top of the user interface 202, Fig. 2 shows the status bar 205 is displayed at the top edge in a portrait orientation); and
in response to detecting an event that causes the display generation component to change from the first orientation to a second orientation, displaying the status bar, including the one or more status icons and the indication of the alert, at the first position of the display generation component in the second orientation (see Fig. 4 and ¶ 0022; the status gadget holder 205 may be arranged in other locations of the user interface 202, and may have a variety of different configurations and shapes. As depicted, the status gadget holder 405 is oriented vertically at the left side of the user interface 402, the vertical status bar is displayed at left edge in landscape orientation).
As to claim 21, claim 21 is directed to a computer system, comprising: a display generation component; one or more processors; and memory storing one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs are configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for implementing the method steps of claim 1; therefore, is rejected under similar rational. (Bonansea: see Fig. 1 and ¶ 0018-0022).
As to claim 22, claim 22 is directed to a computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions that, when executed by a computer system with a display generation component, cause the computer system to implement the method steps of claim 1; therefore, is rejected under similar rational. (Bonansea: see Fig. 1 and ¶ 0018-0022).
Claims 3, 5, 7, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonansea and Matthews further in view of Tseng et al. (US 2009/0249247 A1; hereinafter Tseng).
As to claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews do not expressly teach, but Tseng is relied upon for teaching the limitations:
wherein, in response to detecting the occurrence of the alert, displaying in the status bar the indication of the alert includes: in accordance with a determination that the alert does not correspond to the one or more status icons in the status bar, displaying, in the status bar, an alert icon that is different from the one or more status icons and that indicates a state of a respective function of the computer system, wherein the alert icon includes information about the alert and is updated over time as a state of the respective function changes (see Fig. 1 and ¶ 0036; Fig. 1(e), 1(g) show an updated status bar, where an icon for the voice mail message has been added to the icon for the prior e-mail message. ¶ 0037; third icon is added. The examiner notes the contingent limitations “in accordance with a determination that”).
The references, each is related to status bar user interface; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bonansea/ Matthews with the teachings of Tseng to provide a method that allows the user to interact with status icons displayed in the status bar as claimed. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination because of the overlapping subject matter, and the advantages described in Tseng that enhance user experience by providing the notifications to the user in a more convenient manner (Tseng: see ¶ 0084).
As to claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea/ Matthews/Tseng further teach wherein updating the first status icon to include the indication of the occurrence of the alert includes updating the first status icon while changing respective positions of one or more other status icons within the status bar (see Fig. 1(c) , 1(e) and ¶ 0036; In this example, the icons are sorted according to priority of importance, where voice mails have been determined to be more important than e-mails, as shown in Fig. 1(e), position of email within the status bar is changed compared to the position of the email icon shown in Fig. 1(c)). Combining Bonansea/ Matthews/Tseng would meet the claimed limitations for the same reasons as set forth in claim 3.
As to claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea/ Matthews/Tseng further teach in response to detecting the input directed to the status bar: in accordance with a determination that the input is directed to the indication of the alert, updating the indication of the alert to display information about the alert (Tseng: see Fig. 2A and ¶ 0041, 0076; the status bar 202 is shown with the message notification icons removed (because the user has now been shown the messages and does not need a notification about them). The examiner notes the contingent limitations “in accordance with a determination that”). Combining Bonansea/Matthews/Tseng would meet the claimed limitations for the same reasons as set forth in claim 3.
As to claim 14, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews further teach: wherein detecting the occurrence of the alert includes detecting that one or more battery criteria have been met, and the indication of the alert corresponds to a battery alert icon (Bonansea: see Figs. 2, 5 and ¶ 0023-0024; status gadgets which are persistently displayed status notifications with respect to the current state of a running application or device component. See ¶ 0034; while status gadgets primarily display information about the electronic system or device itself (e.g. battery level) or the device's environment (e.g. cell phone signal strength). Tseng: see Fig. 1 and ¶ 0067; graphical display elements representing a battery level of signal strength level for the device 30). Combining Bonansea/Matthews/Tseng would meet the claimed limitations for the same reasons as set forth in claim 3.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonansea and Matthews further in view of Cinek et al. (US 2020/0192566 A1; hereinafter Cinek).
As to claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews further teach the limitations:
in response to detecting the input directed to the status bar (see Fig. 5 and ¶ 0030; i.e., the status gadget 228 is selected):
in accordance with a determination that the input [
in accordance with a determination that the input is a second [The examiner notes the contingent limitations “in accordance with a determination that” could be nothing occurs when the input is NOT the type of the first and a second).
Bonansea and Matthews do not expressly teach the first input and second input are of different types. However, Cinek is relied upon for teaching the deficient limitations. Specifically, Cinek teaches:
in response to detecting an input directed to an icon having a notification badge (see Figs. 3A-3B and ¶ 0085);
in accordance with a determination that an input is of a first type directed to a respective alert icon, displaying a user interface for a respective application that is associated with the respective alert icon (Cinek: see ¶ 0085; A user may provide a first type of user input (e.g. a tap gesture) at or near a location of UIC 212 at which launch icon 318 is displayed. UI module 220 may interpret the first type of user input as an input that selects launch icon 318 to cause computing device 210 to execute the application or service associated with launch icon 318).
in accordance with a determination that the input is a second type of input directed to the respective alert icon, wherein the second type of input is different from the first type of input, updating the respective alert icon to display information about the alert (Cinek: Figs. 3A-3B and ¶ 0085; the user may provide a second type of user input 306 (e.g. a long-press gesture) at or near a location of UIC 212 at which launch icon 318 is displayed. UI module 220 may interpret the second type of user input 306 as an input that selects launch icon 318 to cause computing device 210 to display notification area 315, which in the example of FIG. 3A, is a notification preview window that includes notification messages 316A-316D (collectively “notification messages 316”)).
The references, each is related to user interface interaction; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bonansea/ Matthews with the teachings of Cinek to provide a method that allows the user to view different information based on input type as claimed. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination because of the overlapping subject matter, and the advantages described in Cinek that provides a mechanism for the user to be able to more quickly interact with a particular notification message; thus, enhance user experience with user interface (Cinek: see ¶ 0004).
As to claim 9, the rejection of claim 8 is incorporated. Bonansea/ Matthews/Cinek further teach wherein the first type of input comprises an input that is detected for less than a threshold amount of time and the second type of input is an input that is detected for at least the threshold amount of time (Cinek: see ¶ 0085; first type of user input comprises a tap gesture and second input comprises a long-press gesture). Combining Bonansea/ Matthews/Cinek would meet the claimed limitations for the same reasons as set forth in claim 8.
As to claim 10, the rejection of claim 8 is incorporated. Bonansea/ Matthews/Cinek
wherein updating the respective alert icon to display information about the alert in accordance with a determination that the input is the second type of input includes displaying, in the respective alert icon, one or more controls for interacting with the alert (Bonansea: see Fig. 5 and ¶ 0032; The sliplet 400 includes detailed status information, interaction options that affect the application referenced by the selected, or links to navigate to the full instantiation of the referenced application, ¶ 0030; the sliplet is displayed when the user focuses upon and select the status gadget. Matthews: see Fig. 4 and ¶ 0084-0086; rich presentation taskbar buttons 406, 407 each contains control display elements that provide a user with control of the operation/functionality of the respective application). Combining Bonansea/ Matthews/Cinek would meet the claimed limitations for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonansea and Matthews further in view of LI et al. (US 2019/0073124 A1; hereinafter LI).
As to claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews further teach: in accordance with a determination that the input is directed to a respective alert icon and a respective alert icon is not associated with a respective application, expanding the respective alert icon to display additional information about the alert (Bonansea: see Fig. 5 and ¶ 0032; The sliplet 400 includes detailed status information, interaction options that affect the application referenced by the selected, or links to navigate to the full instantiation of the referenced application, ¶ 0030; the sliplet is displayed when the user focuses upon and select the status gadget).
Bonansea and Matthews do not expressly teach, but LI is relied upon for teaching the limitations of claim 11 comprising:
in response to detecting the input directed to the status bar: in accordance with a determination that the input is directed to a respective alert icon that is associated with a respective application, replacing display, outside of the status bar, of the user interface of respective software executing on the computer system with a user interface for the respective application associated with the respective alert icon (LI: see Fig. 1B-1C and ¶ 0043-0044; when detecting that the user clicks an entrance 132 of a social application C, the operating system switches the user interface displayed on the terminal to the user interface 140 of the social application C. Fig. 1B-1C show the “return to phone call” and “return to recording” button, respectively, which allows the user to switch to previous application using the button displayed in the status bar. The examiner notes the contingent limitations “in accordance with a determination that”).
The references, each is related to user interface interaction; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bonansea/Matthews with the teachings of LI to provide a method that allows the user to switch between applications using the controls displayed in the taskbar as claimed. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination because of the overlapping subject matter, and the advantages described in LI that provides a mechanism that simplifies operational steps for controlling an application running in the background and improving an efficiency of operating the application running in the background (LI: see ¶ 0040).
Claims 15-17, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonansea and Matthews further in view of Karunamuni et al. (US 2018/0335939 A1; hereinafter Karunamuni).
As to claim 15, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea and Matthews further teach: the status gadgets comprises status gadgets primarily display information about the electronic system or device itself (e.g. battery level) or the device's environment (e.g. cell phone signal strength) (Bonansea: see ¶ 0024, 0034). Bonansea and Matthews do not expressly teach the status icons comprises status icon regarding screen recording.
However, screen recording is a well-known system/device functionality as disclosed by Karunamuni. Specifically, Karunamuni teaches detecting the occurrence of the alert includes detecting that a screen recording is initiated (see ¶ 0559; screen recording functionality, start/stop state of the screen recording).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bonansea/Matthews with the teachings of Karunamuni to provide a status update relating to screen recording functionality as claimed so that the user can be aware of the ongoing screen recording functionality (Karunamuni: see ¶ 0559). It is true since Bonansea suggests that status icons that are related to device’s functionality and/or device’s environment can be included and displayed in the taskbar for user’s convenience (Bonansea: see ¶ 0034).
As to claim 16, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea, Matthews, Karunamuni further teach: wherein detecting the occurrence of the alert includes detecting that the computer system has entered a restricted mode (Karunamuni: see ¶ 0214; navigation is restricted in the current operating mode. Bonansea: see ¶ 0034; display status of device/system functionality).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bonansea/Matthews with the teachings of Karunamuni to provide a status update relating to restricted mode functionality as claimed so that the user can be aware of the mode that the device is operating (Karunamuni: see ¶ 0214). It is true since Bonansea suggests that status icons that are related to device’s functionality and/or device’s environment can be included and displayed in the taskbar for user’s convenience (Bonansea: see ¶ 0024, 0034).
As to claim 17, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea, Matthews, Karunamuni further teach: wherein detecting the occurrence of the alert includes detecting that media sharing is active (Karunamuni: see ¶ 0235; sharing the media content with others.. Bonansea: see ¶ 0024, 0034; display status of ongoing application and/or device/system functionality).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bonansea/Matthews with the teachings of Karunamuni to provide a status update relating to content sharing functionality as claimed so that the user can be aware of the media content sharing is operating (Karunamuni: see ¶ 0235). It is true since Bonansea suggests that status icons that are related to ongoing applications, and/or device’s functionality and/or device’s environment can be included and displayed in the taskbar for user’s convenience (Bonansea: see ¶ 0030-0034).
As to claim 19, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea, Matthews, Karunamuni further teach: wherein displaying, outside of the status bar, the user interface of respective software executing on the computer system includes displaying a system user interface while concurrently displaying the status bar (Bonansea: see ¶ 0025; a user may scroll through further application not currently shown on the user interface 202 may activating a button which allows applications to be unfolded, for example, by cycling through. Karunamuni: see Fig. 4A and ¶ 0167-0190; Fig. 4A shows status bar and homepage user interface outside of the status bar). Combining Bonansea/ Matthews/ Karunamuni would meet the claimed limitations for the benefit of making it easy for the user to select which application to launch; thus, enhance user experience with mobile device user interface (Karunamuni: see ¶ 0005).
As to claim 20, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Bonansea, Matthews, Karunamuni further teach: wherein displaying, outside of the status bar, the user interface of respective software executing on the computer system includes displaying an application user interface for an application of the computer system, while concurrently displaying the status bar (Bonansea: see ¶ 0025; a user may scroll through further application not currently shown on the user interface 202 may activating a button which allows applications to be unfolded, for example, by cycling through. Karunamuni: see Fig. 5A14 and ¶ 0217; Fig. 5A14 shows status bar and a mail application user interface outside of the status bar). Combining Bonansea/ Matthews/ Karunamuni would meet the claimed limitations for same reasons as set forth in claim 19.
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 these references fully when responding to this action.
It is noted that any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275,277 (CCPA 1968)).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUYETLIEN T TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1033. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00 AM - 8:00 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, Irete (Fred) Ehichioya can be reached on 571-272-4034. 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.
/TUYETLIEN T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2179
Prosecution Insights