1Notice 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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim 2, 4-5, 7-9, 11-12, 14-15, 17-19, and 21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 9-13, 15, and 18-19 of U.S. Patent No. US 12,093,464 in view of US 2013/0159939 Krishnamurthi.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both claim a wrist-wearable device.
For example:
18/888018 claim 2 (pending application)
12,093,464 claim 1
Claim 2. A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium including instructions that, when executed by a wrist-wearable device including and one or more sensors configured to detect yaw, pitch, and roll values for the wrist-wearable device, cause the wrist-wearable device to: obtain an indication that the wrist-wearable device is within a threshold distance of a target device; while the target device is performing operations of a first application: obtain data from the one or more sensors indicating that a user of the wrist- wearable device is performing a digit-to-digit gesture while the wrist-wearable device has a first roll value; and in accordance with obtaining the data, cause an input command to be performed via the first application at the target device; and while the wrist-wearable device remains within the threshold distance of the target device, and the target device is performing operations of a second application, distinct from the first application:
A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium including instructions that, when executed by a wrist-wearable device including a display and one or more sensors configured to detect yaw, pitch, and roll values for the wrist-wearable device, cause the wrist-wearable device to: receive a first indication at a first point in time that a user donning the wrist-wearable device is providing a first digit-to-digit gesture in which a first user digit touches a second user digit without contacting the display of the wrist-wearable device; in accordance with a determination that the first digit-to-digit gesture is provided while data from the one or more sensors indicates that the wrist-wearable device has a first roll value, cause a target device that is in communication with the wrist-wearable device to perform a first input command; receive a second indication at a second point in time that is after the first point in time that the user is providing the first digit-to-digit gesture again;
obtain additional data from the one or more sensors indicating that the user is performing the digit-to-digit gesture while the wrist-wearable device has the first roll value; and in accordance with obtaining the additional data, cause another input command to be performed by the second application at the target device, wherein the other input command causes a different type of operation at the target device than was caused by the input command caused while the target device was performing the operations of the first application.
that the user is providing the second digit-to-digit gesture;
and in accordance with a determination that the first digit-to-digit gesture is provided again while data from the one or more sensors indicates that the wrist-wearable device has a second roll value that is distinct from the first roll value, cause the target device to perform a second input command that is distinct from the first input command; receive a third indication at a third point in time that is after the first point in time that the user is providing a second digit-to-digit gesture in which a third user digit touches a fourth user digit without contacting the display of the wrist-wearable device, wherein the third user digit or the fourth user digit is distinct from the first user digit and the second user digit; in accordance with a determination that the second digit-to-digit gesture is provided while the data from the one or more sensors indicates that the wrist-wearable device has the first roll value, cause the target device that is in communication with the wrist-wearable device to perform a third input command distinct from the first input command; receive a fourth indication at a fourth point in time that is after the first point in time and in accordance with a determination that the second digit-to-digit gesture is provided while the data from the one or more sensors indicates that the wrist-wearable device has the second roll value that is distinct from the first roll value, cause the target device to perform a fourth input command that is distinct from the first input command.
Claim 7. in response to detecting that the wrist-wearable device has moved closer to a second target device than to the target device: establish a second communication channel with the second target device instead of the target device, without requiring any input from the user; receive a fifth indication at a fifth point in time that the user intends to perform the first or second digit-to-digit gesture once again; and in accordance with a determination that the first or second digit-to-digit gesture that is once again provided is provided while the one or more sensors indicate that the wrist-wearable device has a third roll value, cause the second target device to perform a fifth input command, using the second communication channel.
Claims 2, 12, 19
Claims 1, 15, 18-19
Claim 4-5, 14-15, 21
Claims 9
Claims 7-8, 17-18
Claims 10-12
Claim 9
Claim 13
Claim 11
Claim 5
Claim 1 of 12,093,464 does not disclose obtain additional data from the one or more sensors indicating that the user is performing the digit-to-digit gesture while the wrist-wearable device has the first roll value; and in accordance with obtaining the additional data, cause another input command to be performed by the second application at the target device, wherein the other input command causes a different type of operation at the target device than was caused by the input command caused while the target device was performing the operations of the first application.
Krishnamurthi discloses a same gesture may execute a different command in different application (Par. 35).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Mao with the teaching of Krishnamurthi to provide an intuitive inputting process as suggested by Ang (Par. 187).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified claim 1 of 12,093,464 with the teaching of to provide an intuitive inputting process as suggested by Ang (Par. 187).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 2, 7-12, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0097083 A1 to Mao, US 2018/0153430 to Ang et al. (Ang); and US 2013/0159939 Krishnamurthi.
As to claim 2, Mao discloses a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium including instructions that, when executed by a wrist-wearable device (802) (Par. 50) including and one or more sensors (neuromuscular sensors) configured to detect roll values for the wrist-wearable device (Figs. 8A-8B, 10-11C, Pars. 193-195, see also Pars. 166-167), cause the wrist-wearable device to:
obtain an indication that the wrist-wearable device is within a threshold distance of a target device (e.g. smartphone 1103)(Figs. 8A-8B, Pars. 166-167);
while the target device is performing operations of a first application (Figs. 8A-8B, Pars. 166-167):
obtain data from the one or more sensors indicating that a user of the wrist- wearable device is performing a gesture (Figs. 8A-8B, 10-11C, Pars. 166-167, 193-195); and
in accordance with obtaining the data, cause an input command to be performed via the first application at the target device (1103) Figs. 8A-8B, 10-11C, Pars. 166-167, 193-195); and
while the wrist-wearable device remains within the threshold distance of the target device (1103), and the target device is performing operations of a second application, distinct from the first application (Figs. 8A-8B, 10-11C, Pars. 166-167, 193-195).
Mao does not expressly disclose one or more sensors configured to detect yaw and pitch; obtain additional data from the one or more sensors indicating that the user is performing the digit-to-digit gesture while the wrist-wearable device has the first roll value; and in accordance with obtaining the additional data, cause another input command to be performed by the second application at the target device, wherein the other input command causes a different type of operation at the target device than was caused by the input command caused while the target device was performing the operations of the first application.
Ang discloses one or more sensors (sensors in 950) (Fig. 18, Pars. 22, 186-187) configured to detect yaw, pitch, and roll (Fig. 18, Pars. 22, 187); and obtain data from the one or more sensors indicating that a user of the wrist-wearable device is performing a digit-to-digit gesture (see Pars. 51, 78, 202) while the wrist-wearable device has a first roll value(e.g. first direction, orientations, rates of motion, or magnitude of motion)(see Pars. 22, 189).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Mao with the teaching of Ang to provide an intuitive inputting process as suggested by Ang (Par. 187).
Krishnamurthi discloses a same gesture may execute a different command in different application (Par. 35).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Mao with the teaching of Krishnamurthi to provide an intuitive inputting process as suggested by Ang (Par. 187).
Mao as modified discloses obtain additional data from the one or more sensors indicating that the user is performing the digit-to-digit gesture while the wrist-wearable device has the first roll value (Ang’s (see Pars. 22, 189, see also Pars. 51, 78, 202).; and
in accordance with obtaining the additional data, cause another input command to be performed by the second application at the target device (Krishnamurthi’s Par. 35), wherein the other input command causes a different type of operation at the target device than was caused by the input command caused while the target device was performing the operations of the first application Krishnamurthi’s Par. 35).
As to claims 12 and 19, see claim 2 rejection and motivation above.
As to claim 7, Mao’s discloses the first application is one of a photo-viewing or video-playback application (Mao’s Table1: display video control, see Page 18), and the second application is a gaming application (Mao’s Par. 150).
As to claim 17, see claim 7 rejection and/or motivation above.
As to claim 8, Mao’s discloses the input command causes operations corresponding to navigation through a media-viewing interface of the video-playback application (Mao’s Table1: display video control, see Page 18), and the other input command causes operations corresponding to a control command within the gaming application (Mao’s Pars. 150, 155).
As to claim 18, see claim 8 rejection and/or motivation above.
As to claim 9, Mao’s discloses at least one of the input command or the other input command is personalized based on the user of the wrist-wearable device (Mao’s Pars. 168-169), and the user is determined based on a biometric signal detected while the user is performing the digit-to-digit gesture (Mao’s Pars. 168-169, 190).
As to claim 10, Mao’s discloses the input command and/or the other input command are user configurable for the respective application to which the respective input command is directed (Mao’s Par. 169).
As to claim 11, Mao’s discloses before obtaining the data from the one or more sensors indicating that the user is performing the digit-to-digit gesture: establishing a communication channel (806) with the target device (803), without requiring any input from the user (Figs. 8A-8B, Par. 166).
Claim(s) 3-5, 13-15, and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0097083 A1 to Mao, US 2018/0153430 to Ang et al. (Ang) and US 2013/0159939 Krishnamurthi; in view of US 2017/0308118 A1 to Ito.
As to claim 3, Mao does not expressly disclose the wrist-wearable device further includes a display, and the instructions further cause the wrist-wearable device to: in conjunction with the performance of the input command and the other input command, cause display of different respective UI elements at the display of the wrist-wearable device.
Ito discloses the wrist-wearable device further includes a display (20)(Figs. 12A-12B, Pars. 182-183), and the instructions further cause the wrist-wearable device (1) to: in conjunction with the performance of the input command and the other input command, cause display of different respective UI elements at the display of the wrist-wearable device (1)(Figs. 12A-12B, Pars. 182-183).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Mao with the teaching of Ito to perform a predetermined display operation in response to the detected bodily motion as suggested by Ito (Par. 7).
As to claims 13 and 20, see claim 3 rejection and/or motivation above.
As to claim 4, Mao as modified discloses the different respective UI elements include a respective UI element indicating a zoom level corresponding to a visual zoom of content being presented at the target device (Ito’s Figs. 12A-12B, Pars. 182-183, Ang’s Fig. 18, Pars. 22, 187, see also Pars. 162, 163, 186, 188). See claim 3 motivation above.
As to claims 14 and 21, see claim 4 rejection and/or motivation above.
As to claim 5, Mao as modified discloses the zoom level is determined based on a yaw value detected by the one or more sensors of the wrist-wearable device (Ito’s Figs. 12A-12B, Pars. 182-183, Ang’s Fig. 18, Pars. 22, 187, see also Pars. 162, 163, 186, 188). See claim 3 motivation above.
As to claim 15, see claim 5 rejection and/or motivation above.
Claim(s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0097083 A1 to Mao, US 2018/0153430 to Ang et al. (Ang); and US 2013/0159939 Krishnamurthi; in view of US 2017/0308118 A1 to Ito and US 2005/0210417 to Marvit et al. (Marvit).
As to claim 6, Mao as modified does not expressly disclose the zoom level is based on a proximity between the wrist-wearable device and a head of the user.
Marvit discloses the zoom level is based on a proximity between the wrist-wearable device and a head of the user (Par. 81).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Mao with the teaching of Marvit to provide a motion user interface easier to learn and use as suggested by Marvit (Par. 81).
As to claim 16, see claim 6 rejection and/or motivation above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARURAT SUTEERAWONGSA whose telephone number is (571)270-7361. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, 8:30AM to 6:00PM, 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, Lun Yi Lao can be reached at 571-272-7671. 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.
/JARURAT SUTEERAWONGSA/Examiner, Art Unit 2621
/LUNYI LAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2621