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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to: Application filed on September 25th, 2024
Claims 1-17are pending claims.
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 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.
Claims 1–17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Tseng (US 2011/0099316 A1) in view of Fadell (US 2018/0322405 A1).
As for independent claim 1:
Tseng discloses a method, comprising:
at a computer system that is in communication with a display component (Tseng, 0044, 0046, 0282):
detecting a change to a coupling status of the computer system (0072-0074, see detecting change in docking/coupling);
in response to detecting the change to the coupling status of the computer system: in accordance with a determination that a first set of one or more criteria is met, wherein the first set of one or more criteria includes a criterion that is met when a determination is made that the computer system is currently magnetically coupled, displaying, via the display component, a first user interface that includes a first set of one or more controls (0090, 0100-0102, Tseng discloses determining coupling and decoupling status and select rendering user interface control based on dock specific user interface profile. The coupling status infers the device environment, see 0090);
in accordance with a determination that a second set of one or more criteria is met, wherein the second set of one or more criteria includes a criterion that is met when a determination is made that the computer system is not currently magnetically coupled, displaying, via the display component, a second user interface that includes a second set of one or more controls, wherein the second set of one or more controls are different from the first set of one or more controls.
Tseng does not disclose the computer system is currently magnetically coupled to a respective area. Fadell discloses the computer system is currently magnetically coupled to a respective area in 0046, 0076-0078. In the cited section Fadell discloses docking and determining device’s location along with displaying user interface control correspond to the location. Accordingly it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a skilled artisan to modify the method of Tseng, to incorporate the teaching of Fadell of associating a device with a respective area, thus allow a customized user interface to control devices in the respective area (Fadell, 0046, 0078).
As for dependent claim 2:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first set of one or more criteria includes a criterion that is met when a determination is made that the respective area is associated with a first type of device, the method further comprising: in response to detecting the change in the coupling status of the computer system and in accordance with a determination that the computer system is currently magnetically coupled to a second respective area, wherein the second respective area is associated with a second type of device that is different from the first type of device, forgoing displaying the first set of one or more controls (Tseng, 0076, 0091, 011, discloses determining the dock type and selecting a different profile for each type along with changing the controls based on profile and dock state).
As for dependent claim 3:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: while displaying the first user interface that includes the first set of one or more controls, displaying, via the display component, a first set of indications corresponding to one or more settings related to the respective area (Fadell, 0078, discloses room specific menu and control devices such as door lock, smoke alarm, also see hvac and doorbell in 0028)
As for dependent claim 4:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to detecting the change to the coupling status of the computer system and in accordance with a determination that the computer system is currently magnetically connected to a third respective area that is different from the respective area, displaying, via the display component, a third set of one or more controls that is different from the first set of one or more controls (Fadell discloses controls that are unique to each room in 0078)
As for dependent claim 5:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to detecting the change to the coupling status of the computer system, transitioning the display component from a first state to a second state that is different from the first state (Tseng, 0006, 0144, see transitioning between display states in response to the dock and undock change of the device).
As for dependent claim 6:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first set of one or more controls are local controls that are directed to one or more devices associated with the respective area and not a fourth respective area that is different from the respective area, and wherein the second set of one or more controls are global controls that are directed to one or more devices associated with the respective area and the fourth respective area (Fadell, 0078, 0151-0152, see controls that are local to one area’s devices or across multiple areas, see user’s location).
As for dependent claim 7:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first set of one or more controls do not include and the second set of one or more controls includes a control that, when selected, causes output of media to be adjusted (Tseng, 0145-0147, discloses undocked profile presents a dock-control interface containing media-output controls such as pause, play, distinct and different from the docked area profile).
As for dependent claim 8:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first set of one or more controls includes and the second set of one or more controls do not include a control, that when selected, causes output of a device that impacts temperature of the environment to be adjusted (Fadell, 0028, 0207-0208, see temperature adjustment and configuration).
As for dependent claim 9:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: while displaying the second set of one or more controls, detecting an input directed to one control in the second set of one or more controls; and in response to detecting the input directed to the one control in the second set of one or more controls, displaying, via the display component, an indication that a value has been adjusted (Tseng, 0146; Fadell discloses adjusting thermostat and setpoint that change the value set by the user in 0212-0213).
As for dependent claim 10:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: while displaying the first set of one or more controls, detecting an input directed to one control in the first set of one or more controls; and in response to detecting the input directed to the one control in the first set of one or more controls, forgoing displaying, via the display component, an indication that a value has been adjusted (Fadell, 0095, 0031, 0089).
As for dependent claim 11:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: while displaying the first set of one or more controls, detecting a set of one or more inputs that includes an input directed to a respective control in the first set of one or more controls; and in response to detecting the set of one or more inputs, causing output of a device associated with the respective area to change (Fadell, 0078, 0095, discloses the system detecting inputs and display controls that adjust devices corresponding to the area/room).
As for dependent claim 12:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the second set of one or more controls consists of a first number of controls, and wherein the first set of one or more controls consists of a second number of controls that is different from the first number of controls (Tseng, car-dock desktop present six selectable elements while the desktop-dock interface displays a different set, 0100-0102, 0105-0106).
As for dependent claim 13:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the second set of one or more controls includes a control that is included in the first set of one or more controls (Tseng, 0101, 0107, see “home” element upon undocking of the device).
As for dependent claim 14:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first set of one or more controls includes at least one control that is not included in the second set of one or more controls (Tseng discloses controls unique to a profile, “Navigate” element of car-dock desktop different form other profile, see 0100, 0105).
As for dependent claim 15:
Tseng–Fadell discloses the method of claim 1, wherein each control in the first set of one or more controls is different from each control in the second set of one or more controls (Tseng, 0100-0102, 0105, discloses profiles whose control sets are disjoint such as car dock desktop and desktop dock interface, see Figures 8 and 9).
As for dependent claims 16, 17:Claims 16–17 contain substantial subject matter as claim 1 and are rejected along the same rationale.
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)).
The Examiner notes MPEP § 2144.01, that quotes In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825,159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968) as stating “in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom.” Further MPEP 2123, states that “a reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including nonpreferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID PHANTANA ANGKOOL whose telephone number is (571) 272-2673. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:00-3:30 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, can Adam Queler be reached on 571-272-4140. 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.
/David Phantana-angkool/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172
Prosecution Insights