DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is responsive to communication(s): original application filed on 09/27/2024, said application claims a priority filing date of 12/11/2016.
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 15 and 20 are independent.
Double Patenting
The non-statutory 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 non-statutory obviousness-type 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); and 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 a non-statutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1, 15 and 20 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2 and 11 of US Patent 12,105,931 by Al Majid et al. (hereinafter ‘931). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
The scope of claim limitations 1, 15 and 20 of instant application falls within the scope of the claim limitations 2 and 11 of '931 underlined below:
Instant Application 18/900031
Reference Patent # 12,105,931
Claim 1. A method comprising: causing display on a mobile user device of a GUI for a chat application, the GUI including a vertically extending scrollable series of message cells, each message cell displaying message content of a corresponding message; receiving user input indicating selection of one of the message cells; and in an automated operation performed by one or more computer processors responsive to the user input, launching a contextual action menu overlaid on the series of message cells of the series of message cells, the action menu comprising: a preview area displaying a preview of the message content of the selected message cell; and one or more action items that are user-selectable to cause performance of respective corresponding actions with respect to the message of the selected message cell, wherein the launching of the contextual action menu comprises automatically calculating a size of the preview area based at least in part on a vertical position of the selected message cell, such that the size of the preview area is variable from one instance of launching the action menu to another as a factor of the message cell vertical position.
Claim 2. A method comprising: causing display of a GUI for a chat application on a mobile user device, the GUI including a series of message cells, each message cell corresponding to a respective message; receiving a user input indicating selection of a first message cell from the series of message cells; calculating a display scale of a preview area for displaying text included in a first message corresponding to the first message cell; determining whether the text displayed at a predetermined minimum font size fits within the preview area at the display scale; and based on determining that the text displayed at the minimum font size does not fit within the preview area at the display scale, generating a text preview for the first message based on the display scale for the preview area, the text preview comprising a text string that is ellipsized and that comprises a truncated portion of a whole text string of the first message; in response to and conditional on the user input for selection of the first message cell, launching a contextual action menu overlaid on the series of message cells, the contextual action menu comprising the preview area and one or more action items that are selectable to cause performance of corresponding actions with respect to the first message, the preview area being presented at the display scale and displaying the text preview, textual information accessible via the preview area being limited to the text preview, wherein the calculating of the display scale is such that on-screen size of the preview area is variable from one instance of launching the contextual action menu to another as a factor of one or more on-screen display attributes of the first message cell.
In regard to dependent claims 2-14 and 16-19, claims are rejected for fully incorporating the deficiency of their respective base claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Paul Horowitz, "How to Use Tapback in Messages on iPhone &iPad" 12/09/2016 8 pages (Year:2016)
Juli Clover, "How to Use Messages' Tapback, Screen Effects and Bubble Effects in iOS 10" 9/13/2016, 9 pages (Year:2016)
McCommons et al. (US Publication 2010/0095239) – Scrollable preview of content.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REZA NABI whose telephone number is (571)270-7592. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, WILLIAM BASHORE can be reached at 571-272-4088. 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.
/Reza Nabi/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights