DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Status of Claims
The following is a non-final, first action on the merits, in response to application filed October 18, 2024. Claims 1-15, are currently pending.
Priority
Certified copy of priority documents KR10-2022-0089836 dated July 20, 2022 and KR10-2022-0109188, dated August 30, 2022, are acknowledged which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 10/18/2024, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-15, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (WO 2022/119219, admitted prior art) to Lee et al (hereinafter Lee).
Regarding claims 1, 11, 15, Lee discloses an electronic device (method) (element 101, fig. 1 and 200 in fig. 2) comprising:
a display module (element 160, 210 in fig 1 and 2 respectively) comprising a plurality of areas (areas 1310a, 1320a and 1310b, 1320b in figs 13A and 13B respectively) (paras. 0084, 0102, 0134-0149);
at least one processor (element 120, 250 in figs 1 and 2 respectively); and
memory (element 130, 240 in figs 1 and 2 respectively) configured to store instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (paras. 0007-0008, 0038, 0061), cause the electronic device to:
when detecting an execution input for a target application9the execution input is implied, since it generally interpreted to mean a trigger input, a user touch input on a screen to execute a target application to obtain or have the desired area of interest sought by the user appear on the screen to display among the pieces of application targeted by the touch trigger) obtain pieces of target subscriber identification module (SIM) information connected to the target application among pieces of SIM information read by the electronic device (according to an embodiment, when the function related to the first application is not performed using the first SIM 221, the processor 250 May determine whether a function related to the first application may be performed using the second SIM 223. For example, each of the first SIM 221 and the second SIM 223 May correspond to a different communication company, a communication fee, and/or a communication scheme, or may have a difference in the amount of available data communication. For example, in order to perform a specific function of an application, the SIM 220 May support a corresponding setting (e.g. a communication company or a communication method), or a resource (e.g. a communication data capacity, a call time, or a message number) allocated to the SIM 220 May need to be sufficient. For example, when the amount of communication data available in the first SIM 221 is insufficient, the processor 250 May determine whether the amount of available communication data is sufficient through the second SIM 223. For example, when a specific communication scheme cannot be used in the first SIM 221, the processor 250 May determine whether the specific communication scheme may be used in the second SIM 223. For example, when the first SIM 221 uses all available resources (e.g. communication data capacity, call time, or message number) according to the specified communication fee, the processor 250 May determine whether the second SIM 223 May use the corresponding resource) (paras. 0007-0008, 0066, 0068-0071, 00840112, 0115, 0156, 0159-0161, 0176, 0199, element 2020, 2040, in figs. 15A, 15B and fig. 20 respectively), and
display a screen of the target application executed by using the obtained target SIM information in a target area corresponding to the obtained target SIM information among the areas of the display module (an electronic device capable of efficiently managing areas and user interfaces of a display corresponding to a plurality of SIMs. Flexible display 210 May visually provide information to the outside (e.g. a user) of the electronic device 200, the flexible display 210 May include at least one of a foldable display, a slidable display, and a rollable display the flexible display 210 may have various form factors, for instance, an expanded form or a reduced form of a folded form or an unfolded form of a foldable display, a slidable display (e.g. an area of a slidable display exposed to the outside of the electronic device), or an expanded form or a reduced form of a rollable display (e.g. an area of a rollable display exposed to the outside of the electronic device) may be a form factor of a flexible display, a reduced state may refer to a state in which at least a portion of the slidable display or the rollable display is inserted into the housing of the electronic device and covered by the housing) (paras. 0007-0008, 0028, 0042, 0049, 0067-0072, 0077-0078, 0112, 0115, 0156, 0158). Lee further discloses computer program product may be distributed in the form of a machine-readable storage medium (e.g. compact disk read only memory (CD-ROM)), or be distributed (e.g. downloaded or uploaded) online via an application store, or between two user devices (e.g. smart phones) directly, (para. 0265).
Regarding claim 11, this claim is analyzed and rejected for the same reasons as claim 1 because the corresponding apparatus in claim 1 can be used to practice the method steps of claim 11.
Regarding claims 2, 12, Lee discloses wherein the instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to: when obtaining the pieces of target SIM information connected to the target application, display the screen of the target application by using the pieces of target SIM information in target areas respectively corresponding to the pieces of target SIM information (see paras. 0007-0008, 0078; fig. 2, elements 221, 223)
Regarding claims 3, 13, Lee discloses wherein the instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to: when a piece of content corresponds to at least two pieces of among the pieces of SIM information read by the electronic device, display the content through a screen corresponding to a piece of SIM information among the at least two pieces of SIM information (see paras. 0007-0008, 0078 and fig. 2).
Regarding claims 4, 14, Lee discloses when there is a different area from the target area among the areas, display a home screen configured to detect an execution input for an application stored in the electronic device in the different area (see paras. 00073, 0096, 0113, figs 4, 6, 13A and 13B, element 2120 in fig. 21).
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses when detecting an execution input for a different application using different SIM information from the target SIM information while displaying the screen of the target application, display a screen of the different application in a different area from the target area while maintaining the displaying of the screen of the target application in the target area (see para. 0087).
Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses when detecting an execution input for the target application, select the target SIM information connected to the target application from among the pieces of SIM information, based on connection information between an application and SIM information (see paras. 0007, 0036, 0039, 0082, 0084, 0089, 0170, 0177).
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses select the target SIM information based on an area comprising a position at which the execution input is detected (see paras. 0159, 0161).
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses in areas respectively corresponding to the pieces of SIM information, display a home screen configured to execute an application stored in the electronic device by using a SIM corresponding to the application (see paras. 0122, 0126).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses by using representative SIM information selected from among the pieces of SIM information, display a home screen configured to execute an application (see para. 0126).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 7, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (hereinafter Lee) (WO2022/119219, prior art IDS) in view of Wang (US 2022/0007172, prior art IDS).
Regarding claim 7, Lee discloses limitation noted above with claim 1. Lee does not expressly show when detecting an input for moving the displayed screen of the target application to another area corresponding to different SIM information, execute the target application by using the different SIM information and display the screen of the target application in the other area. Wang however discloses when detecting an input for moving the displayed screen of the target application to another area corresponding to different SIM information, execute the target application by using the different SIM information and display the screen of the target application in the other area (after the icon of the target application is moved from the first display region to the second display region, when the target application is controlled to perform an operation based on a SIM card, the SIM card associated with the second display region is automatically selected to perform the operation, instead of selecting the SIM card associated with the first display region. Therefore, in this embodiment of the present disclosure, the SIM card automatically selected when the application performs an operation based on a SIM card can be adjusted by means of moving the icon of the application) (para. 0080). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Wang with device processing of Lee for the benefit of allow a user to use services provided by a plurality of wireless network systems through one terminal device provide a simplified user operation, thereby improving user experience.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUTBUDDIN GHULAMALI whose telephone number is (571) 272-3014. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 4:00pm.
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, Chieh Fan can be reached at 571 272 3042. 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.
/QUTBUDDIN GHULAMALI/
Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 2632.
Prosecution Insights