DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
This action is in reply to the remarks/arguments for Application 18/966,308 filed on 3 December 2024.
Claim 1 is currently pending and has been examined.
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.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the "same invention" type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that "whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process ... may obtain a patent therefor ..." (Emphasis added). Thus, the term "same invention," in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957); and In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the conflicting claims so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1 of prior U.S. Patent 12,190,379 (Berlent et al) Issued: January 10, 2024. The Examiner notes that the claims are a duplicate of the claims in the '379 patent. This is a double patenting rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art(s) made of record and not relied upon is/are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Strasnick et al. (US 5,528,735) discloses a method and apparatus for displaying data within a three-dimensional information landscape. A method and apparatus are presented for displaying three dimensional navigable display space containing an aggregation of graphical objects and an overview of the aggregation of display objects. An altered perspective is provided by compressing the horizontal dimension of the displayed objects so that a user can see a representative overview of the entire aggregation of display objects that have been selected for display together on a display screen. The
compressed component is expanded so that the objects appear wider as a navigator approaches the displayed objects. A spotlight shines down on objects responsive to a data query. The spotlight serves as a navigation aid to the navigator so that highlighted items are visible from a distance and can be easily located. The user's view of the display space is altered so that the navigator perceives that he is traveling in a straight line when approaching a display object in a display space in which the horizontal dimension of displayed objects is compressed in accordance with the apparent distance between a displayed object and the navigator.
Geva et al. (US 9,600,298 B2) discloses active and efficient monitoring of a graphical user interface. Machines, systems and methods for recognizing visual change in a graphical user interface (GUI) environment, the method comprising determining position of an active GUI object in the GUI environment based on known attributes of the active GUI object; monitoring a focus area in the active
GUI object to detect visual changes in attributes of the focus area, without regard to any visual changes outside the focus area; determining whether the active GUI object has moved or has been resized, in response to determining a visual change in the attributes of the focus area; and determining position of a new active GUI object in the GUI environment, in response to determining that the active GUI object has not been moved or has not been resized.
Claim 1 is rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Clifford Madamba whose telephone number is 571-270-1239. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu 7:30-5:00 EST Alternate Fridays.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ryan Donlon, can be reached at 571-272-3602. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CLIFFORD B MADAMBA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692