DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . It is responsive to the submission dated 01/30/2025. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination. Claims 1, 11 and 20 are independent claims.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 01/30/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and are being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 4-5, 11, 14-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(a1) as being anticipated by Goyal et al. (US 10957286).
Considering claim 1, Goyal discloses a method comprising: identifying, using a graphical element modification system, a graphical element displaying state change information that is to be presented as an overlay on a display device (e.g., Goyal discloses: a computer-implemented method for remediating an instance of a visual notification interfering with an output of an application on a display of an electronic device, comprising: identifying the instance of the visual notification on the display. See col. 1 lines 58-62. Goyal further teaches that: if the system detects that users are looking at the screen for an average of four seconds, it can be inferred that there is a probability that some other graphic object may be blocking the information that the user wishes to obtain… the display device screen having an instance of a notification covering an application's output on the screen. See col. 4 line 67 to col. 5 line 10);
identifying, using the graphical element modification system, a feature of content displayed on the display device, wherein the feature affects a visibility of the graphical element (e.g., The visual notification is determined to be interfering with the output of the application on the display device. User response to the output of the application is monitored. An assessment is made, based on the monitoring, of an effectiveness of the output of the application. It is determined, based on the assessment, that there exists a failure of the effectiveness of the output of the application. See col. 2 line 66 to col. 3 line 6. Display device 302a has visual notification 304 appearing over the messaging on the screen. Notification 304 has contour 313 and covers lines 306a on the screen making such lines unreadable by viewers. See col. 5 lines 17-20);
adjusting, using the graphical element modification system, a characteristic of the graphical element in view of the feature (e.g., A remediation action is performed in response to the determined failure. The remediation action may include removal of the instance of the visual notification. See abstract and col. 5 lines 45-48); and
transmitting, using the graphical element modification system, instructions to display the graphical element having the adjusted characteristic (e.g., Display device 302b represents the display device following the remediation, which results in the removal of the notification according to embodiments of the invention, making all lines, including lines 306b, viewable again. See col. 5 lines 48-52).
As per claim 4, Goayl discloses the identifying the feature comprises identifying an appearance of the content (e.g., Display device 302a has visual notification 304 appearing over the messaging on the screen. Notification 304 has contour 313 and covers lines 306a on the screen making such lines unreadable by viewers. See col. 5 lines 17-20) and wherein the adjusting the characteristic comprises adjusting an appearance of the graphical element to distinguish visually the appearance of the graphical element from the appearance of the content (e.g., A remediation action is performed in response to the determined failure. The remediation action may include removal of the instance of the visual notification. … Display device 302b represents the display device following the remediation, which results in the removal of the notification according to embodiments of the invention, making all lines, including lines 306b, viewable again. See col. 5 lines 45-52).
As per claim 5, Goayl discloses the identifying the feature comprises identifying a graphical object of focus within the content, and wherein the adjusting a characteristic comprises moving the graphical element to be at a different location on the display device as compared to a location of the graphical object of focus (e.g., The instance of the visual notification is identified on a display device, at 402. It is determined whether the visual notification is interfering with the output of the application on the display device, at 404. …If yes, a first remediation is performed…may include attempting to move the interfering notification. …… multiple remediation levels may include moving progressively from moving the notification to behind the application window that is displaying content. See col. 5 line 54 to col. 6 line 15. In embodiments, the remediation may include determining the existence of the window by invoking an operating system call to indicate all windows, and indicate if the windows are covering the application of interest. The calls can include a window Z-order API (Application Programming Interface). .. The remediation may then include using the SetWindowPos API to change the Z-order of the window so that it is behind the application of interest (e.g. a flight status application). See col. 6 lines 36-45).
The subject-matter of independent claim 11 is analogous to and similar in scope to that of claim 1, and the rationale raised above to reject the later also apply, mutatis mutandis, to the former. In addition, Goayl discloses a system comprising: a processor; a memory device that stores instructions that, when executed by the processor. See col. 12 lines 18-22.
Claim 14 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 4.
Claim 15 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 5.
The subject-matter of independent claim 20 is analogous to and similar in scope to that of claim 11, and the rationale raised above to reject the later also apply, mutatis mutandis, to the former
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 2-3, 9-10, 12-13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 10788931).
Considering claim 2, Goayl fails to teach identifying a color scheme of the content, which is disclosed by Smith (see col. 51 line 64 to col. 52 line 6).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention was made, to have modified the teachings of Goayl to include identifying a color scheme of a content as part of identifying a feature of content display on a screen, in the same conventional manner as taught by Smith; in order allow the user to interact with the user interface and experience the style settings for the graphical element within the content in a wide range of color schemes. See col. 51 line 64 to col. 52 line 6 of Smith.
As per claim 3, Goayl fails to teach the adjusting the characteristic comprises adjusting a color of the graphical element to a color that contrasts with the color scheme of the content, which is disclosed by Smith.
In particular, Smith discloses presentation of visual properties that describe an object on a display comprises a combination of shading, color, contrast, brightness, transparency and/or pattern; wherein the animation routines include changing of colors, flashing, simulated optical distortions, and/or any other routine which varies, color, content, and/or any other graphical property over time; and wherein the animation routine may be a function of user input by shading the selection with a color which is somewhere between a pair of colors which represent the extrema of measurable contact pressure levels. See col. 22 line 59 to col. 23 line 13. See also col. 51 line 64 to col. 52.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention was made, to have modified the teachings of Goayl to include adjusting a color of the graphical element to a color that contrasts with the color scheme of the content, in the same conventional manner as taught by Smith; in order allow the user to interact with the user interface and experience the style settings for the graphical element within the content in a wide range of color schemes. See col. 51 line 64 to col. 52 line 6 of Smith.
As per claim 9, Goayl fails to teach producing an audible output that corresponds to a location of the graphical element, which is disclosed by Smith (See col. 51 lines 30-65).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention was made, to have modified the teachings of Goayl to include producing an audible output that corresponds to a location of the graphical element, in the same conventional manner as taught by Smith; so as to generate the user’s feedback by playing a sound. See col. 51 lines 30-65 of Smith.
As per claim 10, Goayl fails to teach the identifying the graphical element comprises receiving an input at an input element associated with the graphical element, which is disclosed by Smith (See col. 22 lines 23-65).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention was made, to have modified the teachings of Goayl to include receiving an input at an input element associated with the graphical element, in the same conventional manner as taught by Smith; in order allow the user to establish a selection for presentation of a visual property that describes a graphical object on a display. See col. 22 lines 59-65 of Smith.
Claim 12 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 2.
Claim 13 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 3.
Claim 19 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 9.
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 6-8 and 16-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, because the prior art of record fail to teach the method of claim 1, wherein the display device is a first display device of a plurality of display devices, and wherein the transmitting the instructions comprises generating the instructions to display the graphical element on one of the plurality of display devices, the one display device being selected to display the graphical element.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
AUtioniemi et al. (US 20150277705) discloses Electronic device comprising: a display screen, a computing entity configured to display graphical user interface via the display screen, and configured to capture user input via said graphical user interface, the computing entity further being configured to present a plurality of graphical indications of selectable image entities via the graphical user interface; detect an essentially continuous user input gesture via said graphical user interface along a path substantially upon two or more of said indications as a selection of such indications and corresponding two or more image entities; translate the selected image entities into an action producing a video representation of said image entities. A corresponding method is presented.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WESNER SAJOUS whose telephone number is (571)272-7791. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10:00 TO 7:30 (ET).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 or email the Examiner directly at wesner.sajous@uspto.gov.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Said Broome can be reached on 571-272-2931. 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. 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. 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.
/WESNER SAJOUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
WS
08/06/2026
Prosecution Insights