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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on February 27, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3 and 6-13 are currently pending. Applicant’s amended claims are addressed herein below.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 4-7, “based on identifying a selection of screen capture while displaying the first window and the second window on the screen of the display, detect, as a focused second window, the second window, and store the focused second window and an unfocused first window as an image” is not clear since too many commas are present.
Is it “based on identifying a selection of screen capture while displaying the first window and the second window on the screen of the display, detect the second window as a focused second window, and store the focused second window and an unfocused first window as an image?” Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-8 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 20200387540) in view of Bastide et al. (US 20180239521) .
As to claim 1, Chen discloses an electronic device comprising:
a display (Fig. 2(208), [0030]);
at least one processor (Fig. 2(202), [0031]); and
memory (Fig. 2(214)) storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively ([0032]), cause the electronic device to:
based on identifying a selection of a screen recording function while displaying execution of a first application in a first window (Fig. 4A(404)) and execution of a second application in a second window (Fig. 4A(408)) on a screen of the display, perform the screen recording function for the screen of the display displaying the first window and second window (Figs. 4A-4C, [0037], [0045]: desktop 402 is shown with multiples windows 404, 406, 408. The computing device 102 detects the presence of one or more windows depicted within a video desktop recording 118 (screen recording function) capturing activities on a desktop. It is obvious that window 404 (first window) and window 408 (second window) can execute a first application and a second application);
while performing the screen recording function for the screen, based on detecting that a focus is changed from the first window (Fig. 4A(404)) to the second window (Fig. 4A(408)), record the first window and the second window (Fig. 3(330): identify a target window, [0035]: desktop video recordings utilizing focused content analysis performed by the computing device 102, [0045]: detects the presence of one or more windows depicted within a video desktop recording 118 capturing activities on a desktop and identifies a target window from among one or more windows, [0047]: window 408 (second window) is currently focused window among all other windows); and
based on identifying a termination of the screen recording function, store a video including the first window (Fig. 4A(404)) and the second window (Fig. 4A(408)) in the memory ([0040]: computing device 102 identifies the target window from among the one or more windows detected within the video desktop recording based on closing a window, [0042]: store the updated video desktop recording 118 back in the data store 116, [0043] – [0045]).
Chen does not expressly teach record the first window and the second window by reducing a size of the first window and increasing a size of the second window; and the first window and the second window whose sizes are changed according to the change of the focus.
Bastide teaches record the first window and the second window by reducing a size of the first window and increasing a size of the second window ([0019]: user device 110 can increase the size of one or more application windows determined to be active for longer than a predetermined threshold period of time and, similarly, can decrease the size of one or more application windows determined to be inactive for longer than a predetermined threshold period of time, [0026]: activity sensor module 250 can determine an active area of user interest and/or focus within an application window based on the number of user clicks within a segment of the application window or by monitoring user eye moments, e.g., via image capture device 160, [0047], [0049], Note: active (focused) application window is interpreted as the second window and inactive (unfocused) application window is interpreted as the first window); and
the first window and the second window whose sizes are changed according to the change of the focus ([0049]: application window manager minimizes one or more application windows that are inactive and/or not currently in use, dim the visibility associated with one or more active application windows that are not a primary area of user interest, and/or enlarge one or more application windows that contain an area of user interest, [0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen’s electronic device by incorporating Bastide’s idea of reducing the size of the application window that is inactive and increasing the size of the application window that contains an area of user interest (focus) in order to provide user flexibility.
As to claim 2, Chen (as modified by Bastide) teach the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Chen: Fig. 2(202), [0031]) individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
detect, as the focused window, at least one of a window activated and in use by a selection of a user, a window on which a cursor (Chen: Fig. 4A(410): pointer) displayed to control the electronic device through an external device connected to the electronic device is located (Chen: Fig. 4A, [0047]: window 408 (second window) is the top-most window or active window due to selection by the user using a pointer 410. It is the currently focused window among all other windows), or a window on which a gaze of the user lingers for a predetermined time, among the first window and the second window (Bastide: [0026]: activity sensor module 250 can determine an active area of user interest and/or focus within an application window based on the number of user clicks within a segment of the application window or by monitoring user eye moments, e.g., via image capture device 160, [0047]. Note: since there is “or” between two items listed above, Examiner can choose one item from the list to reject the entire limitation. However, Bastide teaches the other item on the list).
As to claim 3, Chen teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 2(202), [0031]) individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
record a background image (Fig. 4A(402): “screen image of desktop 402 that is not hidden by the windows” is interpreted as the background image) displayed as a background of the first window (Fig. 4A(404)) and the second window (Fig. 4A(408)) while recording the first window and the second window (Fig. 4A, [0045]: video desktop recording 118 (screen recording function) capturing activities on a desktop).
Chen does not expressly teach record the first window and the second window by reducing a size of the first window and increasing a size of the second window.
Bastide teaches record the first window and the second window by reducing a size of the first window and increasing a size of the second window ([0019]: user device 110 can increase the size of one or more application windows determined to be active for longer than a predetermined threshold period of time and, similarly, can decrease the size of one or more application windows determined to be inactive for longer than a predetermined threshold period of time, [0026]: activity sensor module 250 can determine an active area of user interest and/or focus within an application window based on the number of user clicks within a segment of the application window or by monitoring user eye moments, e.g., via image capture device 160, [0047], [0049], Note: active (focused) application window is interpreted as the second window and inactive (unfocused) application window is interpreted as the first window).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen’s electronic device by adapting Bastide’s idea of reducing the size of the application window that is inactive and increasing the size of the application window that contains an area of user interest (focus) in order to provide user flexibility.
As to claim 6, Chen (as modified by Bastide) teach the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Chen: Fig. 2(202), [0031]) individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
based on identifying a selection of screen capture while displaying the first window (Chen: Fig. 4A(404)) and the second window (Chen: Fig. 4A(408)) on the screen of the display, detect, as a focused second window, the second window, and store the focused second window (Chen: Fig. 4A(408)) and an unfocused first window (Chen: Fig. 4A(404)) as an image (Chen: Fig. 3(330): identify a target window, [0035]: desktop video recordings utilizing focused content analysis performed by the computing device 102, [0045]: detects the presence of one or more windows depicted within a video desktop recording 118 capturing activities on a desktop and identifies a target window from among one or more windows, [0047]: window 408 (second window) is currently focused window among all other windows. Note: window 408 (second window) is currently focused window, other windows including window 404 (first window) are unfocused windows).
As to claim 7, Chen teaches the electronic device of claim 6, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 2(202), [0031]) individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
store the image of the focused second window (Fig. 4A(408)) and unfocused first window (Fig. 4A(404), Fig. 3(330): identify a target window, [0035]: desktop video recordings utilizing focused content analysis performed by the computing device 102, [0045]: detects the presence of one or more windows depicted within a video desktop recording 118 capturing activities on a desktop and identifies a target window from among one or more windows, [0047]: window 408 (second window) is currently focused window among all other windows).
Chen does explicitly teach not a size of the focused second window is increased and a size of the unfocused first window is reduced.
Bastide teaches a size of the focused second window is increased and a size of the unfocused first window is reduced ([0019]: user device 110 can increase the size of one or more application windows determined to be active for longer than a predetermined threshold period of time and, similarly, can decrease the size of one or more application windows determined to be inactive for longer than a predetermined threshold period of time, [0026]: activity sensor module 250 can determine an active area of user interest and/or focus within an application window based on the number of user clicks within a segment of the application window or by monitoring user eye moments, e.g., via image capture device 160, [0047], [0049], Note: active (focused) application window is interpreted as the focused second window and inactive (unfocused) application window is interpreted as the unfocused first window).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen’s electronic device by incorporating Bastide’s idea of increasing the size of the application window that contains an area of user interest (i.e., focused window) and reducing the size of the application window that is inactive (i.e., unfocused window) for user’s convenience.
As to claim 8, Chen (as modified by Bastide) teach the electronic device of claim 6, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Chen: Fig. 2(202), [0031]) individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
store the image in which the focused second window (Fig. 4A(408)) is displayed on the screen of the display and not displaying the unfocused first window (Chen: [0035]: desktop video recordings utilizing focused content analysis performed by the computing device 102, [0045]: detects the presence of one or more windows depicted within a video desktop recording 118 capturing activities on a desktop and identifies a target window from among one or more windows, [0042]: if the user minimizes (not displaying) a first window and a second window is identified as a new target window; Note: second window becomes new target window (focused window) and minimized first window becomes unfocused window which is not displaying).
As to claims 11-13, it is the operation performed by the claims 1-3. Please see claims 1-3 for detail analysis.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 20200387540) in view of Bastide et al. (US 20180239521) and O’leary et al. (US 20230098395) and in further view of Krasadakis (US 20170212583).
As to claim 9, Chen (as modified by Bastide) teach the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Chen: Fig. 2(202), [0031]) individually or collectively, based on the electronic device, cause the electronic device to:
while performing the screen recording function for the display displaying the first window (Chen: Fig. 4A(404)) and the second window (Chen: Fig. 4A(408)) according to a selection of the screen recording function, perform the screen recording function, while detecting, as a focused second window (Chen: Fig. 4A(408)), at least one of a window selected by a controller communication-connected to the electronic device (Chen: [0045], [0047]: window 408 (second window) is currently focused window among all other windows).
Chen (as modified by Bastide) do not specifically teach a head mounted display (HMD) device, performing the screen recording function for the display displaying the first window and the second window in a three-dimensional space, and a window selected by a hand motion of a user, or a window on which a gaze of the user lingers for a predetermined time.
O’leary teaches a head mounted display (HMD) device ([0559]: head mounted display) and performing the screen recording function for the display displaying the first window and the second window in a three-dimensional space (Fig. 6A, [0112] – [0113]: “three dimensional” scene) and a hand motion of a user (Figs. 6AB, 6AC, [0312], [0317]: hand gesture).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electronic device of Chen (as modified by Bastide) by incorporating O’leary’ idea of using a head mounted display device in order to provide a user hands-free operation.
Chen (as modified by Bastide and O’leary) do not explicitly teach a window selected by a hand motion of a user, or a window on which a gaze of the user lingers for a predetermined time.
Krasadakis teaches a window selected by a hand motion of a user, or a window on which a gaze of the user lingers for a predetermined time (Fig. 3, [0052]: gesture input, proximity input (such as by hovering), [0057]: gaze 306 causes the UI window to come into focus, [0070]: gaze detector 134 performs a check to see whether a threshold amount of time has elapsed; if the threshold amount of time has been met, the UI window is brought into focus or activated).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electronic device of Chen (as modified by Bastide and O’leary) by adapting Krasadakis’ idea of selecting window by gaze in order to provide a user more flexibility.
As to claim 10, Chen (as modified by Bastide) teach the electronic device of claim 9, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Chen: Fig. 2(202), [0031]) individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
record a background (Chen: Fig. 4A(402): “screen image of desktop 402 that is not hidden by the windows” is interpreted as the background image) of the first window (Chen: Fig. 4A(404)) and the second window (Chen: Fig. 4A(408)) as a background image, while recording the focused second window Chen: Fig. 4A(408)) and the unfocused first window (Chen: Fig. 4A(404), [0045]: video desktop recording 118 (screen recording function) capturing activities on a desktop), [0047]: window 408 (second window) is currently focused window among all other windows. Note: window 408 (second window) is currently focused window, other windows including window 404 (first window) are unfocused windows).
Chen (as modified by Bastide) do not expressly teach record the three-dimensional space displayed as a background of the plurality of windows as a background image.
O’leary teaches record the three-dimensional space displayed as a background of the plurality of windows as a background image (Fig. 6A, [0113]: “three dimensional” scene).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electronic device of Chen (as modified by Bastide) by incorporating O’leary’ idea of including three-dimensional space in order to improve quality of displaying plurality of windows.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3 and 6-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AFROZA Y CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)270-1543. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Nitin Patel can be reached at (571)272-7677. 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.
/AFROZA CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628