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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 17/282,886, filed on 04/05/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 04/08/2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1), which requires the following: (1) a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office; (2) U.S. patents and U.S. patent application publications listed in a section separately from citations of other documents; (3) the application number of the application in which the information disclosure statement is being submitted on each page of the list; (4) a column that provides a blank space next to each document to be considered, for the examiner’s initials; and (5) a heading that clearly indicates that the list is an information disclosure statement. The information disclosure statement has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. In this case, the IDS does not contain any information to consider.
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 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.
Claims 1-4 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US Publication 2015/0046433 A1, hereinafter “Lee”).
With regards to Claims 1, 14 and 15, Lee discloses an input apparatus (Paragraph [0161 – 0162]) comprising:
a handwriting input unit (FIG 1, 110 & 120; see also FIG 8) configured to receive a handwritten input (S) using a position of a pen (Paragraph [0043]) or a user's finger (finger) in contact with a display (FIG 8, clearly shows this feature); and
a display unit (FIG 1, 130 & FIG 8, 410) configured to display the handwritten input (S) received by the handwriting input unit (FIG 8, shows this feature) on the display as a handwritten object (S - 132) (FIGS 8 & 9, shows this feature),
wherein the input apparatus (Title and Abstract) is configured to, in response to no occurrence of a change in the handwritten object (FIG 9, S) during a first period (Paragraph [0129 – 0136] – after writing S), display one or more operation commands (FIG 9, 133-1 – 133-4) on the basis of the handwritten object (Paragraph [0129 – 0136]).
With regards to Claim 2, Lee discloses the input apparatus according to claim 1, further configured to, in response to no occurrence of a change in the handwritten object during the first period (FIG 9 and Paragraph [0129 – 0136]),
display a handwritten object rectangular area including the handwritten object (FIG 9, 132) and displays one or more operation commands candidates identified as the operation commands from the handwritten object (FIG 9, 133-1 – 133-4 and Paragraph [0129 – 0136]);
in response to any one from among (i) no operation command candidate being selected from among the one or more operation command candidates during a second period, (ii) receiving an operation of the user to delete display of one or more operation command candidates, and (iii) an occurrence of a change in the handwritten object (FIGS 12 & 13 – “P”),
delete display of the one or more operation command candidates (FIG 13, shows after “P” is written and operation command candidates are deleted); and
in response to deleting from the display the one or more operation command candidates due to a condition other than any operation command candidate being selected from among the one or more operation command candidates (FIG 13 and Paragraph [0140 – 0144]), 2Docket No. 536360US Preliminary Amendment
maintain display of the handwritten object (FIG 12 & 13 and Paragraph [0140 – 0144]).
With regards to Claim 3, Lee discloses the input apparatus according to claim 1, further configured to display one or more character string candidates identified from the handwritten object (FIG 9 and Paragraph [0129 – 0136]);
in response to either one from among (i) neither operation command candidate nor character string candidate being selected from among the one or more operation command candidates and the one or more character string candidates during the second period and (ii) receiving an operation of the user to delete the one or more operation command candidates and the one or more character string candidates (FIGS 12 & 13 – “P”),
delete display of the one or more operation command candidates (FIG 13, shows after “P” is written and operation command candidates are deleted) and the one or more character string candidates (FIG 13, shows after “P” is written in addition to the S and operation command candidates are deleted); and
in response to deleting the display of the one or more operation command candidates and the one or more character string candidates due to a condition other than any operation command candidate or any character string candidate being selected from among the one or more operation command candidates and the one or more character string candidates (FIG 13 and Paragraph [0140 – 0144]), 2Docket No. 536360US Preliminary Amendment
maintain display of the handwritten object (FIG 12 & 13 and Paragraph [0140 – 0144]).
With regards to Claim 4, Lee discloses the input apparatus according to claim 1, further configured to display character strings (FIGS 12 & 13, SP) including elements selected from among characters, numerals, symbols, and geometric forms as the one or more character string candidates (132 - SP), and display the operation commands together with the elements selected from among characters, numerals, symbols, and geometric forms (FIG 12 & 13 and Paragraph [0140 – 0144]).
With regards to Claim 11, Lee discloses the input apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the display unit is further configured to, for ultimately displaying the one or more operation command candidates (FIG 9, sows the operations command candidates), first, display one or more operation command candidates from among the one or more operation command candidates and a submenu button (FIG 13, shows submenu from operation command candidates); and
second, display a remaining operation command candidate from among the one or more operation command candidates in response to the submenu button being operated by the user (see FIGS 9 – 13 and Paragraph [0142 – 0144]).
With regards to Claim 12, Lee discloses the input apparatus according to claim 11, wherein one operation command candidate from among the one or more operation command candidates displayed first with the submenu button corresponds to an operation command last selected by the user (FIGS 9 – 13, shows this feature. Please also see Paragraphs [0142 – 0144]).
With regards to Claim 13, Lee discloses the input apparatus according to claim 2, wherein
the condition other than any operation command candidate being selected from among the one or more operation command candidates (Fig. 9) corresponds to a case of either one from among (i) receiving an operation of the user to delete the display of the one or more operation command candidates and (ii) an occurrence of a change in the handwritten object (FIGS 12 & 13 – “P”; FIG 13, shows after “P” is written and operation command candidates are deleted).
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 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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Seo et al. (US 2007/0067740 A1, hereinafter “Seo”).
With regards to Claim 5, Lee fails to disclose the input apparatus according to claim 1, further configured to store constants that replace variables associated with the one or more operation command candidates, replace the variables associated with the one or more operation command candidates identified from the handwritten object with constants, and execute an operation command from among the one or more operation command candidates for which a variable is replaced with a constant.
However, Seo teaches further configured to store (using FIG 3, 305) constants (constant tabs 1 to n) that replace variables (variable tabs 1 to n) associated with the one or more operation command candidates (Paragraph [0066 – 0067]), replace the variables associated with the one or more operation command candidates identified from the handwritten object (Lee’s invention teaches this) with constants (constant tab 1 to n), and execute an operation command from among the one or more operation command candidates for which a variable is replaced with a constant (Paragraph [0050 – 0052 and 0066 – 0067]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to have used the teachings of further configured to store constants that replace variables associated with the one or more operation command candidates, replace the variables associated with the one or more operation command candidates identified from the handwritten object with constants, and execute an operation command from among the one or more operation command candidates for which a variable is replaced with a constant in Lee’s invention as taught by Seo’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would have been in order to simply and rapidly use frequently used functions and to improve operation efficiency (Seo’s invention Paragraph [0012]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Seo, and in further view of Chung et al. (US Publication 2010/0046020 A1, hereinafter “Chung”).
With regards to Claim 6, Lee fails to disclose the input apparatus according to claim 5, further comprising a user authentication unit configured to authenticate the user, wherein the input apparatus is further configured to, in response to success of authentication of the user by the user authentication unit, set, to the constant, information concerning the user, replace the variable associated with the operation command with the information concerning the user, and execute the operation command for which the variable is replaced with the information concerning the user.
However, Chung teaches further comprising a user authentication unit (FIG 1, 17) configured to authenticate the user (Paragraph [0030]), wherein the input apparatus is further configured to, in response to success of authentication of the user by the user authentication unit (Paragraph [0030]), set, to the constant, information concerning the user, replace the variable associated with the operation command with the information concerning the user (Paragraph [0030, 0052 & 0075]), and execute the operation command for which the variable is replaced with the information concerning the user (Paragraph [0030, 0052 & 0075]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to have used the teachings of further comprising a user authentication unit configured to authenticate the user, wherein the input apparatus is further configured to, in response to success of authentication of the user by the user authentication unit, set, to the constant, information concerning the user, replace the variable associated with the operation command with the information concerning the user, and execute the operation command for which the variable is replaced with the information concerning the user in Lee’s modified invention as taught by Chung’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would have been in order to provide a simplified GUI menu screen for that authenticated user, thereby enhancing user convenience (Chung’s invention Paragraph [0076]).
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Jang et al. (US Publication 2014/0062962 A1, hereinafter “Jang”).
With regards to Claim 7, Lee fails to disclose the input apparatus according to claim 1, further configured to, in response to position information of a fixed object obtained from handwriting having predetermined relationships with the handwritten object, 4Docket No. 536360US Preliminary Amendment
identify an operation command, from among the one or more operation command candidates, concerning the fixed object that has the predetermined relationships with the handwritten object.
Jang discloses: further configured to, in response to position information of a fixed object (FIG 4A, handwriting of circle or drawing a line under words or phrases) obtained from handwriting having predetermined relationships with the handwritten object (FIG 5 and Paragraph [0041 – 0042]), 4Docket No. 536360US Preliminary Amendment
identify an operation command, from among the one or more operation command candidates (FIG 4B, copy, share, search), concerning the fixed object that has the predetermined relationships with the handwritten object (FIG 5 and Paragraph [0041 – 0042])4Docket No. 536360USPreliminary Amendment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Jang to include a handwriting gesture in the device disclosed by Lee. The motivation would have been for a selection purpose (Jang; Fig. 4B).
With regards to Claim 8, Lee in view of Jang discloses Jang teaches the input apparatus according to claim 7. Furthermore, Jang teaches further configured to, identify the operation command for editing or modifying the fixed object that has the predetermined relationships with the handwritten object (FIG 5 and Paragraph [0041 – 0042] – teaches of sharing, copying, etc., however it is old and well known that one of the commands could also be for editing or modifying the fixed object please see Garside et al., US Publication 2003/0233237 A1 Claims 17 and 18)4Docket No. 536360USPreliminary Amendment.
With regards to Claim 9, Lee in view of Jang discloses Jang teaches the input apparatus according to claim 7. Furthermore, Jang teaches further configured to, in response to position information of a plurality of fixed objects obtained from handwriting having predetermined relationships with the single handwritten object (FIG 5 and Paragraph [0041 – 0042]), identify an operation command, from among the one or more operation command candidates, concerning the plurality of fixed objects that have the predetermined relationships with the single handwritten object (FIG 5 and Paragraph [0041 – 0042]).
With regards to Claim 10, Lee in view of Jang discloses Jang teaches the input apparatus according to claim 7. Furthermore, Jang teaches further configured to, in response to an overlap of the fixed object obtained from handwriting with the handwritten object being of a predetermined overlapping percentage or more (FIG 5 and Paragraph [0041 – 0042] – the overlapping percentage is the encircling of the text or handwritten text) or being of more than the predetermined overlapping percentage or in response to overlaps of the plurality of fixed objects obtained from handwriting with the single handwritten object being of a predetermined overlapping percentage or more or being of more than the predetermined overlapping percentage, 5Docket No. 536360US Preliminary Amendment
determine that the position information of the fixed object obtained from handwriting has the predetermined relationships with the handwritten object or the position information of the plurality of fixed objects obtained from handwriting has the predetermined relationships with the single handwritten object (FIG 5 and Paragraph [0041 – 0042]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant‘s disclosure.
Goldsmith et al. (US 2009/0226091 A1) discloses displaying potential candidates (Fig. 3C).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BIPIN GYAWALI whose telephone number is (571)272-1597. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30 PM.
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, Will Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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.
BIPIN GYAWALI
Examiner
Art Unit 2625
/BIPIN GYAWALI/Examiner, Art Unit 2625