DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2014/0015736 A1, hereinafter Kim 1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2024/0094971 A1, hereinafter Kim 2).
As to claim 1, Kim 1 teaches an electronic device (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-3, [0036], e.g., “digital device 200 such as a PC, a PDA (personal digital assistant), a notebook computer, a tablet PC, a television and the like”) comprising:
communication circuitry (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-3, [0036], “digital device 200 may include a communication unit (not shown in the drawing)”);
a display (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-3, [0036], “display unit 220”);
at least one processor comprising processing circuitry (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-3, [0036], e.g., processor with circuitry of “digital device 200 such as a PC, a PDA (personal digital assistant), a notebook computer, a tablet PC, a television and the like”); and
memory, comprising one or more storage mediums, and storing instructions, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-3, [0036], e.g., instructions stored in the memory to be executed by the processor with circuitry of “digital device 200 such as a PC, a PDA (personal digital assistant), a notebook computer, a tablet PC, a television and the like”) to:
display, via the display, a first screen (Kim 1, e.g., FIG. 1, [0036], “contents 1” displayed by “display unit 220”);
establish, via the communication circuitry, a communication connection with a wearable device worn by a user (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-5, [0038], “the HMD 100 may be able to display various kinds of contents by interoperating with the digital device 200 connected by a network 300”), the wearable device (Kim 1, FIG. 2, [0042], “HMD 100”) comprising displays (Kim 1, FIG. 2, [0043], “display unit 120”) viewable by the user (Kim 1, see FIGS. 1-2);
during the communication connection, transmit, to the wearable device via the communication circuitry, data associated with a mirror screen corresponding to the first screen (Kim 1, FIG. 2, [0043], “HMD 100 receives data from the digital device via the communication unit 140 and may be then able to output a corresponding image based on the received data”; FIG. 3, [0059], e.g., “output content of digital device (on HMD) S342”), such that the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen is to be displayed via the displays of the wearable device (Kim 1, e.g., FIG. 5, [0075], “HMD 100 may be able to output the content 1”).
Kim 1 does not teach “identify an approach of another user distinguished from the user while the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen is to be displayed on the wearable device; and based on identifying the approach of the another user, display, via the display, a second screen indicating that the user is using the electronic device”.
However, Kim 2 teaches the concepts of identifying an approach of another user distinguished from the user (Kim 2, FIGS. 14-15, [0091], “wearable device 200 may identify that an external object (e.g., an external user) approaches the wearable device 200”) while the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen is to be displayed on the wearable device (Kim 2, FIGS. 14-15, [0091], “while displaying the first execution screen”); and
based on identifying the approach of the another user, displaying, via the display, a second screen indicating that the user is using the electronic device (Kim 2, FIGS. 14-15, [0096], “wearable device 200 may transmit information related to the warning message 1430 to the external electronic device 1610 so that the external electronic device 1610 displays the warning message 1430”; “external electronic device 1610 (e.g., a smart watch) may output the warning message 1430 based on the information obtained from the wearable device 200”).
At the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “HMD 100” taught by Kim 1 to further display the “warning message 1430” on the external display device such as “digital device 200”, as taught by Kim 2, in order to address the problem that “when the user uses specific content through the wearable device in a state where the user's view is blocked, not only the user of the wearable device but also other people or devices around the user may be placed in a dangerous situation such as collisions due to the user's movement of the wearable device” (Kim 2, [0004]).
As to claim 2, Kim 1 in view of Km 2 teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
while transmitting the data associated with the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen to the wearable device via the communication circuitry (Kim 1, FIG. 5, [0075], “HMD 100 receives the content 1 from the digital device 200 via a network 300 by real time and may be then able to output the received content 1”), cease displaying the first screen via the display (Kim 1, FIG. 5, [0075], “Meanwhile, the digital device 200 may stop displaying the content 1”); and
in response to the first screen being ceased from displaying, display the second screen based on identifying the approach of the another user (Kim 2, FIGS. 14-15, [0096], “wearable device 200 may transmit information related to the warning message 1430 to the external electronic device 1610 so that the external electronic device 1610 displays the warning message 1430”; “external electronic device 1610 (e.g., a smart watch) may output the warning message 1430 based on the information obtained from the wearable device 200”). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 1.
As to claim 3, Kim 1 in view of Km 2 teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
while transmitting the data associated with the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen to the wearable device via the communication circuitry, maintain displaying the first screen via the display (Kim 1, see FIG. 8, [0081], “digital device 200 may be able to display a content 1 in both of the first state and the second state”); and
in response to the first screen being maintained, replace the first screen with the second screen based on identifying the approach of the another user (Kim 2, FIGS. 14-15, [0096], “wearable device 200 may transmit information related to the warning message 1430 to the external electronic device 1610 so that the external electronic device 1610 displays the warning message 1430”; “external electronic device 1610 (e.g., a smart watch) may output the warning message 1430 based on the information obtained from the wearable device 200”). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 1.
As to claim 16, it differs from claim 1 only in that it is the method performed by the electronic device of claim 1. It recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 1, and Kim 1 in view of Kim 2 teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 1. Please see claim 1 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 17, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 2, and Kim 1 in view of Kim 2 teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 1. Please see claim 2 for detailed analysis.
Claims 4, 6-15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2014/0015736 A1, Kim 1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2024/0094971 A1, Kim 2) and Nakagawa (US 2020/0042281 A1).
As to claim 4, Kim 1 in view of Kim 2 does not explicitly teach the electronic device of claim 1, further comprising: an input module; wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: while the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen is to be displayed on the wearable device: identify a user input to the input module from the another user; and cease performing a function according to the user input.
However, Nakagawa teaches the concepts of an input module (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0102], “the communication device 101 is able to detect that an interrupt has occurred in the communication device 102 that is performing mirroring or the like with the communication device 101”, i.e., “has interrupt occurrence notification been received? S311”; [0042], “communication device 102 may have, as the input unit 204, a hard key, a touch screen, or the like integrated with the communication device 102 or integrated with a remote control separated from the communication device 102”);
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
while the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen is to be displayed on the wearable device (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0142], “start and maintain mirroring, content redirection, or direct streaming S309” until the decision is made at “S313”):
identify a user input to the input module from the another user (Nakagawa, e.g., FIG. 3, [0160], “has interrupt playback been permitted? S313” → “Yes”); and
cease performing a function according to the user input (Nakagawa, e.g., FIG. 3, [0172], “finish mirroring, content redirection, or direct streaming S315”).
At the time of effective fling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “digital device 200” and the “wearable device 200” taught by Kim 1 in view of Kim 2 to further perform the steps of identifying “interrupt” as shown in FIG. 3, as taught by Nakagawa, in order to provide that, e.g., “when playback of content is newly requested to a communication device that is playing back content, playback of the content is appropriately controlled on the basis of whether or not the source devices or users that have transmitted individual playback requests are identical to each other” (Nakagawa, [0007]).
As to claim 6, Nakagawa teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
while the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen is to be displayed on the wearable device (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0142], “start and maintain mirroring, content redirection, or direct streaming S309” until the decision is made at “S313”):
receive, from the wearable device via the communication circuitry, other data for identifying the approach of the another user (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0102], “has interrupt occurrence notification been received? S311” → “Yes”),
Kim 1 in view of Kim 2 and Nakagawa does not explicitly teach “the other data for identifying the approach of the another user indicating whether the another user identified by the wearable device using an image captured by a camera of the wearable device is in a state of approaching the electronic device; and identify the approach of the another user based on the other data for identifying the approach of the another user”.
However, Kim 2 in view of Nakagawa teaches the concepts of the other data for identifying the approach of the another user indicating whether the another user identified by the wearable device using an image captured by a camera of the wearable device is in a state of approaching a specific area (Kim 2, FIG. 14, [0091], “safety area 1420 may be determined based on a user input”); and
identify the approach of the another user based on the other data for identifying the approach of the another user (Nakagawa, e.g., FIG. 3, [0103], “display interrupt occurrence notification screen S312”).
At the time of effective filing date, given that the “digital media 200” and the “wearable device 101”taught by Kim 1 in view Kim 2 are in a mirroring session, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to set the “safety area 1420” to be expanded for covering the area around the “digital media 200”, as taught by Kim 2, in order to (1) address the problem that “when the user uses specific content through the wearable device in a state where the user's view is blocked, not only the user of the wearable device but also other people or devices around the user may be placed in a dangerous situation such as collisions due to the user's movement of the wearable device” (Kim 2, [0004]), and (2) identify the approach with the “interrupt occurrence notification”, as taught by Nakagawa, in order to provide that, e.g., “when playback of content is newly requested to a communication device that is playing back content, playback of the content is appropriately controlled on the basis of whether or not the source devices or users that have transmitted individual playback requests are identical to each other” (Nakagawa, [0007]).
As to claim 7, Kim 2 in view of Nakagawa teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
based on identifying the approach of the another user (Kim 2, FIG. 20, [0104], “identify that external object approaches wearable device, while first execution screen is displayed 2020”), transmit, to the wearable device via the communication circuitry, a message for notifying the approach of the another user (Kim 2, FIG. 20, [0105], “output warning message through first display (208) 2030”); and
receive, from the wearable device via the communication circuitry, a response to the message; and wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
maintain displaying the second screen while the another user approaches the electronic device (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0142], “start and maintain mirroring, content redirection, or direct streaming S309” until the decision is made at “S313”), based on the response to the message indicating that the another user is not allowed to use the electronic device (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0109], “transmit response indicating non-permission S316” → S309); or
display a third screen (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0110], a message corresponding the “response indicating permission S314”) indicating that the another user is able to use the electronic device, while the another user approaches the electronic device (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0102], “has interrupt occurrence notification been received? S311” → “Yes”), based on the response to the message indicating that the another user is allowed to use the electronic device (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0110], “transmit response indicating permission S314”). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 4.
As to claim 8, Nakagawa teaches the electronic device of claim 7, further comprising:
an input module (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0102], “the communication device 101 is able to detect that an interrupt has occurred in the communication device 102 that is performing mirroring or the like with the communication device 101”, i.e., “has interrupt occurrence notification been received? S311”; [0042], “communication device 102 may have, as the input unit 204, a hard key, a touch screen, or the like integrated with the communication device 102 or integrated with a remote control separated from the communication device 102”);
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
cease performing a function according to a user input to the input module from the another user, while displaying of the second screen is maintained; or
perform the function according to the user input to the input module from the another user (Nakagawa, e.g., FIG. 3, [0172], “finish mirroring, content redirection, or direct streaming S315”), while displaying the third screen (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0110], the message corresponding the “response indicating permission S314”). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 4.
As to claim 9, Kim 1 in view of Nakagawa teaches the electronic device of claim 7, wherein the third screen (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0110], “transmit response indicating permission S314”) corresponds to the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0102], “the communication device 101 is able to detect that an interrupt has occurred in the communication device 102 that is performing mirroring or the like with the communication device 101”; [0042], “communication device 102 must have a screen such as a touch screen, or the like”); and
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
receive a user input from the another user (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0102], “the communication device 101 is able to detect that an interrupt has occurred in the communication device 102 that is performing mirroring or the like with the communication device 101”, i.e., “has interrupt occurrence notification been received? S311”; [0042], “communication device 102 may have, as the input unit 204, a hard key, a touch screen, or the like integrated with the communication device 102 or integrated with a remote control separated from the communication device 102”); and
based on the user input: update the third screen (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, e.g., [0110], “finish mirroring S315” and perform a function corresponding to the user input); and
transmit, to the wearable device via the communication circuitry, the data for updating the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen to be displayed on the wearable device (Kim 1, e.g., FIG. 3, [0053], “communication connected with digital device? S350” → Yes → “detect location state of connected digital device S320”). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 4.
As to claim 10, Kim 1 in view of Nakagawa teaches the electronic device of claim 7,wherein the third screen (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0110], the message corresponding the “response indicating permission S314”) is different from the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0142], “start and maintain mirroring, content redirection, or direct streaming S309” until the decision is made at “S313”); and
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
receive, from the wearable device via the communication circuitry, a user input of the user (Nakagawa, e.g., FIG. 5, [0104], “Interrupt playback is requested to the sink device. Do you permit? 501” → “OK”); and
based on the user input, transmit, to the wearable device via the communication circuitry, the data for updating the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen to be displayed on the wearable device such that the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen is updated (Kim 1, FIG. 8, [0084], “if the content 1 displayed by the digital device is not identical to the content 1 currently outputted by the HMD 100, the HMD 100 may not terminate the output of the content 1”) while not updating the third screen (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0110], the message corresponding the “response indicating permission S314” stays). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 4.
As to claim 11, Nakagawa teaches the electronic device of claim 1,wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
while displaying the second screen (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, while “mirroring S607” on the screen of “communication device 101”), receive, from another wearable device (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, e.g., “communication device 104”) via the communication circuitry (Nakagawa, see FIGS. 6-7), a request for another communication connection with the another wearable device worn by the another user (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, e.g., “capability negotiation (M4 request: request to start direct streaming) S612”), the another wearable device comprising other displays viewable by the another user when worn by the another user (Kim 1, see FIG. 1, another “HMD 100”);
based on receiving the request for the another communication connection, transmit, to the wearable device via the communication circuitry, a message querying whether to establish the another communication connection with the another wearable device (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, e.g., “interrupt occurrence notification S613” → “receive user selection about interrupt playback S615”);
receive, from the wearable device via the communication circuitry, a response to the message (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, “response indicating non-permission for interrupt S616” or “response indicating permission for interrupt S716”);
maintain displaying of the second screen (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, maintain “mirroring/streaming S607”) while the another user approaches the electronic device (Kim 2, e.g., see FIGS. 14-16), based on the response to the message indicating that the another communication connection with the another wearable device is not allowed (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, “response indicating non-permission for interrupt S616”), and
establish, via the communication circuitry, the another communication connection with the another wearable device (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, “M4 response (interrupt OK response) S718” and “establish session S719”), based on the response to the message indicating that the another communication connection with the another wearable device is allowed (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, “response indicating permission for interrupt S716”). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 4.
As to claim 12, Nakagawa teaches the electronic device of claim 11, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
cease transmitting of the data associated with the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen via the communication circuitry (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, “finish mirroring/direct streaming (disconnect session) S717”), based on the response to the message indicating that the another communication connection with the another wearable device is allowed (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, “response indicating permission for interrupt S716”). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 4.
As to claim 13, Nakagawa teaches the electronic device of claim 11, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
during the communication connection with the wearable device (Nakagawa, see FIGS. 6-7, “communication device 101”) and the another communication connection with the another wearable device (Nakagawa, see FIGS. 6-7, “communication device 104”; [0027], the communication device 102 … a head mounted display, or the like”; [0044], “communication device 101 has a hardware configuration similar to that of the communication device 102 … communication device 104 is similar to the communication device 101”):
transmit, to the wearable device via the communication circuitry, the data associated with the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen, such that the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen is to be displayed via the displays of the wearable device (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, “establish session S706” and “mirroring/direct streaming S707”); and
transmit, to the another wearable device via the communication circuitry, another data associated with a third screen (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0110], the message corresponding the “response indicating permission S314”; FIGS. 6-7, “M4 response (interrupt OK response) S719”) different from the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, ““mirroring/direct streaming S707””), such that the third screen is to be displayed via the other displays (Nakagawa, FIG. 3, [0110], the message corresponding the “response indicating permission S314”) of the another wearable device (Nakagawa, see FIGS. 6-7, “communication device 104”). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 4.
As to claim 14, Kim 1 teaches a wearable device (Kim 1, FIG. 2, [0042], “HMD 100”) comprising:
communication circuitry (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-5, [0038], “the HMD 100 may be able to display various kinds of contents by interoperating with the digital device 200 connected by a network 300”);
displays viewable by a user (Kim 1, e.g., see FIGS. 1-2, [0042], “display unit 120” of “HMD 100”);
at least one processor (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-2, [0042], “processor 110”) comprising processing circuitry (Kim 1, see FIG. 2); and
memory (Kim 1, FIG. 1, [0042], “storage unit 160”), comprising one or more storage mediums, storing instructions (Kim 1, see FIG. 2), wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-2, [0042], “processor 110”) individually or collectively, cause the wearable device (Kim 1, FIG. 2, [0042], “HMD 100”) to:
establish, via the communication circuitry, a communication connection with an electronic device (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-5, [0038], “the HMD 100 may be able to display various kinds of contents by interoperating with the digital device 200 connected by a network 300”);
during the communication connection, receive, from the electronic device, data associated with a mirror screen (Kim 1, FIG. 5, [0075], “HMD 100 receives the content 1 from the digital device 200 via a network 300 by real time and may be then able to output the received content 1”) corresponding to a first screen (Kim 1, FIGS. 1-5, [0036], “display unit 220”) that is displayed on the electronic device (Kim 1, FIG. 1, [0036], “digital device 200”), wherein the data is for displaying, via the displays of the wearable device, the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen (Kim 1, FIG. 5, [0075], “HMD 100 receives the content 1 from the digital device 200 via a network 300 by real time and may be then able to output the received content 1”);
Kim 1 does not teach “identify an approach to the electronic device by another user different from the user while the mirror screen is displayed via the displays”.
However, Kim 2 teaches the concept of identifying an approach to the electronic device by another user different from the user while the mirror screen is displayed via the displays (Kim 2, FIG. 14, [0091], “safety area 1420 may be determined based on a user input”).
At the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “HMD 100” taught by Kim 1 to further (1) expand the “safety area 1420” to cover the area corresponding to the “digital device 200”; and (2) display the “warning message 1430” on the external display device such as “digital device 200”, as taught by Kim 2, in order to address the problem that “when the user uses specific content through the wearable device in a state where the user's view is blocked, not only the user of the wearable device but also other people or devices around the user may be placed in a dangerous situation such as collisions due to the user's movement of the wearable device” (Kim 2, [0004]).
Kim 1 in view of Kim 2 does not explicitly teach “based on identifying the approach of the another user, display, via the displays (Kim 2, e.g., see FIG. 2C, [0066], “display 208”), a user interface (UI) for querying whether to allow the another user to use the electronic device (Nakagawa, FIG. 5, [0104], “interrupt occurrence notification screen 501”, i.e., “Interrupt playback is requested to the sink device. Do you permit?”). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 6”.
However, Nakagawa teaches the concept of displaying, a user interface (UI) for querying whether to allow the another user to use the electronic device (Nakagawa, FIG. 5, [0104], “interrupt occurrence notification screen 501”, i.e., “Interrupt playback is requested to the sink device. Do you permit?”).
At the time of effective fling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “digital device 200” and the “wearable device 200” taught by Kim 1 in view of Kim 2 to further perform the steps of identifying “interrupt” as shown in FIG. 3, as taught by Nakagawa, in order to provide that, e.g., “when playback of content is newly requested to a communication device that is playing back content, playback of the content is appropriately controlled on the basis of whether or not the source devices or users that have transmitted individual playback requests are identical to each other” (Nakagawa, [0007]).
As to claim 15, Kim 2 in view of Nakagawa teaches the wearable device of claim 14, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to:
after displaying the UI (Nakagawa, FIG. 5, [0104], “Interrupt playback is requested to the sink device. Do you permit? 501” → Cancel), based on receiving a user input not to allow that the another user to use the electronic device (Nakagawa, FIGS. 6-7, “response indicating non-permission for interrupt S616”), transmit, to the electronic device via the communication circuitry, a response such that the electronic device displays another screen indicating that the user is using the electronic device (Kim 2, FIGS. 14-15, [0096], “wearable device 200 may transmit information related to the warning message 1430 to the external electronic device 1610 so that the external electronic device 1610 displays the warning message 1430”; “external electronic device 1610 (e.g., a smart watch) may output the warning message 1430 based on the information obtained from the wearable device 200”). Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 1.
As to claim 18, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 4, and Kim 1 in view of Kim 2 and Nakagawa teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 4. Please see claim 4 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 19, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 7, and Kim 2 in view of Nakagawa teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 4. Please see claim 7 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 20, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 8, and Nakagawa teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 4. Please see claim 8 for detailed analysis.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 5, the closest known prior art, i.e., Kim (US 2014/0015736 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2024/0094971 A1), Nakagawa (US 2020/0042281 A1), Urbanus et al. (US 2025/0028570 A1), Ikeda (US 2024/0137482 A1) and Choi et al. (US 2016/0133052 A1), alone or in reasonable combination, fails to teach limitations in consideration of the claims as a whole, specifically with respect to the limitations “while the mirror screen corresponding to the first screen is to be displayed on the wearable device, identify, via the camera, an image; identify a first visual object indicating the another user and a second visual object indicating the user within the image; and identify the approach of the another user, based on identifying that the first visual object indicating the another user is closer to the electronic device than the second visual object indicating the user.”.
Conclusion
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: Urbanus et al. (US 2025/0028570 A1) teaches the concept of “initiating a computing process on a wearable device … identifying a companion device and determining that the companion device is available to perform at least one task” (Abs.); Ikeda (US 2024/0137482 A1) teaches the concept of “mirroring image generation unit 204b that generates a mirroring image … on a flat plate type display” (Abs.); and Choi et al. (US 2016/0133052 A1) teaches the concept of “obtaining information to be output through the external electronic device, and providing contets corresponding to the information in relation to a region” (Abs.).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD J HONG whose telephone number is (571) 270-7765. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST.
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, Chanh Nguyen can be reached on (571) 272-7772. 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.
Mar. 14, 2026
/RICHARD J HONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2623
***