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 .
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 21, 23-31, and 33-42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. (CN114356258A; hereinafter Li).
Regarding claim 21:
Li discloses a method, comprising:
obtaining, by a first electronic device, a display pixel density of a second electronic device, the first electronic device being connected to the second electronic device (see page 2, lines 22-24 and page 3, lines 9-11 of the English translation);
adjusting, by the first electronic device, a display pixel density of a first application from a first display pixel density to a second display pixel density based on the display pixel density of the second electronic device (see page 2, lines 34-38 and page 3, lines 26-30), wherein the first display pixel density is determined based on a display pixel density of the first electronic device (see Figs. 3a-3c; the mobile device (i.e., the first electronic device) 100 inherently includes a first display pixel density), wherein the first application is drawn based on the first display pixel density for display on the first electronic device (see Figs. 3a-3c; the display application shown in mobile device 100), and the first application is drawn based on the second display pixel density for display on the second electronic device (see Figs. 3a-3c; the display application shown in machine device 200); and
projecting, by the first electronic device, the first application for display on the second electronic device based on the second display pixel density (see Figs. 3a-3c and Fig. 4, step 406).
Regarding claim 23:
Li discloses the method according to claim 21, wherein the first electronic device comprises a projection manager, and the projection manager is accessible to any application on the first electronic device (see Fig. 2, virtual screen 104 and page 13, lines 28-33; the display manager of the android system is interpreted as a projection manager; also see Fig. 19 and page 28, lines 43-44; the application frame layer includes window manager which is interpreted as a projection manager); and adjusting, by the first electronic device, the display pixel density of the first application from the first display pixel density to the second display pixel density based on the display pixel density of the second electronic device comprises:
determining, by the first electronic device, the second display pixel density based on the display pixel density of the second electronic device (see Fig. 4, step 402 and page 13, lines 7-8); and
storing, by the first electronic device, the second display pixel density in the projection manager (see Fig. 4, steps 403 and 404; the parameter obtained from second electronic device 200 is inherently stored by the first electronic device 100).
Regarding claim 24:
Li discloses the method according to claim 23, wherein the projection manager stores a first list, the first list comprises an application identifier and a display pixel density configured for projection onto the second electronic device that correspond to each of at least one application, and the at least one application comprises the first application (see page 5, line 40 to page 6).
Regarding claim 25:
Li discloses the method according to claim 23, wherein obtaining, by the first electronic device, the display pixel density of the second electronic device comprises:
obtaining, by the first electronic device, the display pixel density of the second electronic device via the projection manager (see Fig. 2 and Fig. 4, and page 13, lines 28-33; the display manager of the android system is interpreted as projection manager); and/or
determining, by the first electronic device, the second display pixel density based on the display pixel density of the second electronic device comprises:
determining, by the first electronic device, the second display pixel density via the projection manager (see Fig. 2 and Fig. 4, and page 13, lines 28-33; the display manager of the android system is interpreted as projection manager).
Regarding claim 26:
Li discloses the method according to claim 23, wherein the first electronic device further comprises a projection application, and the projection application is configured to implement projection between the first electronic device and the second electronic device (see Fig. 2, virtual screen 104 and page 13, lines 28-33; the display manager of the android system is interpreted as a projection manager; also see Fig. 19 and page 28, lines 43-44; the application frame layer includes window manager which is interpreted as a projection manager); and obtaining, by the first electronic device, the display pixel density of the second electronic device comprises:
obtaining, by the first electronic device, the display pixel density of the second electronic device via the projection application (see Fig. 2 and 4, and page 13, lines 28-33; the display manager of the android system is interpreted as projection manager); and/or
determining, by the first electronic device, the second display pixel density based on the display pixel density of the second electronic device comprises:
determining, by the first electronic device, the second display pixel density via the projection application (see Fig. 2 and Fig. 4, and page 13, lines 28-33; the display manager of the android system is interpreted as projection manager).
Regarding claim 27:
Li discloses the method according to claim 23, wherein the first application comprises a first resource manager, the first resource manager runs in a process of the first application, and before projecting, by the first electronic device, the first application for display on the second electronic device based on the second display pixel density (see Fig. 19 and page 28, lines 43-44, the application frame includes a resource manager; also see Fig. 4, step 403; the virtual screen 104 is generated by the first electronic device 100) the method further comprises:
obtaining, by the first electronic device, the second display pixel density from the projection manager via the first resource manager (see Fig. 4, step 401-402, Figs. 2, 19, and page 13, lines 1-49).
Regarding claim 28:
Li discloses the method according to claim 21, wherein the second display pixel density is equal to the display pixel density of the second electronic device (see page 2, line 18 to page 3, line 30).
Regarding claim 29:
Li discloses the method according to claim 21, wherein adjusting, by the first electronic device, the display pixel density of the first application from the first display pixel density to the second display pixel density based on the display pixel density of the second electronic device comprises:
adjusting, by the first electronic device, the display pixel density of the first application from the first display pixel density to the second display pixel density based on the display pixel density of the second electronic device and an optimization coefficient (see Figs. 3a-3d and pages 10-11; the music app 103 is being projected onto the second electronic device 200 based on the parameter information obtained by the first electronic device 100; also the description regarding the configuration file and/or layout configuration/rule is interpreted as an optimization coefficient).
Regarding claim 30:
Li discloses the method according to claim 29, wherein the second display pixel density is equal to a product of the display pixel density of the second electronic device and the optimization coefficient (see Figs. 3a-3d and pages 10-11; the output of the music app 103 is the product of both the display density information from the second electronic device and the configuration file and/or layout rule).
Regarding claims 31 and 33-40:
Claims 31 and 33-40 recite similar limitations as in claims 21 and 23-30. Hence, claims 31 and 33-40 are rejected under the same reasons as discussed above in claims 21 and 23-30, respectively. In addition, see Li, Fig. 18 for an electronic device (100) comprising: processor 110 and memories (120-121).
Regarding claim 41:
Li discloses the method according to claim 29, wherein the optimization coefficient is determined based on at least one of a type of the first application, a user type, and a projection scenario (see page 11, lines 9-17).
Regarding claim 42:
Li discloses the first electronic device according to claim 37, wherein the first electronic device is further enabled to perform:
drawing, by the first resource manager, an interface of the first application based on the second display pixel density (see Figs. 3a-3c and page 13, lines 25-33).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21 and 31 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.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIXI CHOW SIMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7571. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-3:00pm.
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, William Boddie can be reached at 517-272-0666. 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.
/LIXI C SIMPSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Prosecution Insights