Ex Parte Chang et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Feb 21, 2017

12905408 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 21, 2017)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O.Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
12/905,408 10/15/2010 Youn Seog CHANG 0203-0254 7915
68103 7590
Jefferson IP Law, LLP
1130 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 420
Washington, DC 20036
EXAMINER
SAX, STEVEN PAUL
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2174
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
02/23/2017 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
u sdocketing @ j effersonip .com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte YOUN SEOG CHANG and JOON WOO KIM
Appeal 2016-002695
Application 12/905,408
Technology Center 2100
Before CARL W. WHITEHEAD JR., KARA L. SZPONDOWSKI, and
MICHAEL M. BARRY, Administrative Patent Judges.
BARRY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a Final Rejection of
claims 25, 27—30, 36, 38, 43, 45—48, 54—56, 58, and 60-72. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM.
1 Appellants identify the real party in interest as Samsung Electronics Co.,
Ltd. App. Br. 2.
Appeal 2016-002695
Application 12/905,408
Introduction
Appellants state their claimed invention “relates to a data display
method for displaying icons in order to select a corresponding function.”
Spec. 1. Claim 25 is representative:
25. A method of displaying an icon in a mobile
terminal comprising a touch screen, the method comprising:
displaying a first icon associated to a corresponding
function and a second icon associated to a corresponding
function on the touch screen;
receiving a first input that is associated with grouping
the first icon and the second icon;
displaying a group icon on the touch screen so as to
include smaller sized representations of the first icon and the
second icon displayed within the display of the group icon;
receiving a second input corresponding to a selection of
the group icon; and
in response to selection of the group icon with the second
input, displaying at least one of an icon that is larger than the
smaller sized representation of the first icon and that is
associated to a first function relating to the first icon, and an
icon that is larger than the smaller sized representation of the
second icon and that is associated to a second function relating
to the second icon,
wherein the second input corresponds to a touch input to
the group icon.
App. Br. 11 (Appealed Claims) (disputed limitation emphasized).
References and Rejections2
Claims 25, 27—30, 36, 38, 43, 45—48, 54—56, 58, and 60-72 stand
rejected as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Atherton (US
2 The Examiner’s Answer withdraws previously pending rejections made
under 35 U.S.C. § 112. See Ans. 2—3.
2
Appeal 2016-002695
Application 12/905,408
2009/0193363 Al; July 30, 2009) and Locker et al. (US 8,656,314 B2; Feb.
18,2014). Final Act. 7-15.
ISSUE
Based on Appellants’ arguments, the issue before us is whether, in
rejecting claim 1 as obvious, the Examiner errs in finding the cited art
teaches or suggests the disputed limitation of “receiving a first input that is
associated with grouping the first icon and the second icon.” See App. Br.
8-10.
ANALYSIS
Appellants argue the Examiner errs in finding Atherton teaches the
recited “first input” because, when adding “resources” identified by icons to
a “representation” associated with a display icon in Atherton, “[t]he user
does not need to perform a specific input operation to create the
representation. Instead, all the user needs to do is drag an icon to the
predefined region.” App. Br. 9. Appellants contend “Atherton’s drag and
drop operation is associated with just the one icon, and therefore cannot read
upon a limitation in which a first input is associated with grouping the first
icon and a second icon.” Id.
The Examiner answers by finding that in Atherton’s Figure 5,
reproduced below, “placing more than one icon reads on the claimed
limitation of ‘receiving a first input that is associated with grouping the first
icon and the second icon’ as placing the second resource icon ... is
grouping that second icon with the first icon, the display icon,” and
specifically that “placing reads on the claimed first input.’” Ans. 6—7.
Atherton’s Figure 5 is reproduced below:
3
Appeal 2016-002695
Application 12/905,408
Resource
icons §04
Identify A Piufsliiy Of Competing Resources Fo
Repfpsentebon On A GUI fn A Rreds&ied Region For
Displaying A Sing® ton 2S£
! | Determine When The User Pisces ftoe Than One Of The
Resource toons In The Predefined Region SCO
jpdensfy The Cofaputihg Resources Represented 8y Each OF
| The Resource icons Placed in The Predefined Region SS2
1 Render A Display ip
Predefined R&gk
on Iri The j
|
___i
iifeiWfy A locators Cif An Input |
Devise Mfite? Wilfcin Tte j
Predefined Reak
Resource Table 104
Resource ID 106
Resource Icon ID ICS
Regton Cook], U§
■" ;.....r;....
AcS«ste The Computing Resource
Associated With The Person Of The
Prsdsfisito Region In Which The Input
Device Pester Is Located When A User
Renatas The Display ton £G§
FIG. 5
Atherton’s Figure 5 illustrates a “method for representing multiple
computing resources within a predefined region of a graphical user interface
for displaying a single icon.” Atherton 115.
Appellants respond that because “Atherton suggests that the user
drags and drops the various icons one at a time,” a single drag-and-drop
operation does not teach or suggest “an input associated with a first icon and
a second icon.” Reply Br. 2—3.
4
Appeal 2016-002695
Application 12/905,408
Appellants do not persuade us of error. In the disputed limitation, the
first input is associated with grouping the first and second icons. Atherton
teaches dragging and dropping icons onto a predefined region in order to
group them together under a single display icon. See Atherton || 46—50,
Fig. 5. When dragging and dropping an icon in order to group that icon
together with another icon, as disclosed by Atherton, that drag-and-drop
operation is an input that is associated with the grouping together of the two
icons, as recited.
Accordingly, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claim 25.
Because Appellants present no substantive arguments separate from claim
25 for the remaining claims, we also sustain the rejection of claims 27—30,
36, 38, 43, 45—48, 5^56, 58, and 60-72.
DECISION
For the above reasons, we affirm the rejection of claims 25, 27—30,
36, 38, 43, 45—48, 54—56, 58, and 60—72. No time period for taking any
subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37
C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l)(iv).
AFFIRMED
5