Ex Parte St. Clair

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 28, 2019

13767709 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 28, 2019)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
13/767,709 02/14/2013 Luke St. Clair
91230 7590 04/01/2019
Baker Botts L.L.P./Facebook Inc.
2001 ROSS A VENUE
SUITE 900
Dallas, TX 75201
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
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
079894.1590 9868
EXAMINER
BRAHMACHARI, MANDRITA
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2176
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
04/01/2019 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):
ptomaill@bakerbotts.com
ptomail2@bakerbotts.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte LUKE ST. CLAIR 1
Appeal2018-007036
Application 13/767,709
Technology Center 2100
Before JASON V. MORGAN, IRVINE. BRANCH, and
ADAM J. PYONIN, Administrative Patent Judges.
MORGAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Introduction
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's Final
Rejection of claims 1, 3-5, 7-9, 11-13, 15-17, 19, 20, 22, and 23. Claims 2,
6, 10, 14, 18, and 21 are canceled. Appeal Br. 17, 18, 20, and 22. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM.
1 Appellant is the applicant and real party in interest, Facebook, Inc. Appeal
Br. 3.
Appeal2018-007036
Application 13/767,709
Summary of disclosure
The Specification discloses a method that includes displaying
interactive elements corresponding to one or more selected users identified
based on social-graph information. Abstract.
Representative claim (key limitations emphasized)
1. A method comprising:
by a computing device, identifying one or more first users of a
social-networking system based at least in part on social-graph
information associated with the first users and a second user of
the social-networking system;
by the computing device, selecting one or more of the identified
first users of a social-networking system based at least in part on
one or more activities by the identified first users, wherein each
of the activities is socially relevant to the second user;
by the computing device, identifying one or more interactive
elements, the one or more interactive elements comprising a
visual representation corresponding to one or more of the
selected first users for display on a computing device of the
second user;
by the computing device, providing, for display on a lock screen
user interface (UI) of the computing device of the second user,
one or more of the identified interactive elements;
by the computing device, providing, for display on the lock
screen UI, a visual indicator with a respective one of the
identified interactive elements, the visual indicator being
indicative of an application associated with a respective one of
the notifications or a number of notifications associated with the
respective one of the identified interactive elements;
by the computing device, providing for display one or more of
the notifications on the lock screen UI in response to detecting a
user input selecting one or more of the interactive elements;
2
Appeal2018-007036
Application 13/767,709
by the computing device, dynamically aggregating notifications
associated with the one or more activities of the first users
corresponding to the selected interactive elements; and
by the computing device, sending, in response to the selection of
one or more of the interactive elements corresponding to the one
or more of the selected first users, the dynamically aggregated
notifications to the lock screen UI of the computing device of the
second user while the computing device of the second user is in
a locked mode.
Rejections
The Examiner rejects claims 1, 3, 5, 7-9, 11, 13, 15-17, 19, 20, and
22 under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as being obvious over Kuscher et al. (US
2014/0157138 Al; published June 5, 2014) ("Kuscher"), Kim et al. (US
2012/0046077 Al; published Feb. 23, 2012) ("Kim"), Karunamuni et al.
(US 2013/0332826 Al; published Dec. 12, 2013) ("Karunamuni"), and
Brinda et al. (US 2013/0050250 Al; published Feb. 28, 2013) ("Brinda").
Final Act. 2-7.
The Examiner rejects claims 4, 12, and 23 under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as
being obvious over Kuscher, Kim, Karunamuni, Brinda, and Ahrens et al.
(US 2012/0005224 Al; published Jan. 5, 2012) ("Ahrens"). Final Act. 7-8.
ANALYSIS
We agree with and adopt as our own the Examiner's findings as set
forth in the Answer and in the Action from which this appeal was taken, and
we concur with the Examiner's conclusions. We have considered
Appellant's arguments, but do not find them persuasive of error. We
provide the following explanation for emphasis.
In rejecting claim 1 as obvious, the Examiner finds that Kuscher's
disclosure of display on a contact's application a notification such as "1" to
3
Appeal2018-007036
Application 13/767,709
indicate that a new email or instant message has come in from a particular
contact teaches or suggests providing, for display on a screen, a visual
indicator with a respective one of the identified interactive elements, the
visual indicator being indicative of a number of notifications associated with
the respective one of the identified interactive elements. Final Act. 3 ( citing
Kuscher ,r,r 19, 44, Fig. 5). The Examiner further finds Kim's lock screen
menu items teach or suggest one or more of the identified interactive
elements. Id. at 4 (citing Kim ,r 125, Fig. 4). The Examiner relies on
Brinda's disclosure of a lock display to teach or suggest use of a lock screen
user interface to display the visual indicator of Kuscher. Id. at 5 ( citing
Brinda ,r 50). The Examiner concludes it would have been obvious to
modify Kuscher and Kim using the teachings of Brinda
Id.
because the combination would enable the user to view
notifications even when the screen is locked by selecting icons
on the lock screen. The combination enables the user to view
notifications related to contacts directly from the lock screen.
The combination would enable easy access of information
related to a contact.
Appellant contends the Examiner erred because Brinda fails
to show that the visual indicator being indicative of an
application associated with a respective one of the notifications
or a number of notifications associated with the respective one
of the identified interactive elements, as recited in independent
Claim 1. Instead Brinda discloses displaying the profile photos
with tag representing different manners of contacting the
respective user.
Appeal Br. 11; see also Reply Br. 2.
Appellant's arguments are unresponsive to the Examiner's findings
and conclusions, which are based on a combination that includes not just
4
Appeal2018-007036
Application 13/767,709
Brinda, but also Kuscher, Kim, and Karunamuni. See Ans. 4. In particular,
we agree with the Examiner that Kuscher combined with Kim teaches a
visual indicator indicative of a number of notifications associated with
interactive elements. See Final Act. 4--5.
We also agree with the Examiner that it would have been obvious to
combine Kuscher with Kim, Karunamuni, and Brinda in the claimed
manner, despite Appellant's conclusory assertions that the Examiner resorts
to impermissible hindsight reasoning, or otherwise fails to provide sufficient
support for the combination ofKuscher, Brinda, and the other references.
Appeal Br. 11-15; Reply Br. 3--4. The Examiner articulates reasons, having
rational underpinnings, showing why the proposed combination of teachings
and suggestions would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill.
See, e.g., Final Act. 3-5. Appellant merely contends, without addressing
with specificity the particular reasons articulated by the Examiner, that "the
Examiner's analysis is insufficient." Appeal Br. 14.
Accordingly, we sustain the Examiner's 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection
of claim 1, and the Examiner's 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejections of claims 3-5,
7-9, 11-13, 15-17, 19, 20, 22, and 23, which Appellant does not argue
separately. Id. at 15.
5
Appeal2018-007036
Application 13/767,709
DECISION
We affirm the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 1, 3-5, 7-9, 11-
13, 15-17, 19, 20, 22, and 23.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 4I.50(f).
AFFIRMED
6