Ex Parte St. Clair

Patent Trials and Appeals BoardMar 28, 2019

13767709 - (D) (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. Â§ 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. Â§ 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. Â§ 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. Â§ 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. Â§ 103(a) rejection of claim 1, and the Examiner's 35 U.S.C. Â§ 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. Â§ 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R. Â§ 4I.50(f). AFFIRMED 6