Obviousness

The obviousness of US patent 11930362 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 can be analyzed by considering combinations of prior art references identified within the patent text itself, along with the general knowledge possessed by a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) at the time of the invention (priority date July 16, 2013).

The US patent 11930362 patent explicitly incorporates by reference U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870, filed on Mar. 15, 2005, and entitled "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PEER-TO-PEER HYBRID COMMUNICATIONS". The patent states that "the function block 200 may contain functionality similar to that of an endpoint as described in detail in U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870". Furthermore, it teaches a modification of this prior art by noting that "the graphical user interface (GUI) of the endpoint may be replaced with the API 202 of FIG. 2, and some functionality may be removed if not needed for a particular implementation of the function block 200".

Combination of Prior Art References:

1. U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870: This patent describes a system and method for peer-to-peer hybrid communications, including an "endpoint" device with various communication functionalities. The functionality of the function block (200) in US11930362 is explicitly stated to be similar to this endpoint.
2. General knowledge in the art regarding software modularity, Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), and the desire to avoid context switching in software applications, particularly on mobile devices: The background section of US11930362 extensively details the problems associated with accessing additional functionality by "leaving the superblock application, performing some other function, and then returning to the superblock application," calling this process "disruptive, difficult to manage, and pulls the user away from the superblock application" and "inefficient and frustrating". The patent also notes the resource impact of context switching on mobile devices. The use of APIs to integrate software modules, such as SDKs or plugins, into existing applications to extend their functionality was a well-known software development practice prior to 2013, as was the benefit of doing so to provide a more integrated user experience and avoid the inefficiencies of context switching.

Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103:

The independent claims (Claim 1, Claim 12, and Claim 22) of US11930362 generally recite a computing entity, memory storing a "superblock application" and a "function block," where the function block provides functions (e.g., communication, data manipulation) accessible via an API, and these functions are provided within the superblock application without requiring context switching to another application.

A PHOSITA, at the time of the invention, would have found the claimed invention obvious by combining U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870 with the general knowledge of software development practices, for the following reasons:

• Motivation to Combine: The motivation to combine these elements is clearly articulated within US11930362 itself. The patent identifies the problem of "context switching" between applications on mobile devices as negatively impacting "performance and battery life" and being "disruptive," "inefficient," and "frustrating" for the user. A PHOSITA would be motivated to improve user experience and application performance by providing additional functionalities in a more integrated manner.
• Teaching/Suggestion/Reason to Combine: U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870 discloses the core communication functionality of an "endpoint". US11930362 explicitly teaches modifying this known endpoint by "replac[ing its] graphical user interface (GUI)... with the API 202" to enable the function block. It also describes the function block (200) as a set of instructions that "may be provided as a software developer's kit (SDK) or as an otherwise independent module" and that the developer "may then compile or otherwise include the function block instructions in the superblock 104". This directly suggests integrating the communication functionality of the '870 patent (now exposed via an API instead of a GUI) as a module within an existing application (the "superblock application").
• Reasonable Expectation of Success: Given the well-established principles of modular programming, SDKs, APIs, and dynamic linking/loading prior to 2013 (evidenced in part by classification codes like G06F9/44521 for dynamic linking/loading and G06F9/44526 for Plug-ins/Add-ons), a PHOSITA would have a reasonable expectation of successfully integrating the functionality of an existing communication endpoint (like that in US 7,656,870) into an application using an API. The outcome of providing functions "within the superblock application itself and accessible within the superblock application without switching context" directly addresses the problems identified in the background, which would be a desirable and expected result of such an integration.

Therefore, the combination of U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870, disclosing the underlying communication capabilities, with the general knowledge in the art regarding modular software design, APIs for feature integration, and the known motivation to avoid context switching for improved user experience and performance, would render the independent claims of US11930362 obvious.