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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/17/2025 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 15-18, 20, and 29-44 are pending in this Office Action.
Claims 15, 17, 20, 31, 33, 35, 38, 40, and 42 are amended.
Claims 1-14, 19, and 21-28 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 15, 31, and 38 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues nowhere in the cited portions of Miller does Miller describe at least two different priorities being associated with a single "notification," nor determining which of the at least two different priorities to use when selecting which notifications to output to a user based on a determined subject matter associated with activity on a user's device.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Miller teaches many different types of notification exist, for example one type of notification can indicate a suggestion to increase the budget amount of a particular ad campaign (par. 13 and 20). The Examiner interprets these different notifications to be supplemental content assets. Each type of notification may contain different contextual content. For example, a primary entity identifier that identifies a particular ad or ad campaign (par. 20, Fig. 2A-2D). Miller further teaches notifications related to a first ad campaign may be prioritized greater than notifications related to a second ad campaign and the priority level may be assigned and/or adjusted from a lower priority level to a higher priority level (par. 48). As an example, the notification related to increasing budget for an ad campaign can be assigned a high priority for a first ad campaign and a low priority for a second ad campaign. Miller further teaches the notification identification module 120 of the data processing system 110 can identify notifications that are either contextually relevant to the content requested or important enough to the user requesting the content. For example, if the content requested relates to a particular ad campaign, the notification identification module 120 can identify notifications that are associated with the particular ad campaign (par. 38). Select notifications based on their priority levels and relevance to primary content (par. 55). For example, the user action selecting a specific a tab or link, may result in the system identifying the context of “Bar Code Labels” ad campaign associated with the user action and select a higher priority notification based on the contextual relevance and the priority levels of the notifications (par. 29, 48, and 63, Fig. 2D).
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.
Claims 15-18, 20, 30-35, 37-42, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miller et al. (US 2014/0280657).
Regarding claims 15, 31, and 38, Miller teaches: A method, a non-transitory computer readable medium, and a computing device [(abstract, Fig. 1)] comprising:
causing, via a primary display device, output of a content asset during a first period of time [a display device, e.g., a television, CRT (cathode ray tube), plasma, or LCD (liquid crystal display) monitor, for displaying various content to the user (par. 81 and 87, Fig. 1 and 4). For example, displaying a user interface including a primary content, such as “All online campaigns” at a first period of time (par. 53, Fig. 2A)]
determining a subject matter associated with activity on a user device, wherein the determined subject matter associated with the activity comprises one of at least a first subject matter or a second subject matter different from the first subject matter [determining a context of a user making a request for content on a user computing device 115, such as "Campaigns" or “Bar Code Labels” (par. 28-29 and 63, Fig. 1 and 2A). The context may include a first ad campaign or a second ad campaign (par. 48, Fig. 2A-2D)]
accessing a plurality of supplemental content assets [aggregate notifications from various notification providers (par. 15)],
wherein each of the plurality of supplemental content assets is assigned at least a first priority associated with the first subject matter and a second priority associated with the second subject matter, and wherein the at least the first priority and second priority are different for each of the plurality of supplement content assets [notifications related to a first ad campaign may be prioritized greater than notifications related to a second ad campaign and the priority level may be assigned and adjusted from a lower priority level to a higher priority level (par. 48). Many different types of notification exist, for example a notification can indicate a suggestion to increase the budget amount of a particular ad campaign (par. 13 and 20, Fig. 2A-2D). Following this example, the notification can be assigned a high priority for a first ad campaign and assigned a low priority for a second campaign.]
determining, for each of the plurality of supplemental content assets and based on the determined subject matter associated with the activity on the user device, which of the at least the first priority or the second priority assigned to the supplemental content asset to use when selecting one of the plurality of supplemental content assets to be output [the notification identification module 120 of the data processing system 110 can identify notifications that are either contextually relevant to the content requested or important enough to the user requesting the content. For example, if the content requested relates to a particular ad campaign, the notification identification module 120 can identify notifications that are associated with the particular ad campaign (par. 38). Select notifications based on their priority levels and relevance to primary content (par. 55). For example, the user action selecting a specific a tab or link, may result in the system identifying the context of “Bar Code Labels” ad campaign associated with the user action and select a notification based on the contextual relevance and the priority levels of the notifications (par. 29, 48, and 63, Fig. 2D)] and
causing output of the selected one of the plurality of supplemental content assets, via the primary display device during a second period of time different from the first period of time [If the user selects a user interface element, such as a “Bar Code Labels” link, different primary content is displayed, such as information related to “Bar Code Labels” campaign and the selected notification is also displayed 254 at this second period of time different from the first period of time (par. 17, 28-29, 40, 55, and 63, Fig. 2A-2D)].
Regarding claims 16, 32, and 39, Miller teaches the method of claim 15; Miller further teaches: for each of the supplemental content assets, the first priority is higher than the second priority [each notification may be associated with a higher priority and a lower priority (par. 45 and 48)].
Regarding claims 17, 33, and 40, Miller teaches the method of claim 15; Miller further teaches: the determining, for each of the plurality of supplemental content assets, which of the at least the first priority or the second priority assigned to the supplemental content asset to use when selecting one of the plurality of supplemental contents to be output comprises comparing the determined subject matter associated with the activity on the user device with the different subject matters associated with the at least the first priority and the second priority assigned to each supplemental content asset [selecting a notification that matches the contextual relevance of the user selected primary content and also the correct priority level (par. 29 and 55)].
Regarding claims 18, 34, and 41, Miller teaches the method of claim 15; Miller further teaches: the activity on the user device occurs at a first time and the output of the determined supplemental content asset is caused within a first period of time of the first time [If the user selects a user interface element, such as a “Bar Code Labels” link at a first time, different primary content is displayed, such as information related to “Bar Code Labels” campaign and the selected notification is also displayed 254, which is within a period of time from the first time, for example this certainly happens within 1 hour (par. 17, 28-29, 40, 55, and 63, Fig. 2A-2D)].
Regarding claims 20, 35, and 42, Miller teaches the method of claim 15; Miller further teaches: determining a frequency of user inputs to the user device associated with the activity on the user device, wherein the causing output of the selected one of the plurality of supplemental content assets is further based on the frequency of the user inputs [identifying how frequently a user responds to a notification and the most frequently requested primary content, setting the priority based on the frequency, and then selecting a notification based on the priority (par. 48 and 55)].
Regarding claims 30, 37, and 44, Miller teaches the method of claim 15; Miller further teaches: the primary display device comprises a television viewing device and wherein the user device comprises one of a mobile device, a laptop computer, a desktop computer, a smart phone, a tablet computer, or a portable gaming device [a television set (par. 81). the user computing device 115 includes a laptop, desktop, tablet, personal digital assistant, smart phone, or portable computer (par. 28)].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 29, 36, and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miller et al. (US 2014/0280657) in view of Kumar et al. (US 2012/0151527).
Regarding claims 29, 36, and 43, Miller teaches the method of claim 15; Miller does not explicitly disclose: the user device and the primary display device are located at a premises, and wherein the activity on the user device is determined and reported by a gateway device at the premises.
Kumar teaches: the user device and the primary display device are located at a premises [a customer premise that includes devices, such as a set-top box, personal computer (PC), a tablet PC, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a mobile device, a palmtop computer, a laptop computer, a desktop computer, as well as a display device, such as a liquid crystal display (LCD), an organic light emitting diode (OLED), a flat panel display, a solid-state display, or a projection display, or television 106 (par. 8, 19, and 52-53, Fig. 1 and 6)], and
wherein the activity on the user device is determined and reported by a gateway device at the premises [the residential gateway device 102 may observe user actions, store the user actions as the user history 316, and provide information to the content provider regarding user interaction history and actions 316 (par. 33-34, Fig. 1 and 3)].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Boyd whose telephone number is (571)270-0676. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm PST.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
/ALEXANDER BOYD/Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights