DETAILED ACTION
Summary and Status of Claims
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s reply filed 7/14/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 15, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0163792), in view of Erickson (US Patent 2009/0063471), further in view of Bohannon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0318199).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0163792), in view of Bohannon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0318199) and Erickson (US Patent Pub 2009/0063471), further in view of Kapinos et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0303477).
Claims 10-12, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0163792), in view of Bohannon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0318199) and Erickson (US Patent Pub 2009/0063471), further in view of Arnold et al. (US Patent Pub 2009/0158214).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0163792), in view of Bohannon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0318199), Erickson (US Patent Pub 2009/0063471), and Arnold et al. (US Patent Pub 2009/0158214), further in view of Inamdar et al. (US Patent Pub 2021/0097472).
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0163792), in view of Bohannon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0318199) and Erickson (US Patent Pub 2009/0063471), further in view of Cheng et al. (US Patent Pub 2013/0018900).
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Note on Prior Art Rejections
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 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.
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 of this title, 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 15, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0163792) (Gordon), in view of Erickson (US Patent 2009/0063471), further in view of Bohannon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0318199) (Bohannon).
In regards to claim 1, Gordon discloses a method, comprising:
a. executing, on a processor of a computing device, instructions that cause the computing device to perform operations (Gordon at para. 0086), the operations comprising:
i. automatically evaluating, by a system, a query item to identify a characteristic of the query item (Gordon at paras. 0026)1;
ii. determining a set of similarity characteristics among the characteristics of the query item, wherein the determining the set of similarity characteristics (Gordon at paras. 0026, 0031, 0052, 0071)2;
iii. determining, by the system, a set of difference characteristics among the characteristics of the query item and automatically substituting one or more values of the set of difference characteristics with one or more opposing values determined for the set of difference characteristics of the query (Gordon at paras. 0026, 0080, 0083)3;
iv. automatically constructing a query based upon the set of similarity characteristics of the query item (Gordon at paras. 0026, 0031, 0052, 0071, 0080, 0083)4;
v. executing the query to identify a set of query item results comprising items having (i) characteristics similar to the set of similarity characteristics of the query item and (ii) characteristics different from the set of difference characteristics of the query item (Gordon at para. 0083)5; and
vi. providing the set of query item results as query results for the query. Gordon at para. 0083.6
Gordon does not expressly disclose wherein the determining the set of difference characteristics corresponding to a person in the query item and determining a second person who is different than the person in the query item, the automatically substituting one or more values with one or more opposing values comprises altering a first difference characteristic corresponding to the person to generate a second difference characteristic corresponding to the second person by automatically substituting a first value of first characteristic the with a second value.
Bohannon discloses a system and method for comparison of event related data objects. Bohannon at abstract. The method includes finding data objects, which are classified into classes. Data objects include texts news, stories, documents, social media posts, etc. Classifications can be different determined classes based on the source of the data object, language, geographic source, or some other classification. For example, a classification can include politically conservative, while another can be politically liberal. Bohannon at paras. 0013-14, 0017. Once classified, the data objects are analyzed to determine difference characteristics by which the data objects can be compared. These characteristics can include persons of interest. Thus, person references in a data object under one classification can be compared to a different person referenced in a data object in a second classification (i.e., determining a second person who is different than the person in the query item). Bohannon at paras. 0019, 0030. In this way, a user can compare how different sources of data objects treat different people.
Gordon and Bohannon are analogous art because they are both directed to the same field of endeavor of searching and providing content based on determined characteristics.
At the time before the effective filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gordon by adding the feature of wherein the determining the set of difference characteristics comprises determining a person in the query item and determining a second person who is different than the person in the query item, the automatically substituting one or more values with one or more opposing values comprises automatically substituting a first value corresponding to the person with a second value corresponding to the second person, and the opposing values of the constructed query includes the second value corresponding to the second person, as disclosed by Bohannon. As set forth above, Gordon discloses determining a set of difference characteristics and automatically constructing a query based on the set of similarity characteristics of the query item and the one or more opposing values. As modified by Bohannon, the result is that Gordon can identify persons of interest in a query item (i.e., person) and substitute that person with a second value corresponding to a determined different person from a different classification (i.e., substituting … a first value corresponding to the person with a second value corresponding to the second person). In doing so, the combination of Gordon and Bohannon provides the ability to automatically construct a query based on the determined similarity characteristics and opposing values, which include the substituted second value, to identify results comprising items having similar characteristics and different characteristics of the query item, as claimed.
The motivation for doing so would have been to allow a user to compare news from different sources about similar events or topics. Bohannon at para. 0019.
Gordon in view of Bohannon does not expressly disclose the query item characteristics comprising a plurality of property, value, score (PVS) metadata triples of the query item, wherein determining the set of similarity characteristics comprises determining a first PVS metadata triple, wherein the determining the set of difference characteristics comprises determining a second PVS metadata triple, altering the second PVS metadata triple to generate a third PVS metadata triple, the query comprising the first PVS metadata triple, and identifying items with characteristics similar to similarity characteristics based upon one or more similarities to the first PVS metadata triple and items similar to difference characteristics based upon one or more similarities to the third PVS metadata triple generated by altering the second PVS metadata triple. As set forth in the rejection above, Gordon in view of Bohannon discloses determining similarity characteristics and difference characteristics, searching based on these determined similarity and difference characteristics, where the difference characteristic corresponds to a person and the person can be substituted with a second value corresponding to a different person from a different classification. In other words, one characteristic is altered through substitution to generate another characteristic. What is not expressly disclosed are that these characteristics of items are represented in the system using PVS metadata triples.
Erickson discloses a system and method for searching data records. Each data record (i.e., query item) has associated metadata comprising attribute label, attribute value, and a confidence value (i.e., PVS metadata triple). The data record and their associated metadata triples are stored to allow for future searching of the data records. Erickson at Fig. 8; paras. 0051-52, 0055. The system provides an ability to search the data records based on their attributes (i.e., characteristics). Upon receiving search parameters, which identify desired characteristics, the data records are searched to identify the desired characteristics. Once characteristics are identified, the associated unique identifier is used to retrieve the data record and all of its associated information. Erickson at Fig. 10; para. 0059. Thus, Erickson discloses representing characteristics of an item by using metadata triples and searching for items based on these metadata triples.
Gordon, Bohannon, and Erickson are analogous art because they are directed to the same field of endeavor of searching and providing content based on desired characteristics.
At the time before the effective filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gordon by adding the features of the query item characteristics comprising a plurality of property, value, score (PVS) metadata triples of the query item, wherein determining the set of similarity characteristics comprises determining a first PVS metadata triple, wherein the determining the set of difference characteristics comprises determining a second PVS metadata triple, altering the second PVS metadata triple to generate a third PVS metadata triple, the query comprising the first PVS metadata triple, and identifying items with characteristics similar to similarity characteristics based upon one or more similarities to the first PVS metadata triple and items similar to difference characteristics based upon one or more similarities to the third PVS metadata triple generated by altering the second PVS metadata triple, as disclosed by Erickson.
The motivation for doing so would have been storing characteristics of items with a confidence value (i.e., score) for each characteristic allows results to be ranked based on confidence value. Erickson at para. 0039.
In regards to claim 2, Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first portion of the second PVS metadata triple is a score portion of the second PVS metadata triple. Bohannon at para. 0019, 0030. Erickson at para. 0044.7
In regards to claim 3, Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson discloses the method of claim 1, comprising constructing the query with a metric that favors items with characteristics similar to the set of similarity characteristics. Gordon at paras. 0080, 0083.8
In regards to claim 5, Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson discloses the method of claim 1, comprising constructing the query with a metric that favors items with characteristics dissimilar to the set of difference characteristics. Gordon at paras. 0080, 0083.9
In regards to claim 6, Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson discloses the method of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose wherein the first portion of the second PVS metadata triple is at least one of a property portion of the second PVS metadata triple or a value portion of the second PVS metadata triple. Bohannon at para. 0019, 0030. Erickson at para. 0044.10
In regards to claim 7, Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson discloses the method of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose prior to the determining the set of similarity characteristics and the determining the set of difference characteristics: (1) ingesting the query item into a data structure, (2) associating the query item in the data structure with an item identifier, (3) generating the plurality of property, value, and score (PVS) metadata triples for the query item, and (4) inserting the plurality of PVS metadata triples into a metadata store as a mapping between the item identifier and the plurality of PVS metadata triples for the query item, wherein at least one of (i) the determining the set of similarity characteristics or (ii) the determining the set of difference characteristics is performed using the metadata store. Erickson at Fig. 8; paras. 0051-55.11
In regards to claim 8, Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson discloses the method of claim 1, comprising constructing a media item comprising the query item and the set of query item results for comparison. Gordon at para. 0022, 0023, 0074.12
In regards to claim 9, Gordon discloses a non-transitory machine readable medium having stored thereon processor executable instructions that when executed cause performance of operations (Gordon at para. 0086), the operations comprising:
a. automatically evaluating, by a system, a query item to identify characteristics of the query item (Gordon at paras. 0026)13;
b. determining, by the system, a set of difference characteristics among the characteristics of the query item and automatically substituting one or more values of the set of difference characteristics with one or more opposing values determined for the set of difference characteristic of the query (Gordon at paras. 0026, 0080, 0083)14;
c. automatically constructing, by the system, a query based upon a set of similarity characteristics for the query item and the one or more opposing values (Gordon at paras. 0026, 0031, 0052, 0071, 0080, 0083)15;
d. executing the query to identify a set of query item results comprising items having (i) characteristic similar to the set of similarity characteristics of the query item and (ii) characteristics different from the set of difference characteristics of the query item (Gordon at para. 0083)16; and
e. providing the set of query item results as query results for the query. Gordon at para. 0083.17
Gordon does not expressly disclose wherein the determining the set of difference characteristics corresponding to a person in the query item and determining a second person who is different than the person in the query item, the automatically substituting one or more values with one or more opposing values comprises altering a first difference characteristic corresponding to the person to generate a second difference characteristic corresponding to the second person by automatically substituting a first value of first characteristic the with a second value.
Bohannon discloses a system and method for comparison of event related data objects. Bohannon at abstract. The method includes finding data objects, which are classified into classes. Data objects include texts news, stories, documents, social media posts, etc. Classifications can be different determined classes based on the source of the data object, language, geographic source, or some other classification. For example, a classification can include politically conservative, while another can be politically liberal. Bohannon at paras. 0013-14, 0017. Once classified, the data objects are analyzed to determine difference characteristics by which the data objects can be compared. These characteristics can include persons of interest. Thus, person references in a data object under one classification can be compared to a different person referenced in a data object in a second classification (i.e., determining a second person who is different than the person in the query item). Bohannon at paras. 0019, 0030. In this way, a user can compare how different sources of data objects treat different people.
Gordon and Bohannon are analogous art because they are both directed to the same field of endeavor of searching and providing content based on determined characteristics.
At the time before the effective filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gordon by adding the feature of wherein the determining the set of difference characteristics comprises determining a person in the query item and determining a second person who is different than the person in the query item, the automatically substituting one or more values with one or more opposing values comprises automatically substituting a first value corresponding to the person with a second value corresponding to the second person, and the opposing values of the constructed query includes the second value corresponding to the second person, as disclosed by Bohannon. As set forth above, Gordon discloses determining a set of difference characteristics and automatically constructing a query based on the set of similarity characteristics of the query item and the one or more opposing values. As modified by Bohannon, the result is that Gordon can identify persons of interest in a query item (i.e., person) and substitute that person with a second value corresponding to a determined different person from a different classification (i.e., substituting … a first value corresponding to the person with a second value corresponding to the second person). In doing so, the combination of Gordon and Bohannon provides the ability to automatically construct a query based on the determined similarity characteristics and opposing values, which include the substituted second value, to identify results comprising items having similar characteristics and different characteristics of the query item, as claimed.
The motivation for doing so would have been to allow a user to compare news from different sources about similar events or topics. Bohannon at para. 0019.
Gordon in view of Bohannon does not expressly disclose the query item characteristics comprising a plurality of property, value, score (PVS) metadata triples of the query item, wherein the determining the set of difference characteristics comprises determining a first PVS metadata triple, altering the first PVS metadata triple to generate a second PVS metadata triple, the query comprising the second PVS metadata triple, and identifying items similar to difference characteristics based upon one or more similarities to the second PVS metadata triple generated by altering the first PVS metadata triple. As set forth in the rejection above, Gordon in view of Bohannon discloses determining similarity characteristics and difference characteristics, searching based on these determined similarity and difference characteristics, where the difference characteristic corresponds to a person and the person can be substituted with a second value corresponding to a different person from a different classification. In other words, one characteristic is altered through substitution to generate another characteristic. What is not expressly disclosed are that these characteristics of items are represented in the system using PVS metadata triples.
Erickson discloses a system and method for searching data records. Each data record (i.e., query item) has associated metadata comprising attribute label, attribute value, and a confidence value (i.e., PVS metadata triple). The data record and their associated metadata triples are stored to allow for future searching of the data records. Erickson at Fig. 8; paras. 0051-52, 0055. The system provides an ability to search the data records based on their attributes (i.e., characteristics). Upon receiving search parameters, which identify desired characteristics, the data records are searched to identify the desired characteristics. Once characteristics are identified, the associated unique identifier is used to retrieve the data record and all of its associated information. Erickson at Fig. 10; para. 0059. Thus, Erickson discloses representing characteristics of an item by using metadata triples and searching for items based on these metadata triples.
Gordon, Bohannon, and Erickson are analogous art because they are directed to the same field of endeavor of searching and providing content based on desired characteristics.
At the time before the effective filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gordon by adding the features of the query item characteristics comprising a plurality of property, value, score (PVS) metadata triples of the query item, wherein the determining the set of difference characteristics comprises determining a first PVS metadata triple, altering the first PVS metadata triple to generate a second PVS metadata triple, the query comprising the second PVS metadata triple, and identifying items similar to difference characteristics based upon one or more similarities to the second PVS metadata triple generated by altering the first PVS metadata triple, as disclosed by Erickson.
The motivation for doing so would have been storing characteristics of items with a confidence value (i.e., score) for each characteristic allows results to be ranked based on confidence value. Erickson at para. 0039.
Claim 15 is essentially the same as claim 7 in the form of a non-transitory machine readable medium. Therefore, it is rejected for the same reasons.
In regards to claim 17, Gordon discloses a computing device comprising:
a. a processor comprising hardware (Gordon at para. 0086); and
b. memory comprising processor executable instructions that when executed by the processor cause performance of operations (Gordon at paras. 0086-87), the operations comprising:
i. automatically evaluating, by a system, a query item to identify characteristics of the query item (Gordon at paras. 0026)18;
ii. determining, by the system, a set of similarity characteristics among the characteristics of the query item (Gordon at paras. 0026, 0031, 0052, 0071)19;
iii. determining, by the system, a set of difference characteristics among the characteristics of the query item (Gordon at paras. 0026, 0080, 0083)20;
iv. automatically constructing, by the system, a query based upon the set of similarity characteristics and the set of difference characteristics (Gordon at paras. 0026, 0031, 0052, 0071, 0080, 0083)21;
v. executing the query to identify a set of query item results comprising items having (i) characteristics similar to the set of similar characteristics of the query item and (ii) characteristics different from the set of difference characteristics of the query item (Gordon at para. 0083)22; and
vi. constructing a media item comprising the query item and the set of query item results for comparison. Gordon at para. 0083.23
Gordon does not expressly disclose generating a second difference characteristic, different from the first difference characteristic, and using the second difference characteristic to execute the query.
Bohannon discloses a system and method for comparison of event related data objects. Bohannon at abstract. The method includes finding data objects, which are classified into classes. Data objects include texts news, stories, documents, social media posts, etc. Classifications can be different determined classes based on the source of the data object, language, geographic source, or some other classification. For example, a classification can include politically conservative, while another can be politically liberal. Bohannon at paras. 0013-14, 0017. Once classified, the data objects are analyzed to determine difference characteristics by which the data objects can be compared. These characteristics can include persons of interest. Thus, person references in a data object under one classification can be compared to a different person referenced in a data object in a second classification (i.e., determining a second person who is different than the person in the query item). Bohannon at paras. 0019, 0030. In this way, a user can compare how different sources of data objects treat different people.
Gordon and Bohannon are analogous art because they are both directed to the same field of endeavor of searching and providing content based on determined characteristics.
At the time before the effective filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gordon by adding the feature of generating a second difference characteristic, different from the first difference characteristic, and using the second difference characteristic to execute the query, as disclosed by Bohannon. As set forth above, Gordon discloses determining a set of difference characteristics and automatically constructing a query based on the set of similarity characteristics of the query item and the one or more opposing values. As modified by Bohannon, the result is that Gordon can identify persons of interest in a query item (i.e., person) and substitute that person with a second value corresponding to a determined different person from a different classification (i.e., substituting … a first value corresponding to the person with a second value corresponding to the second person). In doing so, the combination of Gordon and Bohannon provides the ability to automatically construct a query based on the determined similarity characteristics and opposing values, which include the substituted second value (i.e., generated second characteristic), to identify results comprising items having similar characteristics and different characteristics of the query item, as claimed.
The motivation for doing so would have been to allow a user to compare news from different sources about similar events or topics. Bohannon at para. 0019.
Gordon in view of Bohannon does not expressly disclose the query item characteristics comprising a plurality of property, value, score (PVS) metadata triples of the query item, wherein determining the set of similarity characteristics comprises determining a first PVS metadata triple, wherein the determining the set of difference characteristics comprises determining a second PVS metadata triple, generating a third PVS metadata triple, different than the second PVS metadata triple, based upon the second PVS metadata triple, the query comprising the first PVS metadata triple and the third PVS metadata triple, and identifying items with characteristics similar to similarity characteristics based upon one or more similarities to the first PVS metadata triple and items similar to difference characteristics based upon one or more similarities to the third PVS metadata triple generated based upon the second PVS metadata triple. As set forth in the rejection above, Gordon in view of Bohannon discloses determining similarity characteristics and difference characteristics, searching based on these determined similarity and difference characteristics, where the difference characteristic corresponds to a person and the person can be substituted with a second value corresponding to a different person from a different classification. In other words, one characteristic is altered through substitution to generate another characteristic. What is not expressly disclosed are that these characteristics of items are represented in the system using PVS metadata triples.
Erickson discloses a system and method for searching data records. Each data record (i.e., query item) has associated metadata comprising attribute label, attribute value, and a confidence value (i.e., PVS metadata triple). The data record and their associated metadata triples are stored to allow for future searching of the data records. Erickson at Fig. 8; paras. 0051-52, 0055. The system provides an ability to search the data records based on their attributes (i.e., characteristics). Upon receiving search parameters, which identify desired characteristics, the data records are searched to identify the desired characteristics. Once characteristics are identified, the associated unique identifier is used to retrieve the data record and all of its associated information. Erickson at Fig. 10; para. 0059. Thus, Erickson discloses representing characteristics of an item by using metadata triples and searching for items based on these metadata triples.
Gordon, Bohannon, and Erickson are analogous art because they are directed to the same field of endeavor of searching and providing content based on desired characteristics.
At the time before the effective filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gordon by adding the features of the query item characteristics comprising a plurality of property, value, score (PVS) metadata triples of the query item, wherein determining the set of similarity characteristics comprises determining a first PVS metadata triple, wherein the determining the set of difference characteristics comprises determining a second PVS metadata triple, generating a third PVS metadata triple, different than the second PVS metadata triple, based upon the second PVS metadata triple, the query comprising the first PVS metadata triple and the third PVS metadata triple, and identifying items with characteristics similar to similarity characteristics based upon one or more similarities to the first PVS metadata triple and items similar to difference characteristics based upon one or more similarities to the third PVS metadata triple generated based upon the second PVS metadata triple, as disclosed by Erickson.
The motivation for doing so would have been storing characteristics of items with a confidence value (i.e., score) for each characteristic allows results to be ranked based on confidence value. Erickson at para. 0039.
In regards to claim 18, Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson discloses the computing device of claim 17, wherein the operations comprising:
a. receiving a submitted query (Gordon at paras. 0026, 0074)24; and
b. constructing items as query results for the submitted query by substituting a specified value for a first characteristic and retaining a specified value for a second characteristic. Gordon at paras. 0074, 0080, 0083.25
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0163792) (Gordon), in view of Bohannon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0318199) (Bohannon) and Erickson (US Patent Pub 2009/0063471), further in view of Kapinos et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0303477) (Kapinos) of record.
In regards to claim 4, Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson discloses the method of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose constructing the query with a metric that disfavors items with characteristics similar to the set of difference characteristics.
Kapinos discloses a method for searching and excluding results based on characteristics that are not relevant to the user search query. Kapinos at para. 0004. A query is received from a user along with input indicating what results would not be relevant to the search query through a selection of one or more exclusion characteristics. Kapinos at para. 0030. The search results are then updated by applying the exclusion characteristics and removing non-relevant search results that comprise the exclusion characteristics (i.e., disfavors items with similar difference characteristics). Kapinos at para. 0034.
Gordon, Bohannon, Erickson, and Kapinos are analogous art because they are both directed to the same field of endeavor of searching items based on characteristics.
At the time before the effective filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson by adding the feature of constructing the query with a metric that disfavors items with characteristics similar to the set of difference characteristics, as disclosed by Kapinos.
The motivation for doing so would have been to provide another method of eliminating results the user is not interested in because they are not relevant to the query. Kapinos at para. 0028.
Claims 10-12, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0163792) (Gordon), in view of Bohannon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0318199) (Bohannon) and Erickson (US Patent Pub 2009/0063471), further in view of Arnold et al. (US Patent Pub 2009/0158214) (Arnold).
In regards to claim 10, Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson discloses the non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 9, but does not expressly disclose wherein the operations comprise displaying the set of query item results along a first axis according to a first characteristic and a second axis according to a second characteristic.
Arnold discloses searching content based on attributes and characteristics of the content. The attributes can be internally or externally generated and can describe any feature of a content item. Arnold at para. 0053. The results of the search are displayed in a manner that arranges content items on multiple axes where a first attribute corresponds to a first axis and a second attribute corresponds to a second axis. Arnold at paras. 0053-54.
Gordon, Bohannon, Erickson, and Arnold are analogous art because they are both directed to the same field of endeavor of searching and browsing items, such as content, by attributes.
At the time before the effective filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson by adding the feature of displaying the set of query item results along a first axis according to a first characteristic and a second axis according to a second characteristic, as disclosed by Arnold.
The motivation for doing so would have been to allow the user the ease of scrolling through content items along a particular access knowing that the axis is assigned to a particular feature. This allows the user to quickly browse results. Arnold at para. 0054.
In regards to claim 11, Gordon in view of Bohannon, Erickson, and Arnold discloses the non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 10, wherein at least one of the first characteristic or the second characteristic is a difference characteristic within the set of difference characteristics. Gordon at paras. 0080, 0083. Arnold at paras. 0053-54. As discussed in the rejection of claim 10, the combination of Gordon and Arnold would allow displaying the search results of Gordon in the manner described by Arnold. Assigning an attribute to an axis can be a positive feature or a negative feature, as disclosed in Gordon. The result is a display of results using multiple axes where at least one of the characteristics is a difference characteristic.
In regards to claim 12, Gordon in view of Bohannon, Erickson, and Arnold discloses the non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 9, wherein the operations comprise displaying the set of query item results along a first axis according to a first characteristics, a second axis according to a second characteristic, and a third axis according to a third characteristic. Arnold at paras. 0054, 0057.26
In regards to claim 14, Gordon in view of Bohannon, Erickson, and Arnold discloses the non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 12, wherein the operations comprise storing sets of similar values and sets of opposing values for characteristics. Gordon at para. 0052.27
In regards to claim 16, Gordon in view of Bohannon, Erickson, and Arnold discloses the non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 14, wherein the operations comprise automatically filling in the set of similarity characteristics using a set of similarity values. Gordon at paras. 0026, 0071.28
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0163792) (Gordon), in view of Bohannon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0318199) (Bohannon), Erickson (US Patent Pub 2009/0063471), and Arnold et al. (US Patent Pub 2009/0158214) (Arnold), further in view of Inamdar et al. (US Patent Pub 2021/0097472) (Inamdar).
In regards to claim 13, Gordon in view of Bohannon, Erickson, and Arnold discloses the non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 12, but does not expressly disclose wherein the set of query item results are displayed and navigable through at least one of augmented reality or virtual reality.
Inamdar discloses a system and method for searching and ranking the results. The results include a list of candidates, which are displayed in a manner that can include a heads up display or virtual reality goggles. Inamdar at paras. 0031-32.
Gordon, Bohannon, Erickson, Arnold, and Inamdar are analogous art because they are all directed to the same field of endeavor of searching information based on characteristics of the information.
At the time before the effective filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gordon in view of Bohannon, Erickson, and Arnold by adding the feature of wherein the set of query item results are displayed and navigable through at least one of augmented reality or virtual reality, as disclosed by Inamdar.
The motivation for doing so would have been to provide another method of output and viewing of results. Inamdar at para. 0032.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0163792) (Gordon), in view of Bohannon et al. (US Patent Pub 2019/0318199) (Bohannon) and Erickson (US Patent Pub 2009/0063471), further in view of Cheng et al. (US Patent Pub 2013/0018900) (Cheng).
In regards to claim 19, Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson discloses the computing device of claim 17, but does not expressly disclose wherein the operations comprise storing a first pair of characteristic values that are analogies to a second pair of characteristic values given other characteristic values.
Cheng discloses a system and method for performing a search against a document collection. The search includes performing a query and expanding the query by adding one or more related search terms. Cheng at paras. 0004, 0029. The system further creates pairs of attributes (i.e., pair of characteristic values), which are mapped and stored. Cheng at paras. 0050-51, 0053. Raw titles are mapped to standard titles (i.e., first pair) and similarities between the pairs are calculated for later use. Cheng at para. 0051.
Gordon, Bohannon, Erickson, and Cheng are analogous art because they are both directed to the same field of endeavor of searching content using characteristics.
At the time before the effective filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gordon in view of Bohannon and Erickson by adding the feature of wherein the operations comprise storing a first pair of characteristic values that are analogies to a second pair of characteristic values given other characteristic values, as disclosed by Cheng.
The motivation for doing so would have been to enable expanding of the query to include additional terms and phrases and retrieve more relevant results for the user. Cheng at para. 0027.
In regards to claim 20, Gordon in view of Bohannon, Erickson, and Cheng discloses the computing device of claim 19, wherein the operations comprise in response to the query corresponding to the first pair of characteristic values, including the second pair of characteristic values within the query. Cheng at paras. 0027, 0029.29
Response to Amendment
Objection to claim 15 for Minor Informalities
Applicant’s amendment to claim 15 to address the minor informalities is acknowledged. Consequently, the objection to claim 15 is withdrawn.
Rejection of Claims 6 and 15 under 35 U.S.C 112(b)
Applicant’s amendment to claims 6 and 15 is acknowledged. The rejection to claims 6 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn.
Rejection of Claim 2 under 35 U.S.C 112(d)
Applicant’s amendment to claim 2 is acknowledged. The rejection to claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) is withdrawn.
Rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C 101
Applicant’s amendment to claims 1-20 is acknowledged, which incorporate features as discussed in the interview conducted 7/14/2025. Consequently, the rejection to claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 101 is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Rejection of claims 1, 3, 5-9, 17, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant’s arguments in regards to the rejections to claims 1, 3, 5-9, 17, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103, have been fully considered and they are persuasive in that Gordon in view of Bohannon does not expressly disclose the PVS triples now recited in the claim.
However, upon further search and consideration, new grounds of rejection are set forth above as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments. The new grounds of rejection rely on Erickson, which discloses a system and method for storing and searching data records. The system provides storing metadata triples for each data record comprising an attribute label, an attribute value, and a confidence value. These metadata triples are utilized to search the data records in response to a received query identifying desired characteristics.
Rejection of claims 2, 4, 10-16, 19, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant’s arguments in regards to the rejections to claims 2, 4, 10-16, 19, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 refer to the arguments presented in regards to their respective independent claims, which are addressed above. Therefore, claims 2, 4, 10-16, 19, and 20 are now rejected under the new grounds of rejection set forth above as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments.
Additional Prior Art
Additional relevant prior art are listed on the attached PTO-892 form. Some examples are:
Rapaka et al. (US Patent Pub 2022/0114385) discloses a system and method for managing attributes associated with objects in video data.
Friedman et al. (US Patent Pub 2004/0210552) discloses a system and method for processing resource description data.
McCarthy et al. (US Patent Pub 2014/0358911) discloses a system and method for searching and discovering information in a real time network.
Theocharous et al. (US Patent Pub 2022/0270152) discloses a system and method for searching for related and contrasting items based on a query item.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Michael Le whose telephone number is 571-272-7970 and fax number is 571-273-7970. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:30 AM – 6 PM.
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, Tony Mahmoudi can be reached on 571-272-4078. 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.
/MICHAEL LE/Examiner, Art Unit 2163
/ALEX GOFMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163
1 A received content (i.e., query item) is analyzed to determine topics and perspectives (i.e., characteristics)
2 Topics and perspectives (i.e., characteristics) are extracted from the provided media content (i.e., query item). These topics and perspectives are used to search complementary content. Thus, the similarity characteristics are interpreted as the topics and perspectives, since the complementary content will be pertaining to similar topics.
3 Topics and perspectives (i.e., characteristics) are extracted from the provided media content (i.e., query item). These topics and perspectives are used to search complementary content. A negation is determined (i.e., opposing values) for the media content and used to search for complementary content (i.e., substituting one or more values of the set of difference characteristics …).
4 The application determines topics and perspectives to search for complementary content (i.e., similarity values for set of similarity characteristics) and negation values (i.e., set of difference characteristics) for the media content. These are all used to perform a search (i.e., automatically construct a query).
5 The query is executed and results are provided to the client.
6 Search results of complementary media content are provided to the user.
7 Erickson discloses confidence value (i.e., score). Bohannon discloses substituting one characteristic for different one, where the characteristic corresponds to persons. Thus, substituting one characteristic corresponding to a person represented by a metadata triple with a second characteristic corresponding to a different person represented by a different metadata triple includes altering the “score” element of the triple.
8 The application searches for complementary media that have similar topics and perspectives.
9 The application searches for complementary media having negations (i.e., characteristics dissimilar) of perspectives about a particular topic extracted from the provided media content.
10 Erickson discloses attribute label and attribute value (i.e., property and value). Bohannon discloses substituting one characteristic for different one, where the characteristic corresponds to persons. Thus, substituting one characteristic corresponding to a person represented by a metadata triple with a second characteristic corresponding to a different person represented by a different metadata triple includes altering the “property” and “value” elements of the triple.
11 Data records (i.e., query item) are received and processed to identify attributes (i.e., characteristics) represented by attribute label, attribute value, and confidence value (i.e., PVS triple). These triples are stored in a database and associated with a unique identifier corresponding to the query item. This database is utilized when performing searches.
12 Search results are provided on a display and presented to the user. The results contain complementary media to the media content provided by the user. By viewing them, the user is able to see differing perspectives.
13 A received content (i.e., query item) is analyzed to determine topics and perspectives (i.e., characteristics)
14 Topics and perspectives (i.e., characteristics) are extracted from the provided media content (i.e., query item). These topics and perspectives are used to search complementary content. A negation is determined (i.e., opposing values) for the media content and used to search for complementary content (i.e., substituting one or more values of the set of difference characteristics …).
15 The application determines topics and perspectives to search for complementary content (i.e., similarity values for set of similarity characteristics) and negation values (i.e., set of difference characteristics) for the media content. These are all used to perform a search (i.e., automatically construct a query).
16 The query is executed and results are provided to the client.
17 Search results of complementary media content are provided to the user.
18 A received content (i.e., query item) is analyzed to determine topics and perspectives (i.e., characteristics)
19 Topics and perspectives (i.e., characteristics) are extracted from the provided media content (i.e., query item). These topics and perspectives are used to search complementary content. Thus, the similarity characteristics are interpreted as the topics and perspectives, since the complementary content will be pertaining to similar topics.
20 Topics and perspectives (i.e., characteristics) are extracted from the provided media content (i.e., query item). These topics and perspectives are used to search complementary content. A negation is determined (i.e., opposing values) for the media content and used to search for complementary content (i.e., substituting one or more values of the set of difference characteristics …).
21 The application determines topics and perspectives to search for complementary content (i.e., similarity values for set of similarity characteristics) and negation values (i.e., set of difference characteristics) for the media content. These are all used to perform a search (i.e., automatically construct a query).
22 The query is executed and results are provided to the client.
23 Search results of complementary media content are provided to the user.
24 A user provides a media content or selects a search result of a search.
25 Based on the submitted media content or selected search result, the application performs a search based on extracted characteristics and determined values, such as topics or perspectives.
26 Arnold discloses the results can be displayed and arranged over multiple axes, including three.
27 Storage stores complementary content (i.e., sets of similar values and sets of opposing values for characteristics).
28 The application searches for the extracted topics (i.e., similarity characteristics) to find media content about the same topics.
29 The query is expanded with additional terms (i.e., second pair of characteristic values).
Prosecution Insights