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 .
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 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.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/14/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-8, 10-18, and 20 remain pending, and are rejected.
Claims 9 and 19 have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 4/14/2026 with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive for at least the following rationale:
Applicant’s arguments filed on 4/14/2026 with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 for claims directed to a judicial exception are not persuasive.
Notably, on pages 12-13 of the Applicant’s Remarks, arguments are made that the claims recite a practical application by reciting a specific improvement to the relevant technical field. The claims have allegedly been amended to be directed to a specific technical architecture including a data structure comprising distinct item sub-structures and interactive module sub-structures and a multi-step incremental rendering process to address specific deficiencies arising in videos that use interactive modules to filter items. The Applicant argues that the claims have been amended to recite a rendering technique that addresses the deficiency of videos presenting the product being predetermined and unalterable by receiving a data structure comprising distinct categories of sub-structures. This enables the processor to perform dynamic content selection and UI configuration during each incremental rendering step to perform real-time content assignment and adaptive UI configuration based on the current state of filtered item sub-structures.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims do not recite any of the underlying technology of how the videos and interfaces are rendered, but only recite a manner of determining what information to display. The technical ability or rendering process of the modules are not addressed in the claims. The claims merely recite a generic rendering of a video and a generic configuring of UI elements without further detail to the technical process. Only the use of data tags to point to the next group of data to be displayed on the interface is recited in the claims, which is merely filtering available options based on previous user selection, and is not a technical process of how a computer renders an interface. The computer itself merely displays the appropriate elements of the abstract idea. The various data structures and sub-structures also do not represent any technical improvement or ability. The data structures and sub-structures only represent an organization of information, such that relevant information is grouped together and form a sort of ontology to follow a path as selections are made by the user. Any ability of how a computer renders interfaces or any kind of graphics remains unchanged, and the claims merely recite how to determine what information is to be displayed.
In view of the above, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 has been maintained below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-8, 10-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claims are directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claims 1-8 and 10 are directed to a method, which is a process. Claims 11-18 and 20 are directed to a system, which is an apparatus. Therefore, claims 1-8, 10-18, and 20 are directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A (Prong 1):
Taking claim 11 as representative, claim 11 sets forth the following limitations (emphasized in bold) reciting the abstract idea of filtering a plurality of products to recommend to a user:
receiving a data structure configured, at least in part, by a publisher of at least one webpage associated with the plurality of items, the data structure including:
a plurality of item sub-structures, each item sub-structure corresponding to a respective item of the plurality of items, and including at least one data tag indicating an attribute of the item;
a plurality of interactive module sub-structures, each interactive module sub-structure including a plurality of module templates prearranged in a sequence, wherein (i) each module template includes a video content portion and a user interface (UI) portion and (ii) the prearranged sequence of module templates is configured, at least in part, by the publisher;
receiving, via at least one webpage, a selection of an item type that is of interest to a user, the selected item type corresponding to a first group of items that is a subset of the plurality of items;
retrieving, from the data structure, an interactive module sub-structure associated with the selected item type from the plurality of interactive module sub-structures;
performing a first incremental step for rendering an interactive video by rendering a first interactive module using a first module template of the retrieved interactive module structure, wherein the rendering includes:
(i) analyzing the plurality of item sub-structures in the data structure to identify a first attribute class corresponding to the first group of items based on the data tags assigned to the first group of items;
(ii) assigning first video content from a content library to the video content portion of the first module template, the first video content being representative of the first attribute class;
(iii) configuring a first plurality of UI elements within the UI portion of the first module template based, at least in part, on a quantity of a first plurality of attribute options for the first attribute class, wherein each attribute option if the first plurality of attribute options corresponds to a data tag assigned to at least one item of the first group of items;
displaying, via an interactive video player embedded in the at least one webpage, the first interactive module if the interactive video;
while displaying the first interactive module, receiving, via the first plurality of UI elements, a first user selection from the first plurality of attribute options indicating the user’s preference for the first attribute class, the first user selection corresponding to a first data tag;
filtering the item sub-structures corresponding to the first group of items based on the first user selection to provide a second group of items wherein each item in the first group of items has the first data tag;
after identifying the second group of items based on the first user selection, performing a second incremental step for rendering the interactive video by rendering a second interactive module based on a second module template of the interactive module sub-structure, wherein the rendering includes:
(i) analyzing the plurality if item sub-structures in the data structure to identify a second attribute class corresponding to the second group of items based on the data tags assigned to the second group of items;
(ii) assigning second video content from the content library to the video content portion of the second module template, the second video content being representative of the second attribute class;
(iii) configuring a second plurality of UI elements within the UI portion of the second module template based, at least in part, on a quantity of a second plurality of attribute options for the second attribute class, wherein each attribute option of the second plurality of attribute options corresponds to a data tag assigned to at least one item of the second group of items;
displaying, via the interactive player embedded in the at least one webpage, the second interactive module of the interactive video;
receiving, via the second plurality of UI elements, a second user selection from the second plurality of attribute options indicating the user’s preference for the second attribute class, the second user selection corresponding to a second data tag;
filtering the item sub-structures corresponding to the second group of items based on the second user selection to provide a third group of items, wherein each item in the third group of items has the first and second data tags;
selecting a predetermined number of recommended items from the third group of items;
after selecting the third group of items, performing a third incremental step for rendering the interactive video by rendering a third interactive module based on a second module template of the interactive module sub-structure, wherein the rendering includes:
(i) assigning third video content from the content library to the video content portion of the third module template, the third video content being representative of the recommended items;
(ii) configuring the UI portion of the third module template to include a selectable link for each recommended item that, upon selection, directs the user to at least one second webpage associated with the item;
displaying, via the interactive video player embedded in the at least one webpage, the third interactive module of the interactive video.
The recited limitations above set forth the process for filtering a group of items to recommend to a user. These limitations amount to certain methods of organizing human activity, including commercial or legal interactions (e.g. advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, etc.). The claims are directed to receiving user selections of attribute options to filter down a group of products to display to the user as a recommended group of items, which is a process of collecting user intention information to narrow down desired items, and is a sales and marketing activity.
Such concepts have been identified by the courts as abstract ideas (see: MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)).
Step 2A (Prong 2):
Examiner acknowledges that representative Claim 11 does recite additional elements, such as:
at least one memory for storing computer-executable instructions;
at least one processor for executing the instructions stored on the memory;
receiving a data structure configured, at least in part, by a publisher of at least one webpage associated with the plurality of items, the data structure including:
a plurality of item sub-structures, each item sub-structure corresponding to a respective item of the plurality of items, and including at least one data tag indicating an attribute of the item;
a plurality of interactive module sub-structures, each interactive module sub-structure including a plurality of module templates prearranged in a sequence, wherein (i) each module template includes a video content portion and a user interface (UI) portion and (ii) the prearranged sequence of module templates is configured, at least in part, by the publisher;
receiving, via at least one webpage, a selection of an item type that is of interest to a user, the selected item type corresponding to a first group of items that is a subset of the plurality of items;
retrieving, from the data structure, an interactive module sub-structure associated with the selected item type from the plurality of interactive module sub-structures;
performing a first incremental step for rendering an interactive video by rendering a first interactive module using a first module template of the retrieved interactive module structure, wherein the rendering includes:
(i) analyzing the plurality of item sub-structures in the data structure to identify a first attribute class corresponding to the first group of items based on the data tags assigned to the first group of items;
(ii) assigning first video content from a content library to the video content portion of the first module template, the first video content being representative of the first attribute class;
(iii) configuring a first plurality of UI elements within the UI portion of the first module template based, at least in part, on a quantity of a first plurality of attribute options for the first attribute class, wherein each attribute option if the first plurality of attribute options corresponds to a data tag assigned to at least one item of the first group of items;
displaying, via an interactive video player embedded in the at least one webpage, the first interactive module if the interactive video;
while displaying the first interactive module, receiving, via the first plurality of UI elements, a first user selection from the first plurality of attribute options indicating the user’s preference for the first attribute class, the first user selection corresponding to a first data tag;
filtering the item sub-structures corresponding to the first group of items based on the first user selection to provide a second group of items wherein each item in the first group of items has the first data tag;
after identifying the second group of items based on the first user selection, performing a second incremental step for rendering the interactive video by rendering a second interactive module based on a second module template of the interactive module sub-structure, wherein the rendering includes:
(i) analyzing the plurality if item sub-structures in the data structure to identify a second attribute class corresponding to the second group of items based on the data tags assigned to the second group of items;
(ii) assigning second video content from the content library to the video content portion of the second module template, the second video content being representative of the second attribute class;
(iii) configuring a second plurality of UI elements within the UI portion of the second module template based, at least in part, on a quantity of a second plurality of attribute options for the second attribute class, wherein each attribute option of the second plurality of attribute options corresponds to a data tag assigned to at least one item of the second group of items;
displaying, via the interactive player embedded in the at least one webpage, the second interactive module of the interactive video;
receiving, via the second plurality of UI elements, a second user selection from the second plurality of attribute options indicating the user’s preference for the second attribute class, the second user selection corresponding to a second data tag;
filtering the item sub-structures corresponding to the second group of items based on the second user selection to provide a third group of items, wherein each item in the third group of items has the first and second data tags;
selecting a predetermined number of recommended items from the third group of items;
after selecting the third group of items, performing a third incremental step for rendering the interactive video by rendering a third interactive module based on a second module template of the interactive module sub-structure, wherein the rendering includes:
(i) assigning third video content from the content library to the video content portion of the third module template, the third video content being representative of the recommended items;
(ii) configuring the UI portion of the third module template to include a selectable link for each recommended item that, upon selection, directs the user to at least one second webpage associated with the item;
displaying, via the interactive video player embedded in the at least one webpage, the third interactive module of the interactive video.
Taken individually and as a whole, representative claim 11 does not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception as the additional elements merely serve to implement the abstract idea in a computing environment.
Furthermore, this is also because the claim fails to (i) reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, (ii) implement a judicial exception with a particular machine, (iii) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or (iv) apply the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
While there is recitation of memory and processors, they are not any particular device or computing components, but generic computing components as they are known in the art. As disclosed in the Applicant’s specification, the invention can be implemented in any suitable hardware or software, the processors can be any general purpose microprocessor, and the memory include all formats of non-volatile memory (specification pages 6-7). As such, it is evident that the instant claims are not directed to any problem or solution in technology, but merely implement a solution to a commercial problem on a computer so that it may be performed over a network. Furthermore, the interactive modules are disclosed with a high level of generality, and are merely described in the specification (page 20) as interactive interfaces where the user can select an attribute or some label describing the item. It is not directed to a particular functionality of a computer, but merely an interface so the user can use the commercial idea on their computing device. The embedding of the video player is also recited with a very high level of generality, the specification merely disclosing that the interactive video can be embedded into the website, without any further detail to the technical process of how the video player is embedded (see specification page 13, lines 3-8). The links also recite generic link functionality to direct the browser to another website.
In view of the above, under Step 2A (Prong 2), claim 11 does not integrate the recited exception into a practical application (see: MPEP 2106.04(d)).
Step 2B:
Returning to claim 11, taken individually or as a whole, the additional elements of claim 11 do not provide an inventive concept (i.e. whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself). As noted above, the additional elements recited in representative claim 11 are recited in a generic manner with a high level of generality and only serve to implement the abstract idea on a generic computing device. The claims result only in an improved abstract idea itself and do not reflect improvements to the functioning of a computer or another technology or technical field. As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements used to perform the claimed process ultimately amount to no more than the mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer and/or no more than a general link to a technological environment.
Even when considered as an ordered combination, the additional elements of claim 11 do not add anything further than when they are considered individually.
In view of the above, claim 11 does not provide an inventive concept under step 2B, and is ineligible for patenting.
Regarding Claim 1 (method): Claim 1 recites at least substantially similar concepts and elements as recited in claim 11 such that similar analysis of the claims would be readily apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. As such, claims 1 is rejected under at least similar rationale as provided above regarding claim 11.
Dependent claims 2-8, 10, 12-18, and 20 recite further complexity to the judicial exception (abstract idea) of claim 11, such as by further defining the algorithm for filtering a group of items to recommend to a user. Thus, each of claims 2-8, 10, 12-18, and 20 are held to recite a judicial exception under Step 2A (Prong 1) for at least similar reasons as discussed above.
Under prong 2 of step 2A, the additional elements of dependent claims 2-8, 10, 12-18, and 20 also do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, considered both individually or as a whole. More specifically, dependent claims 2-8, 10, 12-18, and 20 rely on at least similar elements as recited in claim 11. Further additional elements are also acknowledged (e.g. application program interface (claim 4)); however, the additional elements of claims 2-8, 10, 12-18, and 20 are recited only at a high level of generality (i.e. as generic computing hardware) such that they amount to nothing more than the mere instructions to implement or apply the abstract idea on generic computing hardware (or, merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea). Further, the additional elements do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (such as the Internet or computing networks).
Secondly, this is also because the claims fails to (i) reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, (ii) implement the judicial exception with, or use the judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, (iii) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or (iv) applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Taken individually and as a whole, dependent claims 2-8, 10, 12-18, and 20 do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception under step 2A (prong 2).
Lastly, under step 2B, claims 2-8, 10, 12-18, and 20 also fail to result in “significantly more” than the abstract idea under step 2B. The dependent claims recite additional functions that describe the abstract idea and use the computing device to implement the abstract idea, while failing to provide an improvement to the functioning of a computer, another technology, or technical field. The dependent claims fail to confer eligibility under step 2B because the claims merely apply the exception on generic computing hardware and generally link the exception to a technological environment.
Even when viewed as an ordered combination (as a whole), the additional elements of the dependent claims do not add anything further than when they are considered individually.
Taken individually or as an ordered combination, the dependent claims simply convey the abstract idea itself applied on a generic computer and are held to be ineligible under Steps 2B for at least similar rationale as discussed above regarding claim 11. Thus, dependent claims 2-8, 10, 12-18, and 20 do not add “significantly more” to the abstract idea.
Subject Matter Free of Prior Art
The claims are free of the prior art for the reasons as indicated in the previous Office Action mailed on 2/7/2025.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY J KANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8069. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7:30 - 5:00.
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, Maria-Teresa Thein can be reached at 571-272-6764. 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.
/T.J.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3689
/VICTORIA E. FRUNZI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689 6/18/2026
Prosecution Insights