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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 1/31/2022 with a priority date of 1/29/2021.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without providing a practical application or significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-10 recite a method and claims 11-20 recite a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having embodied thereon a program executable by a processor. Thus, each independent claim, on its face, is direct to one of the statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. §101. However, claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without providing a practical application or significantly more.
Step 2A:
Prong 1: The claims include the abstract idea of receiving data that identifies a set of filter criteria, marching the criteria to data associated with a product where the product is associated with a code and advertising, sending advertising data to a first user, receiving new advertising data related to the product that can be shared with a second user and providing the new advertising data to the second user. Dependent claims recite identifying purchases and orders, allocating commissions, ranking advertising data, thresholds, notification rules based on a change in ranking data and sending additional codes to additional users.
The claims allow a user to search for viral marketing advertisements the send those advertisements to additional users with a code that is used to track purchases and provide commissions. This concept falls under Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity such as commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations).
Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims 1-10 merely recite user devices along with inferring the use of processors, memory and a communication network, as such the use of devices, computers and networks are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component – MPEP 2106.05(f).
The claims also recite an ordered combination that includes a sending hyperlinks that include a code. Although this suggests an environment that is computerized in nature the combination amounts to generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h).
The ordered combination offers nothing more than employing a configuration of computer devices and computer functions of sending and receiving data over a network, even with these additional elements the claims does no amount to a practical application or add significantly more, similar to how limiting the abstract idea in Flook to petrochemical and oil-refining industries was insufficient. Simply put, all the claims add to an arrangement of generic devices are the steps for allow a user to search for viral marketing advertisements the send those advertisements to additional users with a code that is used to track purchases and provide commissions.
The recitation of hyperlinks that include a code is also considered adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g). The terms “technological environment” and “field of use” often overlaps with other considerations, particularly insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)). For instance, a data gathering step that is limited to a particular data source (such as the Internet) or a particular type of data (such as power grid data or XML tags) could be considered to be both insignificant extra-solution activity and a field of use limitation. See, e.g., Ultramercial, 772 F.3d at 716, 112 USPQ2d at 1755 (limiting use of abstract idea to the Internet); Electric Power, 830 F.3d at 1354, 119 USPQ2d at 1742 (limiting application of abstract idea to power grid data); Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indem. Co., 850 F.3d 1315, 1328-29, 121 USPQ2d 1928, 1939 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (limiting use of abstract idea to use with XML tags).
Step 2B:
The claims do not include additional elements or an ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of devices, processors, memory and networks amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
Further the ordered combination of hyperlinks including codes is nothing more than generally linking, as well as adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. For instance, a data-gathering step that is limited to a particular data source (viral advertising) or a well-known technique (hyperlinks) is a field of use limitation. See, e.g., Ultramercial, 772 F.3d at 716, 112 USPQ2d at 1755 (limiting use of abstract idea to the Internet). Affinity Labs of Texas v. DirecTV, LLC, 838 F.3d 1253, 120 USPQ2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2016), provides another example of claims that also used technology to provide a particular technological environment. Although in these claims the additional elements limit the use of the abstract idea, the court explained that this type of limitation merely confines the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (cellular telephones) and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims. 838 F.3d at 1259, 120 USPQ2d at 1204. Similarly, the additional elements, set forth in Prong 2, merely the claim a technological environment the use hyperlinks that include a code to track user purchase and provide redemption.
Examiner provides the following evidence regarding hyperlinks as insignificant extra-solution activity:
McClosky US 2012/0089441: See, “Conventional methods for tracking the effectiveness of promotional email communications include providing a code or hyperlink to a website. Any response from a consumer that includes the code or access to the hyperlink can be attributed to the promotional communication. Likewise, promotional communications that include coupons can be linked to the use of the coupon. Since codes, web-sites, and coupons can be unique to a specific promotion, the use of the codes, web-sites, or coupons can be directly linked to a promotional communication and the related promotion, providing a way to estimate the effectiveness of the communication.” [0003].
Herzog US 2006/0273574: See, “In step 360, the resultant transaction information is stored in database 120. Such information includes a tracking hyperlink (URL) well-known in the art that is used to determine the status of the shipment.” [0080].
Wong US 2022/0188944: See, “In conventional online advertising, the advertiser creates product or service hyperlinks, banner ads etc., and places them onto their affiliated partner's websites or social media pages. Showing the ads and/or clicking the hyperlinks will trigger events such as collecting the consumer's information, frequency of the clicks, the number of views, etc. Advertisers collect this information to justify their advertising effectiveness and to charge their clients accordingly. Affiliates, either companies who carry the hyperlinks on their web pages or individuals such as bloggers embedding the links in their blogs, will receive monetary rewards for their participation.” [0003].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 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.
Claims 1-5, 8-15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plut et al. (U.S. 2012/0209722; Hereafter: Plut) in view of Khmaladze et al. (U.S. 2017/0083960; Hereafter: Khmaladze).
As per Claim 1: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
1. A method for hyperlink-based influence tracking, the method comprising:
Plut discloses receiving data from a first user device that identifies a set of filter criteria; See, “In one embodiment, as suggestion interface 12 renders an ad selection GUI to provide suggester 4 with an electronic region or means to load, import, read, search, filter, etc., electronic advertisement data and can include a region to present the results thereon. These regions can include known text or graphic regions with dialogue boxes, static controls, drop-down menus, list boxes, pop-up menus, edit controls, combo boxes, radio buttons, check boxes, push buttons, text selection options, text highlight options, images, pictures, and the like.” [0064]. See, [0065, 0127]. See also, [0165-170] for an overview of the filtering steps.
Plut discloses matching the set of filter criteria to data associated with a product, wherein the product is associated with a code and stored advertising data; See, “Compensation module 32 receives a notification that recipient 8 activated electronic advertisement 16. Module 32 may place or embed a tracking identifier and/or tracking program for an advertisement, which refers to a unique identifier or software used to track the status of the ad, such as a tracking number, an alphanumeric code, a hexadecimal string, a cookie, etc. Whenever recipient 8 activates the ad, that activation is tracked by module 32. If a product or service is purchased, then recipient 8 pays the advertiser, vendor or seller, or an intermediary for either, and the advertiser, vendor or seller compensates electronic advertising provider 28 for that activation.” [0093]. See, “Electronic advertisement content 61 includes at least one of a subject and a vendor, and displays graphics and/or video information relating to a particular company, vendor, person, product or service, public service announcement, news issue, corporate matter, or political person or topic, etc. Commercial advertisements 16 include ad content 61 that markets a particular product or service and can request, suggest or desire that a particular action be performed by intended recipient 8, such as a transaction or purchase. The Ad content 61 may also convey a purchase offer, deal, or discount or savings offered by clicking though the Ad to make a purchase. For example, using the ad 16 may lead to 15% off of a purchase.” [0099]. See also, [0103, 0177] for tracking codes. See, [0074, 0155] for a different type of code that is scanned.
Plut does not disclose sending the advertisement data associated with the product via a first hyperlink that includes the code to the first user device;
However, Khmaladze disclose advertising associated with products via hyperlinks that includes a code, which is sent as part of a referral network and/or viral marketing scheme. See, “In this respect, the ELinks, as described in more detail below, include coding that allows each successive ELink in a chain of tiered ELinks to be both unique to a particular user, but simultaneously related to one another so that the system recognizes connected (sales) within a tiered framework. For example, a first referring entity and possibly the entity responsible for the recommendation of the first referring entity (the celebrity/influencer, for example) may be connected for example using the novel coding and arrangement described in the detailed description. When a subsequent buyer uses that ELink, even the top or first level purchaser (the celebrity, in one above example) who informed the second level purchaser of the product/manufacturer also receives a credit for that purchase by the two tier-away purchaser.” [0020]. See, ““ELink”—acronym that stands for “electronic link”, which may manifest as URI (uniform resource identifier), WEB URL (uniform resource locator), printed code (bar code, QR code, or any other code). ELinks look like a short obfuscated code (e.g. “x6z23a”). ELinks are defined in more detail below.” [0032]. See also, [0056, 0058].
Plut discloses receiving new advertising data related to the product that can be shared with a second user device; and See, “Advertisement suggestion interface 12 allows suggester 4 to provide input 10 that permits the selection of electronic advertisement 16 for provision to intended recipient 8. Ad suggestion interface 12 receives electronic advertisement input 10 entered by suggester 4. Ad suggestion interface 12 includes any suitable computer interface or digital system that allows suggester 4 to provide input 10. As the term is used herein, suggesting an ad refers to the process of providing input 10 that at least partially determines ad 16. Selecting refers to input 10 that identifies a specific ad 16. Using ad suggestion interface 12, suggester 4 provides input 10 that may include: the results from searching for an ad related to consumer information 6, the selection of an ad 16 from a list, identification of one or more recipients 8 for ad 16, entering key words and selecting input 10 or the ad 16 based on results provided in response by ad suggestion interface 12, etc.” [0063].
Plut discloses providing the new advertising data to the second user device via a second hyperlink different from the first hyperlink. See, “Electronic advertisement 16 conveys any commercial opportunity to recipient 8 or other message for a potential consumer transaction. Electronic advertisement 16 includes any format or data suitable for conveying the commercial opportunity and includes one or more of video data, audio data, text, graphics information, or any combination thereof. Electronic formats suitable for conveying and delivering ad 16 include: an email, an instant message, a text message (SMS or MMS), in situ ad in a web browser, a weblog (blog), a social network environment, a news feed, a webpage, a status post, a twitter update, graphics for display on a display device, etc.” [0069]. See, “Referring now to FIG. 3A, recipient 8 receives at least one electronic advertisement 16 displayed on a display device 41 included with an electronics device 43 employed by recipient 8. Display device 41 provides graphics and/or video output that includes the at least one electronic advertisement 16 for viewing by recipient 8.” [0094]. See also [0097-0102]. See also, [0153-164] for an overview of the sending steps.
Therefore, from the teaching of Plut, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for suggested product advertising, as disclosed by Khmaladze, to send a hyperlink that includes a code, as taught by Plut, for the purpose of providing the tools to generate an effective multi-tiered affiliate/incentive sales structure.
As per Claim 2: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
Plut discloses 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising identifying the second user device from data received from the first user device. See, “Contacts module 85 includes one or more graphical user interface tools that are configured to allow suggester 4 to designate the identity of an ad recipient 8 for an ad 16. In a specific embodiment, contacts module 85 allows suggester 4 to select a name or email or social networking username or other digital identifier for recipient 8 from an existing list of contacts. Another suitable contact selection graphical user interface tool includes a text box for suggester 4 to type an email address, phone number, username, etc. of ad recipient 8.” [0113]. See also, [0114] and Figures 5A and 5B.
As per Claim 3: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
Plut discloses identifying that a user of the first user device has purchased the product; See, “In one embodiment, electronic advertisement 16D was suggested for provision to intended recipient 8 by a second suggester 8, or represents a second advertisement from the suggester of ad 16A. By way of example, ad 16D is an advertisement for new truck tires from father's 8 friend 4, who recently purchased the tires for his own truck, which is a similar model.” [0140].
Khmaladze discloses assigning a second code associated with the purchase of the product by the user of the first user device, wherein the second hyperlink to the new advertising data includes the second code; receiving information that identifies that an order for the product has been received from the second user device via the second hyperlink that includes the second code; and allocating one or more commissions to the user of the first user device based on the order for the product via the second hyperlink that includes the second code. See, “As explained in more detail below in the detailed description, downstream friends, family and followers of an initial purchasers/users are able to engage in the compensation percentages for additional sales using a comprehensive multi-tiered hyperlink system. The present system and method of the present arrangement provides a running financial tallying system to reflect those multi-tiered purchase and sales of products which were directly and indirectly responsible for the purchases and sales of the same or related products to others in the chain.” [0014]. See, “In this example, a seller “Natur-All” sells a certain kind of soap bar for $80 a piece in shopping malls around the country. They also sell the same soap for lesser price, e.g. $60 a piece, on their website, where users may not buy more than 5 pieces. According to the present arrangement in a first step 200, Natur-All creates a root ELink 100 in system 20, that gives checkout price of $50 and $5 is assigned to network product diffusion, consequently they get $45/bar+viral marketing benefit. Next at step 202 it is contemplated that a first user/buyer 10 Alex uses root ELink 100 and spends $50 at checkout at which point Natur-All gets $50. At the same time, at step 204 a new first tier ELink 102 is derived from the original one, and Alex sends link 102 to a second user Tim… Upon receiving link 102, at step 206, Tim pays $50 at checkout, out of which $5 goes to Alex and $45 to original seller.” [0123-124].
As per Claim 4: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
Plut discloses identifying rankings to associate with one or more sets of advertising data; and organizing the one or more sets of advertising data according to the rankings. See, “The present description also contemplates a situation where suggester 4 provides more electronic advertisement input 10 and ads 16 than available places for electronic advertisements ads on page 101. To handle an ad 16 excess, in one embodiment, ad provision module 14 uses a ranking system to determine a display hierarchy of electronic advertisements 16.” [0135].
As per Claim 5: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
Plut discloses 5. The method of claim 1, wherein sending the advertising data to the user device is based on a ranking level of the advertising data among one or more sets of advertising data meeting a threshold level. See, “In another embodiment, the advertisement information 83 displays multiple ads 16 in a ranked format, where the ranked format is at least partially based on the incentive or compensation attributed to suggester 4” [0112]. See, “The ranking system uses an algorithm that ranks or prioritizes the ads 16 based on one or more criteria. Criteria suitable for use in the display hierarchy includes:…a conversion rate of ads 16 provided from suggester 4 to intended recipient 8 (e.g., ads from a suggester with a higher conversion rate receive higher priority over ads with a lower conversion rate).” [0135]. See, “In another embodiment, process flow 221 uses a tiered conversion rate system to attribute compensation to a suggester. The tiered system includes a number of tiers for the suggester's conversion rate, where each conversion rate tier conveys a dedicated compensation rate. In this embodiment, process flow 221 attributes a compensation percentage of the transaction based on the suggester's conversion rate at the time of sending the ad. Changes (up or down) to the suggester's conversion rate cause the suggester to move between the conversion rate tiers and their predetermined conversion rate thresholds. Typically, a higher conversion rate tier results in a higher compensation percentage using the tiered system. For an increasing conversion rate, once the next conversion rate threshold number is reached, the compensation percentage increases.” [0184].
As per Claim 8: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
Khmaladze discloses assigning a third code associated with the order received from the second user device, wherein a third hyperlink includes the third code; identifying that a new purchase of the product via the third hyperlink is associated with the third code; and allocating commissions for receipt by the user of the first user device and a second user of the second user device based on the identification of the new purchase of the product via the third hyperlink that includes the third code. See, “At step 208 a new second tier ELink 104 is created for Tim, that at step 210 Tim sends to Jim. Once Jim gets the derived second tier ELink 104 from Tim, at step 212 he pays $50 at checkout, out of which $45 goes to the original seller and $5 is split between Alex and Tim according to one of the formulas that seller Natur-All established. (e.g. one of the formulas will split even and give $2.50 each). It is noted that the same price of $50 is paid for the product at all levels of percolation chain. This model is important for indexing, as search engines such as Google will index only root ELinks 100's. There is no need to hunt for better percolation deal, as they are all the same.” [0124].
As per Claim 9: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
Khmaladze discloses 9. The method of claim 1, further comprising associating the user of the first user device as being upline of a user of the second user device based on the user of the second user device purchasing the product via the hyperlink that includes the code. See, “F-015 A derivative ELink (or child link)/Referring link—is a new link which was created from the original ELink (parent link) that the referrer (F-013) somehow obtained (i.e. by receiving an email, SMS, WOM, or scanning a QR code, visiting a social network site etc.). The original parent links represent a product item and its referrer (which may be the original seller), along with the whole chain of derivation/reference from the original seller (because the parent link may have another parent link and so on up to original seller).” [0067].
As per Claim 10: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
10. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
Plut discloses receiving marketing data from the second user device, the marketing data associated with an offer to purchase a second product via a hyperlink See, “Users 4 and 8 can view data about social network members via the social network engine, enter data about themselves and possibly others, join social network groups, suggest ads 16 to other members 8 in their social network environment, and so forth. As the term is used herein, social network environment refers to all aspects of a social network that users 4 and 8 can access, including social network contacts, friends, pages, ad locations, pictures, media, groups, etc.” [0083]. See, “For example, when mother 8 views son's social network profile page 101, the page 101 displays advertisements 16 suggested by son 4 for mother 8 such as an advertisement for books mother wants in ad 16A, a new family computer displayed in ad 16B, and a spa getaway package in ad 16C.” [0131]. See, “Using the example above, the son 4 may select a group consisting of his parents 8 to send both father 8 and mother 8 an advertisement for a new family computer 16B.” [0132]. See, “By way of example, ad 16E is an advertisement for a hotel for a Hawaiian vacation as provided by mother 4 based on a recent family planning email between the mother and father, where mother did the research on Hawaiian hotels but father will do the actual purchase. It should be appreciated that electronic advertisements 16A, 16D and 16E may all either derive from the same suggester 4 or from different suggesters 4 and that any number of advertisements are suitable for display on page 121.” [0140]. Plut See, “Ad service window 161 may also include information for new users and how to join or associate with the advertisement service. This may include a hyperlink 169 that directs the viewer to a website operated by the ad service provider.” [0152].
Khmaladze discloses that includes the second code; sending the marketing data to the first user device; and KHM See, “F-009C Any user may be a Buyer and a Seller at the same time.” [0055].
Khmaladze discloses providing commissions for receipt by the second user based on the user of the first user device ordering the second product using the hyperlink that includes the second code, See, “As explained in more detail below in the detailed description, downstream friends, family and followers of an initial purchasers/users are able to engage in the compensation percentages for additional sales using a comprehensive multi-tiered hyperlink system. The present system and method of the present arrangement provides a running financial tallying system to reflect those multi-tiered purchase and sales of products which were directly and indirectly responsible for the purchases and sales of the same or related products to others in the chain.” [0014].
Khmaladze discloses wherein the user of the second user device is classified as being upline of the user of the first user device based on the first user purchasing the second product using the hyperlink that includes the second code. See, “F-015 A derivative ELink (or child link)/Referring link—is a new link which was created from the original ELink (parent link) that the referrer (F-013) somehow obtained (i.e. by receiving an email, SMS, WOM, or scanning a QR code, visiting a social network site etc.). The original parent links represent a product item and its referrer (which may be the original seller), along with the whole chain of derivation/reference from the original seller (because the parent link may have another parent link and so on up to original seller).” [0067].
As per Claim 11: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
11. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having embodied thereon a program executable by a processor for hyperlink-based influence tracking, the method comprising:
Plut discloses receiving data from a first user device that identifies a set of filter criteria; See, [0064]. See, [0065, 0127]. See also, [0165-170] for an overview of the filtering steps.
Plut discloses matching the set of filter criteria to data associated with a product, wherein the product is associated with a code and stored advertising data; See, [0093], [0099]. See also, [0103, 0177] for tracking codes. See, [0074, 0155] for a different type of code that is scanned.
Plut does not disclose sending the advertisement data associated with the product via a first hyperlink that includes the code to the first user device;
However, Khmaladze disclose advertising associated with products via hyperlinks that includes a code, which is sent as part of a referral network and/or viral marketing scheme. See, [0020], 0032]. See also, [0056, 0058].
Plut discloses receiving new advertising data related to the product that can be shared with a second user device; and See, [0063].
Plut discloses providing the new advertising data to the second user device via a second hyperlink different from the first hyperlink. See, [0069], [0094]. See also [0097-0102]. See also, [0153-164] for an overview of the sending steps.
Therefore, from the teaching of Plut, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for suggested product advertising, as disclosed by Khmaladze, to send a hyperlink that includes a code, as taught by Plut, for the purpose of providing the tools to generate an effective multi-tiered affiliate/incentive sales structure.
As per Claim 12: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
Plut discloses 12. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, further comprising instructions executable to identify the second user device from data received from the first user device. See, [0113]. See also, [0114] and Figures 5A and 5B.
As per Claim 13: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
13. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, further comprising instructions executable to:
Plut discloses identify that a user of the first user device has purchased the product;
Khmaladze discloses assign a second code associated with the purchase of the product by the user of the first user device, wherein the second hyperlink to the new advertising data includes the second code; receive information that identifies that an order for the product has been received from the second user device via the second hyperlink that includes the second code; and allocate one or more commissions to the user of the first user device based on the order for the product via the second hyperlink that includes the second code. See, [0014], [0123-124].
As per Claim 14: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
14. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, further comprising instructions executable to:
Plut discloses identify rankings to associate with one or more sets of advertising data; and organize the one or more sets of advertising data according to the rankings. See, [0135].
As per Claim 15: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
Plut discloses 15. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, wherein sending the advertising data to the user device is based on a ranking level of the advertising data among one or more sets of advertising data meeting a threshold level. See, [0112], [0135], [0184].
As per Claim 18: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
18. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, further comprising instructions executable to:
Khmaladze discloses assign a third code associated with the order received from the second user device, wherein a third hyperlink includes the third code; identify that anew purchase of the product via the third hyperlink is associated with the third code; and allocate commissions for receipt by the user of the first user device and a second user of the second user device based on the identification of the new purchase of the product via the third hyperlink that includes the third code. See, [0124].
As per Claim 19: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
Khmaladze discloses 19. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, further comprising instructions executable to associate the user of the first user device as being upline of a user of the second user device based on the user of the second user device purchasing the product via the hyperlink that includes the code. See, [0067].
As per Claim 20: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
20. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, further comprising executable to:
Plut discloses receive marketing data from the second user device, the marketing data associated with an offer to purchase a second product via a hyperlink See, [0083], [0131], [0132], [0140], [0152].
Khmaladze discloses that includes the second code; send the marketing data to the first user device; and See, [0055].
Khmaladze discloses provide commissions for receipt by the second user based on the user of the first user device ordering the second product using the hyperlink that includes the second code, See, [0014].
Khmaladze discloses wherein the user of the second user device is classified as being upline of the user of the first user device based on the first user purchasing the second product using the hyperlink that includes the second code. See, [0067].
Claims 6, 7, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plut et al. (U.S. 2012/0209722; Hereafter: Plut) in view of Khmaladze further in view of Raack (U.S. 2016/0342913; Hereafter: Raack).
As per Claim 6: Plut in view of Khmaladze and Raack discloses the following limitations;
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
Plut in view of Khmaladze does not disclose receiving a notification rule from a user device specifying that notification data is sent to the user device when a change in a set of ranking data meets one or more requirements; identifying that the change in the set of ranking data meets the one or more requirements; and sending the notification data to the user device based on the change in the set of ranking data meeting the one or more requirements.
However, Raack discloses - See, “In some embodiments, the contest processing rules 732 may be configured to generate notifications. For example, a set of threshold conditions may be defined that, when satisfied, trigger a notification. For example, threshold conditions may be defined to trigger notifications for a start of a contest, an end of a contest, a ranking change, and other notifications discussed herein. In some embodiments, the conditions may be predefined, and/or defined by a related sponsor system, e.g., within the contest creation request.” [0014].
Therefore, from the teaching of Raack, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for ranking of advertisements and/or the tiering of users, as disclosed by Khmaladze in view of Plut, to receive notification rules and provide notification based on changes in the rankings, as taught by Raack, for the purpose of increasing an engagement level between participant systems and sponsor systems.
As per Claim 7: Plut in view of Khmaladze and Raack discloses the following limitations;
Raack discloses 7. The method of claim 6, wherein the notification rule is associated with a change in magnitude of the ranking data. See, “In step 420, the participant system 102 presents a first notification (or, “alert”) message indicating a ranking change of the participant system 102. In some embodiments the contest interface module presents the first notification. For example, the participant system 102 may notify a participant if a video the participant has an interest in (e.g., the participant received a vote indicating that the user liked the particular video or the participant created the video) is ranked, moves up the leaderboard, moves down the leaderboard, receives a number of votes equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold, or the like.” [0077].
As per Claim 16: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
16. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, further comprising instructions executable to:
Plut in view of Khmaladze does not disclose receive a notification rule from a user device specifying that notification data is sent to the user device when a change in a set of ranking data meets one or more requirements; identify that the change in the set of ranking data meets the one or more requirements; and send the notification data to the user device based on the change in the set of ranking data meeting the one or more requirements.
However, Raack discloses - See, “In some embodiments, the contest processing rules 732 may be configured to generate notifications. For example, a set of threshold conditions may be defined that, when satisfied, trigger a notification. For example, threshold conditions may be defined to trigger notifications for a start of a contest, an end of a contest, a ranking change, and other notifications discussed herein. In some embodiments, the conditions may be predefined, and/or defined by a related sponsor system, e.g., within the contest creation request.” [0014].
Therefore, from the teaching of Raack, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for ranking of advertisements and/or the tiering of users, as disclosed by Khmaladze in view of Plut, to receive notification rules and provide notification based on changes in the rankings, as taught by Raack, for the purpose of increasing an engagement level between participant systems and sponsor systems.
As per Claim 17: Plut in view of Khmaladze discloses the following limitations;
Raack discloses 17. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 16, wherein the notification rule is associated with a change in magnitude of the ranking data. See, [0077].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Koonce et al. US 2013/0268350: discloses viral marketing using customized emails and tracking effectiveness and commissions with a user interface that let the user build the message. Neystadt US 2012/0158476: discloses create a viral marketing package and provide it for the user to customzie. Vorotyntsev US 2014/01953316: discloses providing tracking hyperlinks to a first user and different links are provided the first user to post and to track purchases of other user.
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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC NETZLOFF whose telephone number is (571)270-3109 and fax number is (571) 270-4109. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30-5:00 EST or eric.netzloff@uspto.gov., If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful the examiner’s supervisor, ABDI KAMBIZ can be reached on 571-272-6702. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ERIC R NETZLOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3688