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 .
Status of Application
This office action is in response to the most recent filings filed by applicants on 02/24/26.
In the response filed on 08/07/24, applicants have elected without traverse Group II, claims 6-17. Group I, claims 1-5 have been withdrawn from consideration and subsequently cancelled by applicants:
Claims 6 and 15 are amended
Claims 1-5 are cancelled
No claim is added
Claims 6-18 are pending
Note:
Applicants have listed the following paragraphs in the remarks dated 02/24/26, applicants recite on page 7 of the remarks: “Applicant respectfully submits that support for the claims is provided in at least paragraphs [005], [012]-[014], [036], [043], [045], [054], [061]. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of claims 6-18 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) be withdrawn.”
However, the paragraphs listed above do not show the limitations discussed in the 112(a) rejection below. None of the cited paragraphs discloses “third”. In the previous office actions, even when “second” was not mentioned as a way to identify a communication channel or gateway, examiner gave the term it’s broadest reasonable interpretation and assumed that applicants’ claims are referring to a different communication channel than the one originally used, same reasonable interpretation was made for edge gateway. However, then when applicants added the term “third”, which is now further defining the claim limitations – communication channel and edge gateway – to be identifiable as specific communication channels and edge gateways that are numbered and the specification does not provide any support for such differentiation.
The paragraphs listed by applicants are more generically describing the components of the system (spec. [005], [012]-[014]), the micro-engagements, or how the goals for individual customers are set up using the micro-engagements, for instance, see specification [0036], [0043]-[0045] [054], [061].
For instance, spec. [054] In another embodiment, a shipping company 806 has a micro-engagement waiting for the customer 800. In the engagement, it provides information for the customer about a package delivery along with the delivery schedule and enquires if the customer would be there. Based on the responses, the micro-engagements will continue with its flows (Fig.2B). In another embodiment, the customer can choose 'No' and then, based on the service offered by the shipping company, the customer may postpone the delivery or give other instructions for delivery of the package, if the customer does not respond to any of the micro-engagements here, the business can choose to deliver the same micro- engagement via other modes as illustrated in Fig.3. This is simply describing asking the customer a question and if the customer is not responding find another way to interact with the customer. However, the whole process is recited at a high level of generality. There are no details that show how this process takes place. How is the system finding other modes of interaction with the customer? What if the customer is busy and has chosen to not engage with the system? In that case, can the system detect this and not proceed to annoy the customer with other micro-engagements via other forms of communication? How many times will the system try before it stops trying to interact with the user?
These are just some of the many questions that could be raised about the paragraphs cited by the applicants in the specification. Further, still it is unclear how these paragraphs show “third” in the limitations discussed in the 112a rejection below.
In light of these notes, the amended claims, do not overcome previously presented rejections under 112, 101 and 103. As is discussed below. This note is intended as a conversation starter to help applicants understand the examiner’s perspective. Applicants are welcome to call the examiner to discuss this further.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 6-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In accordance with section 2161.01 of the MPEP, "original claims may fail to satisfy the written description requirement when the invention is claimed and described in functional language but the specification does not sufficiently identify how the invention achieves the claimed function”. Ariad, 598 F.3d at 1349, 94 USPQ2d at 1171 ("[A]n adequate written description of a claimed genus requires more than a generic statement of an invention's boundaries.'') (citing Eli Lilly, 119 F3d at 1568, 43 USPQ2d al 1405-06). In Ariad, the court recognized the problem of using functional claim language without providing in the specification examples of species that achieve the claimed function. The problem is especially acute with genus claims that use functional language to define the boundaries of a claimed genus. In such a case, the functional claim may simply claim a desired result, and may do so without describing species that achieve that result. But the specification must demonstrate that the applicant has made a generic invention that achieves the claimed result and do so by showing that the applicant has invented species sufficient to support a claim to the functionally-defined genus. Id.'' This may include disclosure of the hardware and software required to perform a claimed function including the "necessary steps for implementing the claimed function" (e.g. an algorithm, description of steps, flowcharts, etc.) (MPEP 2161.01)."If the specification does not provide a disclosure of the computer and algorithm in sufficient detail to demonstrate to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor possessed the invention including how to program the disclosed computer to perform the claimed function, a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C 112, first paragraph, for lack of written description must be made.'' (MPEP 2161.01).
In, independent Claim 6 recites the claim element “a third mobile communication channel” and “a third edge gateway”
Broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim: the above claim is reasonably understood as saying that there are multiple communication channels and multiple edge gateways.
Review of the application to understand how applicant provides support for the claimed invention including each element and/or step: does not show the term “third”. In the short 26 page originally submitted specification, there are mentions of the term “first”, there is only 1 mention of the term “second” in [035]: First one being the information itself is concise and sufficient for the problem at hand. Second one being that the engagement would require at any given time only a short snippet of time from the customer. Here, the mention of the term second is not for a communication channel or an edge gateway. It is for the discussion of the micro-engagements itself.
In the previous office actions, even when “second” was not mentioned as a way to identify a communication channel or gateway, examiner gave the term it’s broadest reasonable interpretation and assumed that applicants’ claims are referring to a different communication channel than the one originally used, same reasonable interpretation was made for edge gateway.
However, in the most recent amendment applicants have added the term “third”, which is now further defining the claim limitations – communication channel and edge gateway – to be identifiable as specific communication channels and edge gateways that are numbered and the specification does not provide any support for such differentiation.
Since there is insufficient written description to inform a skilled artisan that applicant was in possession of the claimed invention as a whole at the time the application was filed one of ordinary skill in the art would not recognize, in light of the above-cited pertinent sections of the disclosure. As such the scope of the “a third mobile communication channel” and “a third edge gateway” in the claim is so broad and sweeping that the metes and bounds of the terms are unclear.
In other words, the claims recite details in the claim language without providing in the specification examples of how that claimed function will be achieved. Applicant should specifically indicate where in the Specification is there support for the claim limitations amended should Applicants amend in order to practice compact prosecution and reduce potential issues such as 35 U.S.C. § 112 rejections that may arise when claims are amended without support in the Specification. See MPEP § 714.02.
Applicant has not pointed out where the new (or amended) claim is supported, nor does there appear to be a written description of the claim limitations described above in the application as filed. (See Hyatt v. Dudas, 492 F.3d 1365, 1370, 83 USPQ2d 1373, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2007)).
In order to promote compact prosecution, the examiner has fully considered the amended claims by giving them their broadest reasonable interpretation discussed above in the Office Action below.
Double Patenting
Independent claim 6 of the present application conflict with independent claim 1 of Application No. 15/439843. 37 CFR 1.78(b) provides that when two or more applications filed by the same applicant contain conflicting claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their retention during pendency in more than one application. Applicant is required to either cancel the conflicting claims from all but one application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822.
A rejection based on double patenting of the "same invention" type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that "whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process ... may obtain a patent therefor ..." (Emphasis added). Thus, the term "same invention," in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957); and In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970).
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
The examiner notes that the claims in both applications closely resemble each other. Claims 6 of this application are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1 of Application No. 15/439843. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
For instance, independent claim 6 of the present application recites:
“A method to create, launch and administer goals in a micro- engagement platform, the method comprising:
creating and storing a plurality of goals, each goal of the plurality of goals comprising one or more micro-engagements, a micro-engagement comprising a request for a customer response;
selecting a first mobile communication channel of a plurality of communication channels to transmit a first micro-engagement of a sequence corresponding to a first goal of the plurality of goals to a customer;
based on selecting a mobile communication channel, uploading and storing mobile contact data associated with the customer in the micro- engagement platform, wherein the mobile contact data corresponds to a customer mobile device;
pushing, via a first edge gateway corresponding to the first mobile communication channel, the first micro-engagement to the customer mobile device, wherein the first micro- engagement persists until the customer response is received, and
wherein the same first micro-engagement is pushed via a second edge gateway corresponding to a second mobile communication channel upon determining that a specified time interval has elapsed without receiving the customer response, wherein the second mobile communication channel is different from the first mobile communication channel; and
upon receiving, from the customer mobile device, the customer response to the first micro-engagement, identifying a second micro-engagement of the sequence based on the customer response;
selecting a third mobile communication channel of the plurality of communication channels to transmit the second micro-engagement;
pushing, via a third edge gateway corresponding to the third mobile communication channel the second micro-engagement to the customer mobile device, and
based on receiving, from the customer mobile device, customer responses to the one or more micro-engagements associated with a goal of the plurality of goals, determining the goal is satisfied;”
*The underlined parts in the two claims are the parts that are not overlapping.
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on non-statutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
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 6-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step One - First, pursuant to step 1 in the January 2019 Guidance on 84 Fed. Reg. 53, the claims 6-18 is/are directed to a method which is a statutory category.
Under the 2019 PEG, Step 2A under which a claim is not “directed to” a judicial exception unless the claim satisfies a two-prong inquiry. Further, particular groupings of abstract ideas are consistent with judicial precedent and are based on an extraction and synthesis of the key concepts identified by the courts as being abstract.
With respect to the Step 2A, Prong One, the claims as drafted, and given their broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the Abstract idea grouping of “certain methods of organizing human activity” (business relations; relationships or interactions between people). For instance, independent Claim 6 is directed to an abstract idea, as evidenced by claim limitations “creating and storing a plurality of goals, each goal of the plurality of goals comprising one or more sequences of micro-engagements, a micro-engagement comprising a request for a customer response; selecting to transmit a first micro-engagement of a sequence corresponding to a first goal of the plurality of goals to a customer; based on selecting the first mobile communication channel, uploading and storing mobile contact data associated with the customer, wherein the mobile contact data corresponds to a customer mobile device; pushing, the first micro-engagement, wherein the first micro- engagement persists until the customer response is received, and wherein the same first micro-engagement is pushed upon determining that a specified time interval has elapsed without receiving the customer response, upon receiving, the customer response to the first micro-engagement, identifying a second micro-engagement of the sequence based on the customer response; selecting to transmit the second micro-engagement; pushing, the second micro-engagement to the customer mobile device, and based on receiving, customer responses to the one or more micro-engagements associated with a goal of the plurality of goals, determining the goal is satisfied.”
These claim limitations belong to the grouping of “certain methods of organizing human activity” because the claims are related to the process for facilitating user interactions. Managing user interactions for one or more human entities involves organizing human activity based on the description of “certain methods of organizing human activity” provided by the courts. The court have used the phrase “Certain methods of organizing human activity” as —fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
With respect to the Step 2A, Prong Two - This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites additional elements: “A method to create, launch and administer goals in a micro- engagement platform, the method comprising: a first mobile communication channel of a plurality of communication channels; in the micro- engagement platform; via a first edge gateway corresponding to the first mobile communication channel; to the customer mobile device; via a second edge gateway corresponding to a second mobile communication channel; wherein the second mobile communication channel is different from the first mobile communication channel; from the customer mobile device, a third mobile communication channel of the plurality of communication channels, via a third edge gateway corresponding to the third mobile communication channel, from the customer mobile device” at a high level of generality such that it amounts to no more than: adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f).
Thus, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limitations on practicing the abstract idea. As a result, claim 6 does not provide any specifics regarding the integration into a practical application when recited in a claim with a judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Similarly dependent claims 7-18 are also directed to an abstract idea under 2A, first and second prong. In the present application, all of the dependent claims have been evaluated and it was found that they all inherit the deficiencies set forth with respect to the independent claims. For instance, dependent claims 7 recite “wherein a weighting function is created as a function of the first mobile communication channel selected by the customer's mobile device for sending a previous response to the micro-engagement platform, and wherein the third mobile communication channel selected for the second micro- engagement is a function of said weighting function”. Here, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims which are similar to the abstract idea noted in the independent claim above.
Dependent claims 10 recite “wherein the user initiates the goal via a graphical user interface and wherein the user monitors each micro-engagement associated with each goal of the plurality of goals via the graphical user interface”. In this claim, “a graphical user interface” is an additional element, but it is still being recited such that it amounts to no more than: adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). As a result, Examiner asserts that dependent claims, such as dependent claims 7-18 are also directed to the abstract idea identified above.
With respect to Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. First, the invention lacks improvements to another technology or technical field [see Alice at 2351; 2019 IEG at 55], and lacks meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment [Alice at 2360, 2019 IEG at 55], and fails to effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing [2019 IEG, 55]. For the reasons articulated above, the claims recite an abstract idea that is limited to a particular field of endeavor (MPEP § 2106.05(h)) and recites insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP § 2106.05(g)). By the factors and rationale provided above with respect to these MPEP sections, the additional elements of the claims that fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application also fail to amount to “significantly more” than the abstract idea.
As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element(s) of “A method to create, launch and administer goals in a micro- engagement platform, the method comprising: a first mobile communication channel of a plurality of communication channels; in the micro- engagement platform; via a first edge gateway corresponding to the first mobile communication channel; to the customer mobile device; via a second edge gateway corresponding to a second mobile communication channel; wherein the second mobile communication channel is different from the first mobile communication channel; from the customer mobile device, a third mobile communication channel of the plurality of communication channels, via a third edge gateway corresponding to the third mobile communication channel, from the customer mobile device” are insufficient to amount to significantly more. Applicants originally submitted specification describes the computer components above at least in page/ paragraph [0014]-[0022]. In light of the specification, it should be noted that the components discussed above did not meaningfully limit the abstract idea because they merely linked the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (i.e., "implementation via computers"). In light of the specification, it should be noted that the claim limitations discussed above are merely instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f). (See MPEP 2106.05(f) - Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception - “Thus, for example, claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible.” Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 235). Mere instructions to apply an exception using computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.). The additional elements amount to no more than a recitation of generic computer elements utilized to perform generic computer functions, such as performing repetitive calculations, Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, 687 F.3d 1266, 1278, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ("The computer required by some of Bancorp’s claims is employed only for its most basic function, the performance of repetitive calculations, and as such does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of those claims."); and storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93; see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II).
The claim fails to recite any improvements to another technology or technical field, improvements to the functioning of the computer itself, use of a particular machine, effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, adding unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application, and/or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular environment. See 84 Fed. Reg. 55. Viewed individually or as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Further, it should be noted that additional elements of the claimed invention such as claim limitations when considered individually or as an ordered combination along with the other limitations discussed above in method claim 6 also do not meaningfully limit the abstract idea because they merely linked the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (i.e., "implementation via computers"). In light of the specification, it should be noted that the claim limitations discussed above are merely instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP 2106.
Similarly, dependent claims 7-18 also do not include limitations amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea under the second prong or 2B of the Alice framework. In the present application, all of the dependent claims have been evaluated and it was found that they all inherit the deficiencies set forth with respect to the independent claims. Further, it should be noted that the dependent claims do not include limitations that overcome the stated assertions. Here, the dependent claims recite features/limitations that include computer components identified above in part 2B of analysis of independent claims 6. As a result, Examiner asserts that dependent claims, such as dependent claims 7-18 are also directed to the abstract idea identified above.
For more information on 101 rejections, see MPEP 2106, January 2019 Guidance at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-01 -07/pdf/2018-28282.pdf
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 6-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. (2013/0080362), further in view of Boerner et al. (2014/0288945) and (US 20140278783 A1) Du.
As per claim 6: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang shows:
A method to create, launch and administer goals in a micro- engagement platform, the method comprising (Chang shows in Abstract: Customer journey prediction and resolution is accomplished via a predictive model in which each user is mapped onto all available user journey information corresponding to a specific business. The predictive model is analyzed to understand the characteristics, preferences, and lowest effort resolution for the user related to the services that are subscribed to by the user. The predictive model is analyzed to predict the service or collection of services for each user. Embodiments interact with, provide and receive information from, and react to and/or deliver action to the customer across channels and across services. All customer and system behavior, data, and action is tracked and coordinated and leveraged for continuous feedback and performance improvement.):
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
creating and storing a plurality of goals, each goal of the plurality of goals comprising one or more sequences of micro-engagements, a micro-engagement comprising a request for a customer response
Chang shows: Fig. 1, 3; [0036], Upon reception of a trigger/event 105 from the user the system checks if the user has access to any other services offered by the system. In an embodiment, this can occur by first continuously tracking each customer action/interaction in real-time within the channel and comparing it against recorded desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths, and signaling a new event when a substantive deviation occurs from the golden path; [0039], user may access the services from a smart phone. The system can detect that user is connected via a smartphone...system now can construct a specific user experience that spans the available channels to deliver the accessible services in the most effective and lowest effort way for the user; [0057]; [0058], system presents (307) various steps involved in the selected services to the user. For each step, the user must reply/react with proper inputs. The system obtains (308) the user inputs and processes (309) the requests to produce desirable outputs. [0023], execution channel is a channel for interaction between a user and a system for delivery of services, resolution of conflict, and so on. Examples of an execution channel include, but are not limited to, mobile platform, Web platform, communication tools, such as chat/email/SMS, Interactive Voice Response (IVR), social media, and/or any such suitable media and/or a combination of suitable media; [0059], outputs of the services are delivered (310) to the user through an execution channel 115. The execution channel 115 may be a mobile device, IVR, Web, or any such suitable means. Chang also shows in [0021] The customer journey is a goal/intent or set of goals/intents combined with a complex decision and action tree that is dynamic because it can adjust based on interaction with, and feedback from, a business' process, products, and people. [0032] The preferred journeys are the subset of preferred and designed paths that the business intends the user to take where a path can be a literal path, a virtual path, or a combination of literal and virtual path components, either all within a channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently. Mapping the preferred journeys, as well as both alternate journeys and unintended journeys, with the prediction of the user's intent and goals allows the system to identify when and how to prepare and deliver key information and actions and services to the user, so that it maximizes the possibility of the user achieving their goal with the lowest effort/friction and provides the easiest most delightful and satisfying customer experience.
Although Chang shows desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths and mapping the preferred journeys, as well as both alternate journeys and unintended journeys, with the prediction of the user's intent and goals [0032]. Boerner shows the above limitation at least in Fig. 1; [0044], process may further involve then using the personalized information to develop an individualized curriculum of engagement. The individualized curriculum of engagement may be delivered periodically to a suitable device in various digital formats.
Reference Chang and Reference Boerner are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of monitoring customer engagement. Said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Boerner, particularly the creating a plurality of goals, (Fig. 1 [0044]), in the disclosure of Reference Chang, particularly in the desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths (Fig. 1, 3; [0036]), in order to provide for a system that improves the system of engagement which would yield significant benefits to both service providers and the consumers themselves, as taught by Reference Boerner (see at least in [0002]), so that the process of monitoring customer engagement can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar monitoring customer engagement field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Chang in view of Reference Boerner, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
selecting a first mobile communication channel of a plurality of communication channels to transmit a first micro-engagement of a sequence corresponding to a first goal of the plurality of goals to a customer ((Chang: [0011], a catalog of available and possible journeys are built corresponding to each user; [0025], existing library of golden paths/journeys; para [0033]; Chang shows: Fig. 1, 3; [0036], Upon reception of a trigger/event 105 from the user the system checks if the user has access to any other services offered by the system. In an embodiment, this can occur by first continuously tracking each customer action/interaction in real-time within the channel and comparing it against recorded desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths, and signaling a new event when a substantive deviation occurs from the golden path; [0039], user may access the services from a smart phone. The system can detect that user is connected via a smartphone...system now can construct a specific user experience that spans the available channels to deliver the accessible services in the most effective and lowest effort way for the user.
[0032] The preferred journeys are the subset of preferred and designed paths that the business intends the user to take where a path can be a literal path, a virtual path, or a combination of literal and virtual path components, either all within a channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently. Mapping the preferred journeys, as well as both alternate journeys and unintended journeys, with the prediction of the user's intent and goals allows the system to identify when and how to prepare and deliver key information and actions and services to the user, so that it maximizes the possibility of the user achieving their goal with the lowest effort/friction and provides the easiest most delightful and satisfying customer experience. In the above claim, “first goal” can be reasonably interpreted to be the preferred path intended for the user.
Although Chang shows desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths and mapping the preferred journeys, as well as both alternate journeys and unintended journeys, with the prediction of the user's intent and goals [0032], Chang does not explicitly show “creating a plurality of goals”. Boerner shows the above limitation at least in Fig. 1; [0044], process may further involve then using the personalized information to develop an individualized curriculum of engagement. The individualized curriculum of engagement may be delivered periodically to a suitable device in various digital formats.
Reference Chang and Reference Boerner are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of monitoring customer engagement. Said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Boerner, particularly the creating a plurality of goals, (Fig. 1 [0044]), in the disclosure of Reference Chang, particularly in the desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths (Fig. 1, 3; [0036]), in order to provide for a system that improves the system of engagement which would yield significant benefits to both service providers and the consumers themselves, as taught by Reference Boerner (see at least in [0002]), so that the process of monitoring customer engagement can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar monitoring customer engagement field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Chang in view of Reference Boerner, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A));
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
based on selecting the first mobile communication channel, uploading and storing mobile contact data associated with the customer in the micro- engagement platform, wherein the mobile contact data corresponds to a customer mobile device (Chang: [0011], a catalog of available and possible journeys are built corresponding to each user; [0025], existing library of golden paths/journeys; para [0033]; Chang shows: Fig. 1, 3; [0036], Upon reception of a trigger/event 105 from the user the system checks if the user has access to any other services offered by the system. In an embodiment, this can occur by first continuously tracking each customer action/interaction in real-time within the channel and comparing it against recorded desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths, and signaling a new event when a substantive deviation occurs from the golden path; [0039], user may access the services from a smart phone. The system can detect that user is connected via a smartphone...system now can construct a specific user experience that spans the available channels to deliver the accessible services in the most effective and lowest effort way for the user);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
pushing, via a first edge gateway corresponding to the first mobile communication channel, the first micro-engagement to the customer mobile device, wherein the first micro- engagement persists until the customer response is received, and
wherein the same first micro-engagement is pushed via a second edge gateway corresponding to a second mobile communication channel upon determining that a specified time interval has elapsed without receiving the customer response, wherein the second mobile communication channel is different from the first mobile communication channel
regarding the amended claim limitations: “wherein the same first micro-engagement is pushed via a second edge gateway corresponding to a second mobile communication channel upon determining that a specified time interval has elapsed without receiving the customer response, wherein the second mobile communication channel is different from the first mobile communication channel;”
Chang shows “pushing, via a first edge gateway corresponding to the first mobile communication channel, the first micro-engagement to the customer mobile device, wherein the first micro- engagement persists until the customer response is received, and wherein the first micro-engagement is pushed via a second edge gateway corresponding to a second mobile communication channel upon determining that…”: [0011], a catalog of available and possible journeys are built corresponding to each user; [0025], existing library of golden paths/journeys; para [0033], Chang: [0032] preferred journeys are the subset of preferred and designed paths that the business intends the user to take where a path can be a literal path, a virtual path, or a combination of literal and virtual path components, either all within a channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; [0036]. Also, see [0023], [0033], [0039]: shows mobile platform and mobile devices. Also see [0080]: shows one or more customer mobile devices; Chang shows: Fig. 1, 3; [0036], Upon reception of a trigger/event 105 from the user the system checks if the user has access to any other services offered by the system. In an embodiment, this can occur by first continuously tracking each customer action/interaction in real-time within the channel and comparing it against recorded desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths, and signaling a new event when a substantive deviation occurs from the golden path; [0039], user may access the services from a smart phone. The system can detect that user is connected via a smartphone...system now can construct a specific user experience that spans the available channels to deliver the accessible services in the most effective and lowest effort way for the user.
Even though, Chang in view of Boerner shows using multiple channels of communicating with the user, neither reference shows a time interval elapse as a trigger for a different action (Chang: [0032]-[0039]), as such neither reference shows the claim limitation “a specified time interval has elapsed without receiving the customer response”. However, Du shows this limitation at least in [0080] In another embodiment, the survey page comprises an explicit submit button or submit link that a customer must click on to submit the survey. In another embodiment, the survey page is an "auto-submit" page, that is, upon completion of all required survey questions, a timer is displayed and it begins to count down. After the timer has elapsed, the results will be automatically submitted. In another embodiment, if the customer changes the answer to a question, the timer countdown is stopped and reset to its starting value. [0081] In another embodiment, the survey page(s) is a "force complete" page(s), that is, a customer must answer all the queries in the survey to complete the survey page(s). In another embodiment, the survey page(s) is an "optional complete" page, that is the customer must answer at least one survey query or a comment must be added to submit the survey page(s). In yet another embodiment, each query can have the `optional` or `required` properties. Queries that have the `optional` property can be skipped. In one embodiment, each query may contain a default response. If the customer does not specify an answer to the query, the default response is used when the survey is submitted.
Further, Chang in view of Broener shows “wherein the same first micro-engagement is pushed via a second edge gateway corresponding to a second mobile communication channel upon determining that a specified time interval has elapsed without receiving the customer response, wherein the second mobile communication channel is different from the first mobile communication channel” (Broener shows: [0047] Another embodiment further seeks to address post-purchase engagement through integration of purchase data and personalized data in order to create a personalized engagement pathway. In this embodiment, the personalized engagement pathway is created to best fit the purchaser both in context, timing, and delivery, using, but not limited to, video media. The post-purchase engagement could incorporate historical personalized data, some of which could be distributed among various forums, current purchases or services offered, shared data sets, and scientific data sets to intelligently make the best decision on what pathway to create for the consumer. The decision on what pathway to create for the consumer may include the decision on how, how long, and which methodology is best to engage the consumer, i.e., engagement continuum.)
Reference Chang and Reference Du are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of managing customer engagement. Said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Du, particularly the ability to reach the user in a different way to make sure the user is still engaged with the communication channel ([0080]-[0081]), in the disclosure of Reference Chang, particularly in the ability to interact with the user through multiple channels and determine which channel the user prefers (Chang: [0032]-[0039]), in order to provide for a system that continues to engage the customer as taught by Reference Du (see at least in [0100]-[0101]: [0100] In step 305, in one embodiment, one or more of the employees performs the step of triaging the feedback from an employee device 111 by communicating, for example, with feedback processing system 122. In a further embodiment, the one or more employees sort one or more pieces of feedback into one or more groups. Then the triaging is performed on the one or more groups. In another embodiment, the feedback is automatically triaged by the processing system 122. In a further embodiment, each piece of feedback is put into a pre-defined or custom workflow. [0101] In one embodiment, the feedback provided in the survey and post-survey feedback affects the choice and configuration of the workflow of the entire customer engagement process), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Du for processing customer feedback allows the business to retain repeat customers in a more efficient and effective way by managing customer engagement.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar managing customer engagement field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Chang in view of Reference Du, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
upon receiving, from the customer mobile device, the customer response to the first micro-engagement, identifying a second micro-engagement of the sequence based on the customer response (Chang: [0011], a catalog of available and possible journeys are built corresponding to each user; [0025], existing library of golden paths/journeys; para [0033], Chang: [0032] preferred journeys are the subset of preferred and designed paths that the business intends the user to take where a path can be a literal path, a virtual path, or a combination of literal and virtual path components, either all within a channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; [0036]. Also, see [0023], [0033], [0039]: shows mobile platform and mobile devices. Also see [0080]: shows one or more customer mobile devices; Chang shows: Fig. 1, 3; [0036], Upon reception of a trigger/event 105 from the user the system checks if the user has access to any other services offered by the system. In an embodiment, this can occur by first continuously tracking each customer action/interaction in real-time within the channel and comparing it against recorded desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths, and signaling a new event when a substantive deviation occurs from the golden path; [0039], user may access the services from a smart phone. The system can detect that user is connected via a smartphone...system now can construct a specific user experience that spans the available channels to deliver the accessible services in the most effective and lowest effort way for the user);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
identifying a second micro-engagement of the sequence based on the customer response (Chang: [0011], a catalog of available and possible journeys are built corresponding to each user; [0025], existing library of golden paths/journeys; para [0033], Chang: [0032] preferred journeys are the subset of preferred and designed paths that the business intends the user to take where a path can be a literal path, a virtual path, or a combination of literal and virtual path components, either all within a channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; [0036]. Also, see [0023], [0033], [0039]: shows mobile platform and mobile devices. Also see [0080]: shows one or more customer mobile devices; Chang shows: Fig. 1, 3; [0036], Upon reception of a trigger/event 105 from the user the system checks if the user has access to any other services offered by the system. In an embodiment, this can occur by first continuously tracking each customer action/interaction in real-time within the channel and comparing it against recorded desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths, and signaling a new event when a substantive deviation occurs from the golden path; [0039], user may access the services from a smart phone. The system can detect that user is connected via a smartphone...system now can construct a specific user experience that spans the available channels to deliver the accessible services in the most effective and lowest effort way for the user);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
selecting a third mobile communication channel of the plurality of communication channels to transmit the second micro-engagement (Chang: [0011], a catalog of available and possible journeys are built corresponding to each user; [0025], existing library of golden paths/journeys; para [0033], Chang: [0032] preferred journeys are the subset of preferred and designed paths that the business intends the user to take where a path can be a literal path, a virtual path, or a combination of literal and virtual path components, either all within a channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; [0036]. Also, see [0023], [0033], [0039]: shows mobile platform and mobile devices. Also see [0080]: shows one or more customer mobile devices; Chang shows: Fig. 1, 3; [0036], Upon reception of a trigger/event 105 from the user the system checks if the user has access to any other services offered by the system. In an embodiment, this can occur by first continuously tracking each customer action/interaction in real-time within the channel and comparing it against recorded desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths, and signaling a new event when a substantive deviation occurs from the golden path; [0039], user may access the services from a smart phone. The system can detect that user is connected via a smartphone...system now can construct a specific user experience that spans the available channels to deliver the accessible services in the most effective and lowest effort way for the user);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
pushing, via a third edge gateway corresponding to the third mobile communication channel the second micro-engagement to the customer mobile device (Chang [0032]: preferred journeys are the subset of preferred and designed paths that the business intends the user to take where a path can be a literal path, a virtual path, or a combination of literal and virtual path components, either all within a channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; [0036]. Also see [0037] and claim 12 “wherein said trigger event is any of initiated by the user”, Chang: Fig. 1, 3; para [0036], Upon reception of a trigger/event 105 from the user the system checks if the user has access to any other services offered by the system. In an embodiment, this can occur by first continuously tracking each customer action/interaction in real-time within the channel and comparing it against recorded desired reference behavior on one or more of the golden paths, and signaling a new event when a substantive deviation occurs from the golden path; para [0039], user may access the services from a smart phone. The system can detect that user is connected via a smartphone...system now can construct a specific user experience that spans the available channels to deliver the accessible services in the most effective and lowest effort way for the user; para [0057]; para [0058], system presents (307) various steps involved in the selected services to the user. For each step, the user must reply/react with proper inputs. The system obtains (308) the user inputs and processes (309) the requests to produce desirable outputs); and
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
based on receiving, from the customer mobile device, customer responses to the one or more micro-engagements associated with a goal of the plurality of goals, determining the goal is satisfied (Chang: [0032], preferred journeys are the subset of preferred and designed paths that the business intends the user to take where a path can be a literal path, a virtual path, or a combination of literal and virtual path components, either all within a channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; [0036]. [0042]: The system selects services related to the user's identified preferences and interests. The selected services are delivered to the user through any execution channel, which may be a mobile, Web, chat/email/SMS, Interactive Voice Response (IVR), social media, and/or any such suitable media and/or a combination of suitable media. In various embodiments herein, the user may use a combination of the above-mentioned suitable media at the same instant.).
As per claim 7: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
wherein a weighting function is created as a function of the first mobile communication channel selected by the customer's mobile device for sending a previous response to the micro-engagement platform, and wherein the third mobile communication channel selected for the second micro- engagement is a function of said weighting function (Chang shows: [0022], user prediction model is a model for predicting user behavior…including user interaction with the system, service journeys mapped, and execution channels used; near term behavior, such as current services being consumed, execution channel state information, and user information relevant to delivered services; [0025], Prioritize and select the subset of paths and journeys based on scoring of relevance of those paths to the predicted intent; para [0026], data aggregated specific to the customer ...can include: Interaction behavior with the channel or set of channels both current and prior; [0042], [0059]).
As per claim 8:
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
further comprising:
enabling a user associated with the micro-engagement platform to create each goal of the plurality of goals (Chang [0032], preferred journeys are the subset of preferred and designed paths that the business intends the user to take where a path can be a literal path, a virtual path, or a combination of literal and virtual path components, either all within a channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; [0036]); and
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
Enabling the user to view results of each micro-engagement associated with each goal of the plurality of goals (Chang [0041], administrator or the authorized person may be responsible for monitoring and affecting the data and prediction sections of the system. In an embodiment, a hybrid of human and machine optimization and learning can monitor and affect the data and prediction sections of the system and enable the system to learn, improve, and change current and future behavior and delivered services and interactions based on past experiences and results).
As per claim 9:
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
Further comprising:
Allowing the customer to initiate the goal, wherein allowing the customer to initiate the goal comprises:
Enabling the user associated with the micro-engagements platform to publish one or more keywords for the goal (Chang shows: Fig. 3; para [0055]; para [0058], system presents (307) various steps involved in the selected services to the user; para [0068], wherein the system gives options to the user, such as canceling, selecting, and rebooking a new flight, or any such suitable services reads on publishing one or more keywords for a given goal);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
Receiving, from the customer mobile device, at least one of the one or more keywords (Chang: Fig. 3; para [0026], wherein data aggregated specific to the customer includes Direct indicators provided by the user reads on the customer initiating a goal by sending one of said keywords; para [0044], prediction is made by creating a direct interaction of with the user and either text mining the users input the look for specific user provided intent, for example in search key words/terms; para [0058], user must reply/react with proper inputs).
As per claim 10: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
Wherein the user initiates the goal via a graphical user interface, and wherein the user monitors each micro-engagement associated with each goal of the plurality of goals via the graphical user interface (Chang: Fig. 3; [0055], system predicts (306) the services suitable for that user; para [0057], system may consider user identity, multi-channel state data, behavior data, and any such suitable data to predict the services effectively that matches the user; [0041]).
As per claim 11: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
Further comprising: enabling a remote enterprise system to initiate goals via a programming interface, wherein the remote enterprise system monitors each micro-engagement associated with each goal of the plurality of goals (Chang: Fig. 3; para [0055], system predicts (306) the services suitable for that user; para [0057], system may consider user identity, multi-channel state data, behavior data, and any such suitable data to predict the services effectively that matches the user; para [0041]).
As per claim 12:
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
wherein the programming interface comprises at least:
a first API that enables the remote enterprise systems to identify specific goals to be launched (Chang: Fig. 3; para [0056]; para [0057], system may consider user identity, multi-channel state data, behavior data, and any such suitable data to predict the services effectively that matches the user);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
a second API that enables the remote enterprise system to identify specific goals that require customer responses (Chang: Fig. 3; para [0056]; para [0058], system obtains (308) the user inputs and processes (309) the requests to produce desirable outputs); and
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
a third API that enables the remote enterprise system to identify specific micro-engagements and retrieve analytics from customer engagements (Chang: Fig. 3; para [0060], system may also interact with the customers/users, learning through the interactions and delivering corresponding responses through multi-channels and also in parallel within multiple channels. The system may also track and analyze customer journeys across multiple channels).
As per claim 13: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
further comprising:
displaying the one or more micro-engagements visually on a mobile browser (Chang: [0033], online/digital interaction behavior a tracking tag can be used to send real-time details of the customer's interaction from either web, mobile web, or native mobile app systems);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
transferring scripts from the micro-engagement platform to the mobile browsers (Chang [0033], data from an enterprise data base or CRM system may be accessed through one or more combinations of web services, dedicated API, secure or unsecured file transfer protocol, and/or custom designed middleware); and
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
retrieving the customer responses to the one or more micro-engagements from the customer mobile device through different scripts that connect the customer mobile device to the micro-engagement platform (Chang [0058], user must reply/react with proper inputs. The system obtains (308) the user inputs and processes (309) the requests to produce desirable outputs; para [0033]).
As per claim 14: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
wherein the contents of the one or more micro-engagements include one or more of text, video, and images (Chang [0044], prediction is made by creating a direct interaction of with the user and either text mining the users input the look for specific user provided intent, for example in search key words/terms; para [0080], system can create a series of focused visual and textual screens, offers, information pushes, and/or action widgets, or any combination or sequence of these, and present them interactively to the user).
As per claim 15:
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
further comprising:
detecting an active customer presence on the first mobile communication channel (Chang [0039], system can detect that user is connected via a smartphone);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
based on detecting the active customer presence on the mobile communication channel, launching the first micro- engagements to the customer (Chang [0039], system can detect that user is connected via a smartphone);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
based on detecting the first micro-engagement timed-out, selecting the second communication channel on which the customer is active (Chang [0039], By combining the information about what privileges/entitlements and service access a user has with which of one or more channels that are available for the user to receive services, the system now can construct a specific user experience that spans the available channels to deliver the accessible services in the most effective and lowest effort way for the user); and
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
launching the first micro-engagement to the customer via the second communication channel (Chang [0039], By combining the information about what privileges/entitlements and service access a user has with which of one or more channels that are available for the user to receive services, the system now can construct a specific user experience that spans the available channels to deliver the accessible services in the most effective and lowest effort way for the user).
As per claim 16: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
further comprising:
enabling multiple goals to be active on the customer mobile device at any time, (Chang: Fig. 3; [0054], system can still uniquely identify and track users by their interactions and touch points with the system, either within one channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; [0056], a journey can span multiple sessions; [0057], system may consider user identity, multi-channel state data, behavior data, and any such suitable data to predict the services effectively that matches the user);
enabling the customer to select an active goal to engage with (Chang: Fig. 3; [0054], system can still uniquely identify and track users by their interactions and touch points with the system, either within one channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; [0056], a journey can span multiple sessions; [0057], system may consider user identity, multi-channel state data, behavior data, and any such suitable data to predict the services effectively that matches the user).
As per claim 17:
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
further comprising:
identifying active goals associated with the customer (Chang: Fig. 3; [0054], system can still uniquely identify and track users by their interactions and touch points with the system, either within one channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; para [0046], If the system finds out that the user is accessing multiple services and/or channels, the system links (205) all identified services and/channels. Based on the identified services, the system offers (206) services to the user.);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
delivering and presenting the active goals to the customer mobile device (Chang [0080], system can create a series of focused visual and textual screens, offers, information pushes, and/or action widgets, or any combination or sequence of these, and present them interactively to the user);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
allowing the customer, via the customer mobile device, to select and engage with an active goal (Chang [0053], If a journey profile exists for that particular user, the system analyzes (305 a) data related to the predicted journey); and
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
allowing the customer to switch between the active goals (Chang Fig. 3; [0054], system can still uniquely identify and track users by their interactions and touch points with the system, either within one channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently).
As per claim 18:
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
further comprising: receiving a user request to update the sequence of micro-engagements corresponding to the first goal (Chang: Fig. 3; [0054], system can still uniquely identify and track users by their interactions and touch points with the system, either within one channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; para [0046], If the system finds out that the user is accessing multiple services and/or channels, the system links (205) all identified services and/channels. Based on the identified services, the system offers (206) services to the user.);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
updating a third micro-engagement of the sequence of micro-engagements based on the user request (Chang [0080], system can create a series of focused visual and textual screens, offers, information pushes, and/or action widgets, or any combination or sequence of these, and present them interactively to the user. Chang [0053], If a journey profile exists for that particular user, the system analyzes (305 a) data related to the predicted journey); and
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Chang in view of Boerner shows:
pushing the updated third micro-engagement to the customer mobile device (Chang Fig. 3; [0054], system can still uniquely identify and track users by their interactions and touch points with the system, either within one channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently. Chang: Fig. 3; [0054], system can still uniquely identify and track users by their interactions and touch points with the system, either within one channel or across multiple channels, either sequentially or concurrently; para [0046], If the system finds out that the user is accessing multiple services and/or channels, the system links (205) all identified services and/channels. Based on the identified services, the system offers (206) services to the user.).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection, necessitated by the amended claims.
Please see the Note and the 112 (a) rejection above. The scope of some of the claim limitations in independent claim 6 is unclear. The support applicants have provided for the limitations is still not clarifying to one of ordinary skill in the art how a particular step is performed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
NPL Reference:
Jan H. Kietzmann, Kristopher Hermkens, Ian P. McCarthy, Bruno S. Silvestre. Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media, Business Horizons. Volume 54, Issue 3, 2011. Pages 241-251, ISSN 0007-6813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.005. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007681311000061)
Abstract: Traditionally, consumers used the Internet to simply expend content: they read it, they watched it, and they used it to buy products and services. Increasingly, however, consumers are utilizing platforms—such as content sharing sites, blogs, social networking, and wikis—to create, modify, share, and discuss Internet content. This represents the social media phenomenon, which can now significantly impact a firm's reputation, sales, and even survival. Yet, many executives eschew or ignore this form of media because they don’t understand what it is, the various forms it can take, and how to engage with it and learn. In response, we present a framework that defines social media by using seven functional building blocks: identity, conversations, sharing, presence, relationships, reputation, and groups. As different social media activities are defined by the extent to which they focus on some or all of these blocks, we explain the implications that each block can have for how firms should engage with social media. To conclude, we present a number of recommendations regarding how firms should develop strategies
Foreign Reference:
(WO 2014144165 A1) Berner et al. The disclosure discusses how the method involves receiving (410) information about a user obtained at a point of interaction at computing devices. An individualized curriculum of engagement for the user is generated (412) based in portion on the information about the user. The individualized curriculum of engagement is delivered (414) to the user using the computing devices. The interactions are scheduled using computing devices. The content is selected from a content management source based on the point of interaction. The individualized curriculum of engagement is generated in portion on an identity of an entity.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 NANCY PRASAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3265. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM EST.
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, Patricia Munson can be reached on (571)270-5396. 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.
/N.N.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3624
/PATRICIA H MUNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3624
Prosecution Insights