DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to Application Serial 17/733,360. In response to the Examiner’s action mailed dated October 11, 2025, Applicant submitted arguments and amendments, mail dated January 2, 2026. Applicant amended claims 1, 10, and 19. Applicant cancelled claims 3, 4, 9, 12, 13, 18 and 23. Applicant added new Claims 27-30. Claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24- 30 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Applicant did not submit an additional information disclosure statement for consideration.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24- 30 are pending in this application. The claims 1, 10, and 19 are amended. The claims 3, 4, 9, 12, 13, 18, and 23 are cancelled. Claims 27-30 are new.
The Applicant’s amendments are not persuasive. The claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, see below.
Regarding the prior art rejection. Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24-30 the amendments are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 2, 2026 have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments are addressed below.
Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. 101
On page 11 of the Applicant’s 35 U.S.C. 101 arguments, the Applicant traverses claim(s) 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24-30 recite statutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. Applicant submits, the claims as amended which renders the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection moot.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s 35 U.S.C. 101 arguments. Examiner submits the claims are directed to a judicial exception, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, and the claims do not amount to significantly more.
The claims recite the abstract idea of determining a number of acquisitions of the game title, 292766-00003ranking titles relative to one another based on geographic location, number of acquisitions, sales, and consumption history, and thus, the claims recite a concept that is related to the abstract grouping of certain methods of organizing human activity – commercial or legal interactions. Thus, the claims are directed to a judicial exception.
Moreover, the claims recite ranked relative to one another based at least in part on the number of acquisitions within the geographic region in an order beginning with one or more content items associated with a highest level of sales and ending with one or more content items associated with a lowest level of sales which is abstract. The claims are related to the abstract grouping of mental concepts – evaluation and observation. Thus, the claims are directed to a judicial exception.
The claims are related to sales activities and marketing activities within a geographic region, which is abstract. The claims recite abstract concepts that are grouped into the abstract concept grouping of certain methods of organizing human activity and mental concepts. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception at Step 2A prong one.
At Step 2A prong two, the claims are evaluated for integration into a practical application. Here, the claims recite additional elements (e.g., a computing device, Internet Protocol (IP) address, a first carousel of icons, a second carousel of icons) which are computer elements.
The additional elements a computing device and Internet Protocol (IP) address are broadly reciting a computer that is conducting computer functions. The additional elements a first carousel of icons and a second carousel of icons are data objects, similar to button or hyperlink, or thumb that is used to represent additional elements using a computer.
The claims are applying a computer and data objects to conduct sales activities and advertising. The claims are 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 – See MPEP 2106.05(f).
The claims do not recite an improvement nor an integration into a practical application at step 2A prong two.
At Step 2B, as discussed above, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims when considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception. Regarding an improvement, a computer used to display computer elements that are displaying products (game titles) for sale is not novel. The claims do not amount to significantly more at Step 2B.
Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. 103
On pages 11- 14 of the Applicant’s 35 U.S.C. 103 arguments, the Applicant traverses the pending rejection. Applicant amended the claims. Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration in light of the amendments.
Examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s amendments and arguments. In the Office Action mail dated October 1, 2025, Examiner withdrew the prior art rejection for claims 2, 11, and 20. Additionally, in the Office Action mail dated October 1, 2025, Examiner withdrew the prior art rejection for claims 6, 15, and 22.
Examiner submits, the Applicant’s amendments to independent claims 1, 10, and 19, mail dated January 2, 2026, further narrow the claimed limitations. The independent claims are amended to include limitations similar to the previously allowed claims 2, 6, 11, 15, and 20. Therefore, independent claims 1, 10, and 19 having been amended with limitations that resulted in the claims 2, 6, 11, 15, and 20 being allowed, are allowable. Similar to previously allowed claims 2, 6, 15, and 20 the independent claims limitations require a specific ordered combined sequence that cannot be found in prior art and can only be found in the Applicant’s specification.
Any combination of the previously cited references and/or additional references(s) used to teach all the claim elements of the amended independent claims, would be the result of impermissible hindsight reconstruction. Accordingly, any combination of Struman, Mantha, Puri, and GameFAQ and/or any other additional reference(s) would be improper to teach the claimed invention. Any combination of Struman, Mantha, Puri, and Yin-Poole and/or any other additional reference(s) would be improper to teach the claimed invention The pending claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24-30 are allowable.
The claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24-30 are allowable. The pending 35 U.S.C.103 is withdrawn.
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 1,2, 5-8, & 27-30 are process.
Claims 10, 11, 14-17, & 26 are machine.
Claims 19-22,24-25 are manufacture.
Claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24- 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims 10 ( and similarly claims 1 and 19) recite, “ … storing an indication that each content item of a set of content items offered for acquisition is associated with a promotion in … storing sales information associated with respective content items; receiving, … associated with a geographical location, a request for information associated with one or more content items the promotion; determining … associated with the request; mapping … to a geographical location; determining a geographic region that includes the geographical location; updating … based on recent sales data at a predefined periodicity; determining, for the one or more content item seach content item of the set of content items, a number of acquisitions of each content item within the geographic region … , wherein the number of acquisitions within the geographic region represents an interest of one or more communities of users for the one or more content items each content item of the set of content items in the geographic region; associating each content item of the set of content items with a corresponding level of sales of multiple levels of sales based on the number of acquisitions; ranking the one or more content items each content item of the set of content items relative to one another based at least in part on the number of acquisitions within the geographic region; causing … to display information associated with the one or more content items the promotion in a manner that is based at least in part on the ranking, wherein the causing comprises: causing … to display … corresponding to a first content category of content items category of the one or more content items ranked relative to one another based at least in part on the number of acquisitions within the geographic region in an order beginning with one or more content items associated with a highest level of sales and ending with one or more content items associated with a lowest level of sales; causing … to display … corresponding to a second content category of content items category of the one or more content items ranked relative to one another based at least in part on the number of acquisitions-within the geographic region in an order beginning with one or more content items associated with a highest level of sales and ending with one or more content items associated with a lowest level of sales; and determining an order in which to cause … to display …based at least in part on a consumption history of the user and sales data associated with the first content category of content items and the second content category of content items.” Claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24- 27 in view of the claims limitations, are related to the abstract idea of, determining a number of acquisitions of the game title, 292766-00003ranking titles relative to one another based on geographic location, number of acquisitions, sales, and consumption history, and thus, the claims are recite an abstract grouping of certain methods of organizing human activity – commercial or legal interactions, and thus, the claims are directed to a judicial exception under the first prong of Step 2A prong one.
Moreover, the claims recite ranked relative to one another based at least in part on the number of acquisitions within the geographic region in an order beginning with one or more content items associated with a highest level of sales and ending with one or more content items associated with a lowest level of sales; and thus, the claims are related to the abstract grouping of mental concepts – evaluation and observation, and thus, the claims are directed to a judicial exception at Step 2A prong one.
This judicial exception is/are not integrated into a practical application under the second prong of Step 2A prong two. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of, “a database”, “a computing device”, “an Internet Protocol (IP) address , “the database”, “a first carousel of icons”, “ a second carousel of icons” in claim 1; “a database”, “from a computing device”, “an Internet Protocol (IP) address”, “a first carousel of icons”, “a second carousel of icons”, in claim 9; “One or more computer-readable media storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors to perform acts comprising”, “ a database”, “a computing device”, “an Internet Protocol (IP) address”, “a first carousel of icons”, “a second carousel of icons”, in claim 19; however, when viewed as an ordered combination, and pursuant to the broadest reasonable interpretation, each of the additional elements are computing elements recite 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 – see MPEP 2106.05 (f)
Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims also fails to recite any improvements to another technology or technical field, improvements to the functioning of the computer itself, or a technical field at Step 2A prong 2.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, the additional elements when considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more. See MPEP 2106.05 (f) – mere instructions to Apply an Exception.
At step 2B, it is MPEP 2106.05 (d) – Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information).
Dependent claims 2, 5-8 & 27-30 further narrow the abstract idea of independent claim 1. Dependent claims 10 -11, 14–17, & 20 further narrow the abstract idea of independent claim 10. Dependent claims 20-22, 24 further narrow the abstract idea of claim 19. The claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24- 30 are not patent eligible.
Since there are no limitations in these claims that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that these claims amount to significantly more than the exception itself, claims 1, 2, 5-8, 10-11, 14-17, 19-22, 24- 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kane (US 2015/0,066,648 A1) teaching geographic regions and sales.
Labato (2019 Netflix Nations p. 89) disclosing the infrastructure of streaming (including Xbox One Games Download p. 18, 42, Figure 1.2) illustrating Carousel interfaces /Catalog Netflix New Release, and Watch Again Carousels (p.25) disclosing distributed television uses filtering, aggregation and recommendation systems. Carousels (p. 26) leveraging video game technology and interaction.
Demetriou (US 2022/0174123 A1) disclosing location-based, single user-centric application, context awareness and targeted advertising.
White US (2014/0,289,753 A1) disclosing machine learning and purchasing online items.
Belle (US 9,639,848 B1) disclosing historical data describing product sales or other types of transactions, indicator scores may be calculated for users who have purchased, reviewed, or otherwise consumed products.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEA LABOGIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9149. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday, 8am-5pm.
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.
/THEA LABOGIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3624