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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed October 29, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
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 1-20 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. The limitation “a non-monetary attribute” in claim 1, lines 14-15; and claims 10 and 19, corresponding lines, is not supported by the original disclosure. Claims 2-9, 11-18, and 20 are further rejected due to their dependency.
Appropriate corrections/clarifications are required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glade-Wright (US 20200394693 A1) in view of Kiencke (US 20230139078 A1).
Regarding Claims 1, 10, and 19, Glade-Wright teaches A computer-implemented method for automatic balancing of a redirection of electronic sessions of different electronic devices …, the method comprising (Glade-Wright: Abstract): A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium for automatic balancing of a redirection of electronic sessions of different electronic devices …, the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium having computer-executable instructions stored thereon that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising (Glade-Wright: Abstract; Paragraph(s) 0022, 0151, 0153): A computer system for automatic balancing of a redirection of electronic sessions of different electronic devices …, the computer system comprising: a server having a processor, the server configured to be in communication with a customer device, the server having a processor configured to (Glade-Wright: Abstract; Paragraph(s) 0014, 0151, 0153):
receiving, by a processor, a first request to initiate a workflow for a product …, the first request being associated with a first electronic session of the electronic site; receiving, by the processor, after the first request, a second request to initiate the workflow …, the second request being associated with a second electronic session of the electronic site (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0023, 0037, 0151, 0153, 0049, 0066-0067, 0155, 0157 teach(es) The priority attention being contemplated herein is the act of serving a purchaser, that is, attending (i.e., workflow) to a request (i.e., first/second request) from a purchaser of an enterprise for a product offering (i.e., first/second session) being offered by that enterprise; the data gathered is processed in the system processor (i.e., by a processor) according to the software instructions for informing waiting purchasers with updated wait times; The system may further comprise data processing means programmed to request, on a prioritized basis (i.e., after the first request), an order in respect of the product offering from a purchaser in the alternative queue. That is, the purchaser in the alternative queue is prioritized above a purchaser in the first queue; implementing a method of prioritizing the processing of a purchaser's order, the system comprising: A website comprising an interface configured for receiving online orders placed for a product offering); instructing, by the processor, a server to execute a challenge protocol for the first electronic session and the second electronic session, the execution of the challenge protocol causing presentation of one or more responsive elements on respective electronic devices associated with the first electronic session and the second electronic session and receiving responses from the first electronic device and the second electronic device, the challenge protocol inquiring about a non-monetary attribute of the product (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0024-0026, 0038-0041, 0151, 0153, 0066-0071, 0146-0147, 0160, 0016 teach(es) there is provided a system (i.e., including server and electronic devices) for providing customer service to purchasers queuing to access a product offering, the system comprising: a. a first location (i.e., non-monetary attribute of the product) defining a start for a first queue joinable for receiving the product offering at a first price (i.e., responsive elements caused by the challenge protocol for the first session); b. a second location (i.e., non-monetary attribute of the product) defining a start of an alternative queue joinable for receiving said product offering at an alternative price differing from the first price (i.e., responsive elements caused by the challenge protocol for the second session); the system (i.e., including server and electronic devices) comprising a website, an order-receiving device, a digital order electronically generated for submission to the order-receiving device, an order-submitting purchaser device, an allocation device in communication with the order-receiving device, etc.; The purchaser may be offered the option of delaying his or her decision for a “snooze” period, before being offered it again. The priority queue may be temporarily established and its proposed temporary location (i.e., non-monetary attribute of the product) may be communicated by the purchaser choosing to use it, preferably after the purchaser has made the election; the vendor, operating a priority queue selection service according to the invention, sets a premium price for a premium queue that ensures purchasers electing that queue are attended to more promptly than those who decline to opt in; New prospective purchasers may be offered only the $12 queue or to choose between both premium queues; The user interface may be provided through a mobile electronic device—for example a smartphone. A user waiting in line at a nightclub may, through the user interface provided in his smartphone, purchase the ability to skip the line and enter the nightclub immediately; A purchaser, being a prospective patron and user of a smart phone handset, on entering the vicinity of the vendor's establishment, should receive an alert and see displayed on the device screen the notice to the effect that the establishment subscribes to the system of the invention and that the purchaser may choose to log on to the system portal via a given URL, or by downloading an app from an app store and then running it to gain access; The priority queue may be temporarily established and its proposed temporary location may be communicated by the purchaser choosing to use it, preferably after the purchaser has made the election); receiving, by the processor from the server, one or more indications corresponding to attributes of responses to the one or more responsive elements of the challenge protocol provided by the electronic devices; and responsive to the one or more indications, … (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0037-0041, 0027-0030, 0048-0049 teach(es) the customer service system is configured for receiving a value (i.e., indications corresponding to responses) for the second price (i.e., indications corresponding to responses to the one or more responsive elements of the challenge protocol) inputted by a purchaser), causing the second electronic session to be directed to the electronic page of the electronic site to proceed with the workflow prior to the first electronic session, and pausing the second electronic session (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0155, 0157, 0049, 0066-0067 teach(es) A purchaser, being a user of an internet communications enabled device, in this example a smartphone handset display screen, accessing the vendor's website, sees displayed notice to the effect that the website provider subscribes to the system of the invention and that the purchaser may choose to join a priority service delivery queue for making their purchase).
However, Glade-Wright does not explicitly teach …accessing an electronic site and requesting to be directed to a same electronic page, …by being directed to an electronic page of the electronic site, and …releasing, by the processor, the second electronic session to proceed with the workflow prior to releasing the first electronic session, the releasing comprising:.
Kiencke from same or similar field of endeavor teaches …accessing an electronic site and requesting to be directed to a same electronic page, …by being directed to an electronic page of the electronic site, and …responsive to the one or more indications, releasing, by the processor, the second electronic session to proceed with the workflow prior to releasing the first electronic session, the releasing comprising (Kiencke: Abstract; Paragraph(s) 0018-0021, 0033 teach(es) the network token system enables the client device to navigate among webpages within the web flow. For example, the network token system receives additional requests from the client device to navigate from one webpage to another within the web flow; the web flow includes a plurality of webpages linked together. For example, a web flow can include one or more interconnected webpages; a web flow can have multiple entry points and multiple exit points. Example entry points include an add to cart option, a reserve ticket option, a register for an account option, or simply a link to a particular website (or group of webpages)).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Glade-Wright to incorporate the teachings of Kiencke for releasing, by the processor, the second electronic session to proceed with the workflow prior to releasing the first electronic session, such that the second electronic session is directed to an electronic page of the electronic site to proceed with the workflow before the first electronic session.
There is motivation to combine Kiencke into Glade-Wright because a person of ordinary skill of the arts would find promising and apply Kiencke’s teaching of web flow including website and webpages (Kiencke: Paragraph(s) 0033).
Regarding Claims 2, 11, and 20, the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke teaches all the limitations of claims 1, 10, and 19 above; and Glade-Wright further teaches wherein the workflow is a checkout process (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0157 teach(es) If the user accepts the priority queue offer at the premium payable, the website software then guides the user through the ordering process, before progressing to the actual checkout step (i.e., a checkout process)).
Regarding Claims 3 and 12, the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 10 above; and Glade-Wright further teaches wherein the first request and the second request are assigned to a cohort of requests received by the processor in accordance with at least one attribute of the first request or the second request (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0023-0030 teach(es) ) there is provided a system for providing customer service to purchasers queuing to access a product offering, the system comprising: a. a first location defining a start for a first queue (i.e., a cohort of requests) joinable for receiving the product offering at a first price (i.e., attribute of the first request); b. a second location defining a start of an alternative queue (i.e., a cohort of requests) joinable for receiving said product offering at an alternative price differing from the first price (i.e., attribute of the second request)).
Regarding Claims 4 and 13, the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke teaches all the limitations of claims 3 and 12 above; and Glade-Wright further teaches …one or more electronic sessions within the cohort, and …one or more electronic sessions within a second cohort of requests (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0023-0030 teach(es) there is provided a system for providing customer service to purchasers queuing to access a product offering, the system comprising: a. a first location defining a start for a first queue (i.e., a cohort of requests) joinable for receiving the product offering at a first price; b. a second location defining a start of an alternative queue (i.e., a second cohort of requests) joinable for receiving said product offering at an alternative price differing from the first price).
However, the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke does not explicitly teach wherein the processor releases one or more electronic sessions within the requests before releasing one or more electronic sessions within a second requests.
Kiencke further teaches wherein the processor releases one or more electronic sessions within the requests before releasing one or more electronic sessions within a second requests (Kiencke: Abstract; Paragraph(s) 0018-0021, 0033, as stated above with respect to claim 1).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke to incorporate the teachings of Kiencke for wherein the processor releases one or more electronic sessions within the cohort of requests before releasing one or more electronic sessions within a second cohort of requests.
There is motivation to combine Kiencke into the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke because a person of ordinary skill of the arts would find promising and apply Kiencke’s teaching of web flow including website and webpages (Kiencke: Paragraph(s) 0033).
Regarding Claims 5 and 14, the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke teaches all the limitations of claims 3 and 12 above; and Glade-Wright further teaches …one or more electronic sessions within the cohort, and …one or more electronic sessions within a second cohort of requests (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0023-0030 teach(es) there is provided a system for providing customer service to purchasers queuing to access a product offering, the system comprising: a. a first location defining a start for a first queue (i.e., a cohort of requests) joinable for receiving the product offering at a first price; b. a second location defining a start of an alternative queue (i.e., a second cohort of requests) joinable for receiving said product offering at an alternative price differing from the first price).
However, the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke does not explicitly teach wherein the processor releases one or more electronic sessions within the requests in parallel with releasing one or more electronic session within a second requests.
Kiencke further teaches wherein the processor releases one or more electronic sessions within the requests in parallel with releasing one or more electronic session within a second requests (Kiencke: Abstract; Paragraph(s) 0102; Fig. 8 teach(es) the disclosed systems facilitate smooth, uninterrupted navigation through various webpages of a web flow (e.g., from an entry point to an exit point) by assigning network access tokens to client devices according to network capacity of servers hosting the web flow, or the web flow for the client devices with network access tokens while preventing other client devices from accessing the web flow; the acts in Fig. 8 (i.e., providing accesses to a first/second client devices) may be repeated or performed in parallel with one another or in parallel with different instances of the same or other similar acts (i.e., releases one or more sessions within the requests in parallel with releasing one or more session within a second requests)).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke to incorporate the teachings of Kiencke for wherein the processor releases one or more electronic sessions within the requests in parallel with releasing one or more electronic session within a second requests.
There is motivation to combine Kiencke into the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke because a person of ordinary skill in the arts may appreciate Kiencke’s teaching of parallel processing of two or more independent or related acts or sessions for achieving the goal of the invention (Kiencke: Paragraph(s) 0102).
Regarding Claims 6 and 15, the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 10 above; and Glade-Wright further teaches wherein the processor instructs the server to execute the challenge protocol responsive to a number of requests received satisfying a threshold (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0144, 0151, 0154, 0040-0041 teach(es) the vendor's device prompts the vendor to input a price for a place in an alternative, premium queue, based on data gathered according to prearranged parameters and determination criteria, including micro-factors such as the service time and number of patrons already queuing, as well as a maximum queue length allowable (i.e., responsive to a number of requests received satisfying a threshold); the system is configured for receiving an input from the vendor, responsive to the second price value inputted by the purchaser (i.e., to execute the challenge protocol); the customer service system comprises means for inputting a negative value for the first price).
Regarding Claims 7 and 16, the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 10 above; and Glade-Wright further teaches wherein the processor instructs the server to execute the challenge protocol responsive to the workflow being associated with a product having an attribute that satisfies a threshold (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0154, 0040-0041 teach(es) the vendor's device prompts the vendor to input a price for a place in a premium queue for the services being offered, based on data gathered according to prearranged parameters, including an additional factor such as inventory level or resource capacity (i.e., associated with a product having an attribute that satisfies a threshold) for rendering a service being ordered online; the system is configured for receiving an input from the vendor, responsive to the second price value inputted by the purchaser (i.e., to execute the challenge protocol responsive to the workflow); the customer service system comprises means for inputting a negative value for the first price).
Regarding Claims 8 and 17, the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 10 above; and Glade-Wright further teaches wherein the processor instructs the server to execute the challenge protocol responsive to receiving a request from a merchant computing device associated with the workflow (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0144-0145, 0151, 0154, 0023-0030 teach(es) On running the software on board, or via accessing the system provider's portal, the vendor's device (i.e., merchant computing device) prompts the vendor to input a price (i.e., a request) for a place in an alternative, premium queue for the services being offered).
Regarding Claims 9 and 18, the combination of Glade-Wright and Kiencke teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 10 above; and Glade-Wright further teaches wherein a characteristic of the challenge protocol is based on a location associated with the first electronic session or the second electronic session or a customer profile associated with the first electronic session or the second electronic session (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0023-0030, 0043-0045 teach(es) there is provided a system for providing customer service to purchasers queuing to access a product offering, the system comprising: a. a first location (i.e., a location associated with the first session; a characteristic of the challenge protocol) defining a start for a first queue joinable for receiving the product offering at a first price (i.e., an attribute of a product); b. a second location (i.e., a location associated with the second session; a characteristic of the challenge protocol) defining a start of an alternative queue joinable for receiving said product offering at an alternative price differing from the first price (i.e., an attribute of a product); the first queue location is at a customer service area (i.e., a customer profile associated with the first session or the second session) defined by the vendor).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 29, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 that “The cited references fail to teach the claimed element involving the processor receiving indications from a server that correspond to non- monetary attributes of responses to a challenge protocol presented to electronic devices,” examiner respectfully argues that Glade-Wright teaches the priority queue, which is processed according to proposed temporary location, like on entering the vicinity of the vendor's establishment, which is non-monetary (Glade-Wright: Paragraph(s) 0146-0147).
It is recommended for the applicant to amend the claims further with technical details and contexts, as discussed in the Examiner-initiated Interview on 2/2/2026.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CLAY LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3309. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5pm 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, Neha Patel can be reached on (571)270-1492. 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.
/CLAY C LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699