DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office Action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/23/2026 has been entered.
3. Applicant's amendment and response received 02/23/2026, responding to the 10/24/2025 Office Action provided in the rejections of claims 1-20, wherein at least independent claims 1, 11 and 16 have been amended. Claims 1, 2, 4-12 and 14-20 remain pending in the application; which has been fully considered by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to newly amended independent claims 1, 11 and 16 and claims 2, 4-10, 12, 14,15 and 17-20 on pages 8-14 of the response have been fully considered but they are not persuasive and are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection- see Zhang (Art of record) and Sayers (Art newly made of record) as applied below, as they further teach such use.
Applicant contends with respect to claims 1, 11 and 16 (p. 8, last para. – p. 11, 2nd para.) that “the cited references of record fail to disclose, teach, or suggest at least ‘differing visual appearances of components of the application include differing combinations of textual content and graphical content’ and ‘updating an engagement metric associated with the first presentation version’ as recited in amended independent claim 1, and similarly recited in independent claims 11 and 16” (- p. 9, 2nd & 3rd para., p. 11, 1st para.). Examiner respectfully disagrees; in regards to the teaching of “‘differing visual appearances of components of the application include differing combinations of textual content and graphical content”, as noted below, Zhang teaches such use at/on: (Fig. 4a, Fig. 4b and Fig. 4c), (column 5, lines 24-41), “the application may be provided to the user via an application store that the user interacts with to receive applications. As an illustrative example, as shown in FIG. 4a… the arrangement may identify the user as part of a primary user group and provide the user with a standard (i.e., non-test) version of the application 430. Subsequently, the user may select the standard version of the application 430 and the standard application may be downloaded and installed on the mobile device for the user to use in an intended manner” and (column 6, lines 31-44), “as an illustrative example, as shown in FIG. 4b , a user may access an application store 401 using a mobile device by selecting an application store launch button accessible via the mobile device… the arrangement may access user history and determine that the user has modified 12% of the default user settings on her mobile device and may determine that the user is part of a secondary group of users based on the 12% modification and a 10% threshold modification value. Accordingly, based on this determination, the arrangement may provide the user with a test version of the application 440”. Note the different graphical content and text content in Fig. 41, 4b, and 4c that are shown to the identified user. In regards to ‘updating an engagement metric associated with the first presentation version, art newly made of record, Sayers teaches such use at/on: (p. 1, [0013]), “applications for download and/or purchase in an application content catalog environment may be accompanied by a metric to assist users in selecting applications. Metrics can include user reviews/ratings, number of downloads, related applications downloaded by other users, etc.” and (p. 2, [0023]), “the metrics may be computed per-user, per-device, or aggregated using additional information, for example per-household, or per-company”.
Applicant contends with respect to claims 1, 11 and 16 (p. 11, 3rd para. – p. 12, 2nd para.) that “the Examiner's stated motivation for combining Ayed is ‘to provide Zhang with the ability to robustly update a user's device.’ This motivation has no connection to tracking engagement metrics or A/B testing analytics. The Examiner has not provided any rationale for why one of ordinary skill would look to Ayed's access control system to add performance tracking functionality to Zhang's app distribution system” (p. 12, 2nd para.). Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that Ayed is not relied upon, rather art newly made of record, Sayers is relied upon for such use.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this
title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
6. Claims 1, 2, 4-7, 10-12 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al., U.S. Patent No. 9,.645,914 (hereinafter Zhang) in view of Balaji et al., U.S. 20020143523 (hereinafter Balaji) in view of Cantrell, U.S. Patent No. 8,832,681 in view of Sayers et al., US 2014/0337304 (hereinafter Sayers).
In regards to claim 1, Zhang teaches:
A method, comprising: detecting first access to an application store, wherein the first access is associated with a first user identifier (Fig. 3, 300 Access an online application store and request an application) and (column 4, line 65 – column 5, line 7, see a first user may access an online application store and request an application by any applicable method… The arrangement may identify the user and/or user account as a being a part of a primary group that receives a standard version of the requested application).
presenting a first representation of an application in the application store, wherein the first representation of the application corresponds to a first presentation version of the application selected for the first user identifier (Fig. 3, 310, Provide a first version of an application to a first user via on online application market) and (column 5, lines 28-26, see a standard version of an application may be provided to a user that is identified as part of a primary group. The standard application may be provided to the user via an application store that the user interacts with to receive applications).
among a plurality of presentation versions associated with differing visual appearances of components of the application (column 2, lines 16-21, see FIG. 4a shows an example illustration of providing a standard version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter. FIG. 4b shows an example illustration of providing a test version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter).
in response to receiving a download request for the application: causing a download package for the application to be downloaded in a download package (column 5, lines 35-41, see the arrangement may identify the user as part of a primary user group and provide the user with a standard (i.e., non-test) version of the application 430. Subsequently, the user may select the standard version of the application 430 and the standard application may be downloaded and installed on the mobile device for the user to use in an intended manner).
the application is configured to be presented, when launched, using the first presentation version in accordance with the application being launched in association with the first user identifier (column 5, lines 35-41, see the arrangement may identify the user as part of a primary user group and provide the user with a standard (i.e., non-test) version of the application 430. Subsequently, the user may select the standard version of the application 430 and the standard application may be downloaded and installed on the mobile device for the user to use in an intended manner).
the differing visual appearances of components of the application include differing combinations of textual content and graphical content (Fig. 4a, Fig. 4b and Fig. 4c, 430 and 440 all has different text and graphics), (column 5, lines 24-41, see the standard application may be provided to the user via an application store that the user interacts with to receive applications. As an illustrative example, as shown in FIG. 4a… the arrangement may identify the user as part of a primary user group and provide the user with a standard (i.e., non-test) version of the application 430. Subsequently, the user may select the standard version of the application 430 and the standard application may be downloaded and installed on the mobile device for the user to use in an intended manner) and (column 6, lines 31-44, see as an illustrative example, as shown in FIG. 4b , a user may access an application store 401 using a mobile device by selecting an application store launch button accessible via the mobile device… the arrangement may access user history and determine that the user has modified 12% of the default user settings on her mobile device and may determine that the user is part of a secondary group of users based on the 12% modification and a 10% threshold modification value. Accordingly, based on this determination, the arrangement may provide the user with a test version of the application 440). Note the different graphical content and text content in Fig. 41, 4b, and 4c that are shown to the identified user.
Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
in response to detecting an input corresponding to a selection of the first representation of the application causing an information page for the application to be displayed in the application store, wherein the information page comports with the first presentation version of the application.
However, Balaji teaches such use: (p. 5, claim 7, see said file, said message catalog, and said localized string retrieval function are stored as a single application), (p. 1, [0006], see the present invention provides a system that includes a file having text for displaying in multiple languages, a string identifier for uniquely identifying each text in the file, a language identifier for uniquely identifying each language available for the file, a localized string for displaying text defined by the string identifier and the language identifier, a message catalog for storing a plurality of the localized strings, and a localized string retrieval function for retrieving the localized string according to the string identifier and the language identifier from the message catalog), : (p. 4, [0047], see however, if the device supports localization (block 84), it is determined whether there is a language identifier that is specified by the user (block 88). In the web-based implementation, users can override their default language identifier) and (p. 3, [0037], see the localized string 36 defined by the language identifier “English” and the string identifier “1” is “welcome,” which is displayed to the user. Similarly, a localized string of “bienvenue” will be displayed to users for string identifier “1” and the language identifier “French”) (emphasis added).
Zhang and Balaji are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang and Balaji before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang to include the teachings of Balaji, as a system for providing an application in multiple languages, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on app store, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to provide a very scalable solution in a memory efficient manner, as suggested by Balaji (p. 1, [0006], p. 4, [0049]).
Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
the download package comprises data for each of the plurality of presentation versions.
However, Cantrell teaches such use: (column 6, lines 5-9, see the software application can be part of a package including multiple program versions for execution on a variety of OS platforms, device types, and/or device hardware configurations) and (column 3, lines 11-28, see the software application 108 b, installed upon the handheld computing device 104, could similarly be optimized for running within the hardware and/or software capabilities of the handheld computing device 104. For example, the graphical user interface (GUI) of the software application 108 b could be optimized for presentation within a small screen area such as the user interface of the handheld computing device 104. The software application version 108 a installed upon the desktop computing device 102 and the software application version 108 b installed upon the handheld computing device 104 can belong to a software application package. The software application package can include multiple versions of a software program, each version created to run upon a different operating system (OS) platform, computing device type, and/or CPU) (emphasis added).
Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang, to include the teachings of Cantrell, as a system for bundled mobile application pack, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on an app store updating, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to download a software package, as suggested by Cantrell (column 6, lines 4-9, column 12, lines 7-11).
Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
updating an engagement metric associated with the first presentation version in accordance with receiving the download request for the application.
However, Sayers teaches such use: (p. 1, [0013], see applications for download and/or purchase in an application content catalog environment may be accompanied by a metric to assist users in selecting applications. Metrics can include user reviews/ratings, number of downloads, related applications downloaded by other users, etc.) and (p. 2, [0023], see the metrics may be computed per-user, per-device, or aggregated using additional information, for example per-household, or per-company).
Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell in particular Zhang to include the teachings of Sayers, as a system for application metrics, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on program store for updating devices, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to present metrics to allow the user to make an informed decisions as suggested by Sayers (p. 1, [0013], p. 7, [0060]).
In regards to claim 2, Zhang teaches:
the first user identifier is at least one of a device identifier and a user account identifier (column 5, lines 4-6, see the arrangement may identify the user and/or user account as a being a part of a primary group that receives a standard version of the requested application).
In regards to claim 4, Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
the updated engagement metric is provided in a user interface for presentation to a developer associated with the application.
However, Sayers teaches such use: (p. 1, [0013], see applications for download and/or purchase in an application content catalog environment may be accompanied by a metric to assist users in selecting applications. Metrics can include user reviews/ratings, number of downloads, related applications downloaded by other users, etc.) and (p. 2, [0023], see the metrics may be computed per-user, per-device, or aggregated using additional information, for example per-household, or per-company).
Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell in particular Zhang to include the teachings of Sayers, as a system for application metrics, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on program store for updating devices, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to present metrics to allow the user to make an informed decisions as suggested by Sayers (p. 1, [0013], p. 7, [0060]).
In regards to claim 5, Zhang teaches:
access to the app store associated with a second user identifier causes a representation of the application in the application store to be presented in accordance with a second presentation version of the plurality of presentation versions presentation version of the plurality of presentation versions (Abstract, see Systems and techniques are disclosed for providing a standard version of an application to a first user, receiving a request for the application from a second user, identifying the second user as a test user, and providing a second version of the application to the second user based on the identification. Interaction events with the second version of the application, by the second user, may be reported and used by the arrangement to modify the second version of the application) and (column 2, lines 19-21, see FIG. 4b shows an example illustration of providing a test version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter).
In regards to claim 6, Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
a download package associated with the first presentation version is the same as a download package associated with the second presentation version.
However, Cantrell teaches such use: (column 6, lines 4-9, see FIG. 2 shows a flowchart of an example technique 200 for launching on, or installing onto, a second device a version of a software application which is running on a first device. The software application can be part of a package including multiple program versions for execution on a variety of OS platforms, device types, and/or device hardware configurations) and (column 3, lines 11-28, see the software application 108 b, installed upon the handheld computing device 104, could similarly be optimized for running within the hardware and/or software capabilities of the handheld computing device 104. For example, the graphical user interface (GUI) of the software application 108 b could be optimized for presentation within a small screen area such as the user interface of the handheld computing device 104. The software application version 108 a installed upon the desktop computing device 102 and the software application version 108 b installed upon the handheld computing device 104 can belong to a software application package. The software application package can include multiple versions of a software program, each version created to run upon a different operating system (OS) platform, computing device type, and/or CPU) (emphasis added).
Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang, to include the teachings of Cantrell, as a system for bundled mobile application pack, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on an app store updating, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to download a software package, as suggested by Cantrell (column 6, lines 4-9, column 12, lines 7-11).
In regards to claim 7, Zhang teaches:
upon launching the application by the second user identifier, the application is presented in accordance with the second presentation version (Abstract, see Systems and techniques are disclosed for providing a standard version of an application to a first user, receiving a request for the application from a second user, identifying the second user as a test user, and providing a second version of the application to the second user based on the identification. Interaction events with the second version of the application, by the second user, may be reported and used by the arrangement to modify the second version of the application) and (column 2, lines 19-21, see FIG. 4b shows an example illustration of providing a test version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter).
In regards to claim 10, Zhang teaches:
the first presentation version is selected based on a predefined association between the user identifier and the first presentation version (Fig. 3, 310, Provide a first version of an application to a first user via on online application market) and (column 5, lines 28-26, see a standard version of an application may be provided to a user that is identified as part of a primary group. The standard application may be provided to the user via an application store that the user interacts with to receive applications.)
In regards to claim 11, Zhang teaches:
A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising computer readable code executable by one or more processors to: detect first access to an app store, wherein the first access is associated with a first user identifier (Fig. 3, 300 Access an online application store and request an application) and (column 4, line 65 – column 5, line 7, see a first user may access an online application store and request an application by any applicable method… The arrangement may identify the user and/or user account as a being a part of a primary group that receives a standard version of the requested application).
presenting a first representation of an application in the application store, wherein the first representation of the application corresponds to a first presentation version of the app selected for the first user identifier (Fig. 3, 310, Provide a first version of an application to a first user via on online application market) and (column 5, lines 28-26, see a standard version of an application may be provided to a user that is identified as part of a primary group. The standard application may be provided to the user via an application store that the user interacts with to receive applications).
among a plurality of presentation versions associated with differing visual appearances of components of the app (column 2, lines 16-21, see FIG. 4a shows an example illustration of providing a standard version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter. FIG. 4b shows an example illustration of providing a test version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter).
in response to receiving a download request for the app: causing a download package for the app to be downloaded in a download package (column 5, lines 35-41, see the arrangement may identify the user as part of a primary user group and provide the user with a standard (i.e., non-test) version of the application 430. Subsequently, the user may select the standard version of the application 430 and the standard application may be downloaded and installed on the mobile device for the user to use in an intended manner).
the app is configured to be presented, when launched, using the first presentation version in accordance with the app being launched in association with the first user identifier (column 5, lines 35-41, see the arrangement may identify the user as part of a primary user group and provide the user with a standard (i.e., non-test) version of the application 430. Subsequently, the user may select the standard version of the application 430 and the standard application may be downloaded and installed on the mobile device for the user to use in an intended manner).
the differing visual appearances of components of the application include differing combinations of textual content and graphical content (Fig. 4a, Fig. 4b and Fig. 4c, 430 and 440 all has different text and graphics), (column 5, lines 24-41, see the standard application may be provided to the user via an application store that the user interacts with to receive applications. As an illustrative example, as shown in FIG. 4a… the arrangement may identify the user as part of a primary user group and provide the user with a standard (i.e., non-test) version of the application 430. Subsequently, the user may select the standard version of the application 430 and the standard application may be downloaded and installed on the mobile device for the user to use in an intended manner) and (column 6, lines 31-44, see as an illustrative example, as shown in FIG. 4b , a user may access an application store 401 using a mobile device by selecting an application store launch button accessible via the mobile device… the arrangement may access user history and determine that the user has modified 12% of the default user settings on her mobile device and may determine that the user is part of a secondary group of users based on the 12% modification and a 10% threshold modification value. Accordingly, based on this determination, the arrangement may provide the user with a test version of the application 440). Note the different graphical content and text content in Fig. 41, 4b, and 4c that are shown to the identified user.
Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
in response to detecting an input corresponding to a selection of the first representation of the app cause an information page for the application to be displayed in the application store wherein the information page comports with the first presentation version of the application.
However, Balaji teaches such use: (p. 5, claim 7, see said file, said message catalog, and said localized string retrieval function are stored as a single application), (p. 1, [0006], see the present invention provides a system that includes a file having text for displaying in multiple languages, a string identifier for uniquely identifying each text in the file, a language identifier for uniquely identifying each language available for the file, a localized string for displaying text defined by the string identifier and the language identifier, a message catalog for storing a plurality of the localized strings, and a localized string retrieval function for retrieving the localized string according to the string identifier and the language identifier from the message catalog), : (p. 4, [0047], see however, if the device supports localization (block 84), it is determined whether there is a language identifier that is specified by the user (block 88). In the web-based implementation, users can override their default language identifier) and (p. 3, [0037], see the localized string 36 defined by the language identifier “English” and the string identifier “1” is “welcome,” which is displayed to the user. Similarly, a localized string of “bienvenue” will be displayed to users for string identifier “1” and the language identifier “French”) (emphasis added).
Zhang and Balaji are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang and Balaji before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang to include the teachings of Balaji, as a system for providing an application in multiple languages, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on app store, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to provide a very scalable solution in a memory efficient manner, as suggested by Balaji (p. 1, [0006], p. 4, [0049]).
Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
the download package comprises data for each of the plurality of presentation versions.
However, Cantrell teaches such use: (column 6, lines 5-9, see the software application can be part of a package including multiple program versions for execution on a variety of OS platforms, device types, and/or device hardware configurations) and (column 3, lines 11-28, see the software application 108 b, installed upon the handheld computing device 104, could similarly be optimized for running within the hardware and/or software capabilities of the handheld computing device 104. For example, the graphical user interface (GUI) of the software application 108 b could be optimized for presentation within a small screen area such as the user interface of the handheld computing device 104. The software application version 108 a installed upon the desktop computing device 102 and the software application version 108 b installed upon the handheld computing device 104 can belong to a software application package. The software application package can include multiple versions of a software program, each version created to run upon a different operating system (OS) platform, computing device type, and/or CPU) (emphasis added).
Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang, to include the teachings of Cantrell, as a system for bundled mobile application pack, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on an app store updating, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to download a software package, as suggested by Cantrell (column 6, lines 4-9, column 12, lines 7-11).
Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
updating an engagement metric associated with the first presentation version in accordance with receiving the download request for the application.
However, Sayers teaches such use: (p. 1, [0013], see applications for download and/or purchase in an application content catalog environment may be accompanied by a metric to assist users in selecting applications. Metrics can include user reviews/ratings, number of downloads, related applications downloaded by other users, etc.) and (p. 2, [0023], see the metrics may be computed per-user, per-device, or aggregated using additional information, for example per-household, or per-company).
Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell in particular Zhang to include the teachings of Sayers, as a system for application metrics, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on program store for updating devices, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to present metrics to allow the user to make an informed decisions as suggested by Sayers (p. 1, [0013], p. 7, [0060]).
In regards to claim 12, Zhang teaches:
the first user identifier is at least one of a device identifier and a user account identifier (column 5, lines 4-6, see the arrangement may identify the user and/or user account as a being a part of a primary group that receives a standard version of the requested application).
In regards to claim 14, Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
the updated engagement metric is provided in a user interface for presentation to a developer associated with the application.
However, Sayers teaches such use: (p. 1, [0013], see applications for download and/or purchase in an application content catalog environment may be accompanied by a metric to assist users in selecting applications. Metrics can include user reviews/ratings, number of downloads, related applications downloaded by other users, etc.) and (p. 2, [0023], see the metrics may be computed per-user, per-device, or aggregated using additional information, for example per-household, or per-company).
Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell in particular Zhang to include the teachings of Sayers, as a system for application metrics, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on program store for updating devices, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to present metrics to allow the user to make an informed decisions as suggested by Sayers (p. 1, [0013], p. 7, [0060]).
In regards to claim 15, Zhang teaches:
access to the application store associated with a second user identifier causes a representation of the application in the application store to be presented in accordance with a second presentation version of the plurality of presentation versions presentation version of the plurality of presentation versions (Abstract, see Systems and techniques are disclosed for providing a standard version of an application to a first user, receiving a request for the application from a second user, identifying the second user as a test user, and providing a second version of the application to the second user based on the identification. Interaction events with the second version of the application, by the second user, may be reported and used by the arrangement to modify the second version of the application) and (column 2, lines 19-21, see FIG. 4b shows an example illustration of providing a test version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter).
In regards to claim 16, Zhang teaches:
A method comprising: detecting a first access to an application store, wherein the first access is associated with a first user identifier (Fig. 3, 300 Access an online application store and request an application) and (column 4, line 65 – column 5, line 7, see a first user may access an online application store and request an application by any applicable method… The arrangement may identify the user and/or user account as a being a part of a primary group that receives a standard version of the requested application).
presenting a first representation of an application in the application store, wherein the first representation of the application corresponds to a first presentation version of the application selected for the first user identifier (Fig. 3, 310, Provide a first version of an application to a first user via on online application market) and (column 5, lines 28-26, see a standard version of an application may be provided to a user that is identified as part of a primary group. The standard application may be provided to the user via an application store that the user interacts with to receive applications.)
among a plurality of presentation versions associated with differing visual appearances of components of the application (column 2, lines 16-21, see FIG. 4a shows an example illustration of providing a standard version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter. FIG. 4b shows an example illustration of providing a test version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter).
in response to receiving a download request for the application: causing a download package for the app to be downloaded in a download package (column 5, lines 35-41, see the arrangement may identify the user as part of a primary user group and provide the user with a standard (i.e., non-test) version of the application 430. Subsequently, the user may select the standard version of the application 430 and the standard application may be downloaded and installed on the mobile device for the user to use in an intended manner).
the application is configured to be presented, when launched, using the first presentation version in accordance with the app being launched in association with the first user identifier (column 5, lines 35-41, see the arrangement may identify the user as part of a primary user group and provide the user with a standard (i.e., non-test) version of the application 430. Subsequently, the user may select the standard version of the application 430 and the standard application may be downloaded and installed on the mobile device for the user to use in an intended manner).
the differing visual appearances of components of the application include differing combinations of textual content and graphical content (Fig. 4a, Fig. 4b and Fig. 4c, 430 and 440 all has different text and graphics), (column 5, lines 24-41, see the standard application may be provided to the user via an application store that the user interacts with to receive applications. As an illustrative example, as shown in FIG. 4a… the arrangement may identify the user as part of a primary user group and provide the user with a standard (i.e., non-test) version of the application 430. Subsequently, the user may select the standard version of the application 430 and the standard application may be downloaded and installed on the mobile device for the user to use in an intended manner) and (column 6, lines 31-44, see as an illustrative example, as shown in FIG. 4b , a user may access an application store 401 using a mobile device by selecting an application store launch button accessible via the mobile device… the arrangement may access user history and determine that the user has modified 12% of the default user settings on her mobile device and may determine that the user is part of a secondary group of users based on the 12% modification and a 10% threshold modification value. Accordingly, based on this determination, the arrangement may provide the user with a test version of the application 440). Note the different graphical content and text content in Fig. 41, 4b, and 4c that are shown to the identified user.
Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
causing an information page for the application to be displayed in the application store, wherein the information page comports with the first presentation version of the application.
However, Balaji teaches such use: (p. 5, claim 7, see said file, said message catalog, and said localized string retrieval function are stored as a single application), (p. 1, [0006], see the present invention provides a system that includes a file having text for displaying in multiple languages, a string identifier for uniquely identifying each text in the file, a language identifier for uniquely identifying each language available for the file, a localized string for displaying text defined by the string identifier and the language identifier, a message catalog for storing a plurality of the localized strings, and a localized string retrieval function for retrieving the localized string according to the string identifier and the language identifier from the message catalog), : (p. 4, [0047], see however, if the device supports localization (block 84), it is determined whether there is a language identifier that is specified by the user (block 88). In the web-based implementation, users can override their default language identifier) and (p. 3, [0037], see the localized string 36 defined by the language identifier “English” and the string identifier “1” is “welcome,” which is displayed to the user. Similarly, a localized string of “bienvenue” will be displayed to users for string identifier “1” and the language identifier “French”) (emphasis added).
Zhang and Balaji are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang and Balaji before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang to include the teachings of Balaji, as a system for providing an application in multiple languages, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on app store, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to provide a very scalable solution in a memory efficient manner, as suggested by Balaji (p. 1, [0006], p. 4, [0049]).
Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
the download package comprises data for each of the plurality of presentation versions.
However, Cantrell teaches such use: (column 6, lines 5-9, see the software application can be part of a package including multiple program versions for execution on a variety of OS platforms, device types, and/or device hardware configurations) and (column 3, lines 11-28, see the software application 108 b, installed upon the handheld computing device 104, could similarly be optimized for running within the hardware and/or software capabilities of the handheld computing device 104. For example, the graphical user interface (GUI) of the software application 108 b could be optimized for presentation within a small screen area such as the user interface of the handheld computing device 104. The software application version 108 a installed upon the desktop computing device 102 and the software application version 108 b installed upon the handheld computing device 104 can belong to a software application package. The software application package can include multiple versions of a software program, each version created to run upon a different operating system (OS) platform, computing device type, and/or CPU) (emphasis added).
Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang, to include the teachings of Cantrell, as a system for bundled mobile application pack, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on an app store updating, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to download a software package, as suggested by Cantrell (column 6, lines 4-9, column 12, lines 7-11).
Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
updating an engagement metric associated with the first presentation version in accordance with receiving the download request for the application.
However, Sayers teaches such use: (p. 1, [0013], see applications for download and/or purchase in an application content catalog environment may be accompanied by a metric to assist users in selecting applications. Metrics can include user reviews/ratings, number of downloads, related applications downloaded by other users, etc.) and (p. 2, [0023], see the metrics may be computed per-user, per-device, or aggregated using additional information, for example per-household, or per-company).
Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell in particular Zhang to include the teachings of Sayers, as a system for application metrics, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on program store for updating devices, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to present metrics to allow the user to make an informed decisions as suggested by Sayers (p. 1, [0013], p. 7, [0060]).
In regards to claim 17, Zhang teaches:
the second user interaction is a second trigger event to launch an information page for the first application within the application store; identifying one or more second contextual parameters associated with the second user interaction; and causing a second presentation version of the information page for the first application to be presented at the second device in accordance with the one or more second contextual parameters (Abstract, see Systems and techniques are disclosed for providing a standard version of an application to a first user, receiving a request for the application from a second user, identifying the second user as a test user, and providing a second version of the application to the second user based on the identification. Interaction events with the second version of the application, by the second user, may be reported and used by the arrangement to modify the second version of the application) and (column 2, lines 19-21, see FIG. 4b shows an example illustration of providing a test version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter).
Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
detecting a second user interaction with a second device.
However, Cantrell teaches such use: (column 6, lines 58-63, see the first computing device uploads the application to the second computing device based upon a request for data from the second computing device. For example, the second computing device could request the currently running application(s) from the first computing device).
Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang, to include the teachings of Cantrell, as a system for bundled mobile application pack, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on an app store updating, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to download a software package, as suggested by Cantrell (column 6, lines 4-9, column 12, lines 7-11).
In regards to claim 18, Zhang teaches:
the first presentation version and the second presentation version comprise different variations of at least one selected from a group consisting of an application preview presentation, a screenshot presentation, and a text presentation (column 2, lines 16-19, see FIG. 4a shows an example illustration of providing a standard version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter. FIG. 4b shows an example illustration of providing a test version of an application to a user, according to an implementation of the disclosed subject matter).
In regards to claim 19, Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
receiving a download request for the first application from the second presentation version of the information page by the second device; and providing the first application for download to the second device in accordance with the download request.
However, Cantrell teaches such use: (column 6, lines 58-63, see the first computing device uploads the application to the second computing device based upon a request for data from the second computing device. For example, the second computing device could request the currently running application(s) from the first computing device), (column 6, lines 50-54, see in further implementations, application version can be retrieved from a server (e.g., 308) The selected version is optionally installed on the second computing device (step 208)) and (column 6, lines 4-9, see FIG. 2 shows a flowchart of an example technique 200 for launching on, or installing onto, a second device a version of a software application which is running on a first device. The software application can be part of a package including multiple program versions for execution on a variety of OS platforms, device types, and/or device hardware configurations).
Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang, to include the teachings of Cantrell, as a system for bundled mobile application pack, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on an app store updating, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to download a software package, as suggested by Cantrell (column 6, lines 4-9, column 12, lines 7-11).
In regards to claim 20, Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
a download package associated with the first download request is the same as a download package associated with the second download request.
However, Cantrell teaches such use: (column 6, lines 4-9, see FIG. 2 shows a flowchart of an example technique 200 for launching on, or installing onto, a second device a version of a software application which is running on a first device. The software application can be part of a package including multiple program versions for execution on a variety of OS platforms, device types, and/or device hardware configurations) and (column 3, lines 11-28, see the software application 108 b, installed upon the handheld computing device 104, could similarly be optimized for running within the hardware and/or software capabilities of the handheld computing device 104. For example, the graphical user interface (GUI) of the software application 108 b could be optimized for presentation within a small screen area such as the user interface of the handheld computing device 104. The software application version 108 a installed upon the desktop computing device 102 and the software application version 108 b installed upon the handheld computing device 104 can belong to a software application package. The software application package can include multiple versions of a software program, each version created to run upon a different operating system (OS) platform, computing device type, and/or CPU) (emphasis added).
Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji and Cantrell before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang and Balaji, in particular Zhang, to include the teachings of Cantrell, as a system for bundled mobile application pack, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on an app store updating, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to download a software package, as suggested by Cantrell (column 6, lines 4-9, column 12, lines 7-11).
7. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Balaji in view of Cantrell in view of Sayers in view of Vegge, Norway Patent No. NO 323907B1.
In regards to claim 1, the rejections above are incorporated respectively.
In regards to claim 8, Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
in accordance with detection of an updated default presentation version among the plurality of presentation versions, cause the representation of the application to be presented.
However, Vegge teaches such use: (p. 10, line 7, see procedures for upgrading servers and user profiles with new standard UI versions).
Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell, Sayers and Vegge are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell, Sayers and Vegge before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers, in particular Zhang to include the teachings of Vegge, as a system for personal mobile internet, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on an app store updating, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to update a user interface, as suggested by Vegge (p. 10, line 7, p. 6, para. 13).
8. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Balaji in view of Cantrell in view of Sayers in view of Brannon et al., Patent No. 11636171 (hereinafter Brannon).
In regards to claim 1, the rejections above are incorporated respectively.
In regards to claim 9, Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell and Sayers, in particular Zhang doesn’t explicitly teach:
the first presentation version is selected using a randomized selection process.
However, Brannon teaches such use: (column 79, lines 65-67, see in various embodiments, the system is configured to select the first interface to display to the user randomly from the group of interfaces).
Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell, Sayers and Brannon are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, software installation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teaching of Zhang, Balaji , Cantrell, Sayers and Brannon before him or her, to modify the system of Zhang, Balaji, Cantrell and Sayers, in particular Zhang, to include the teachings of Brannon, as a system for user interface monitoring, and accordingly it would enhance the system of Zhang, which is focused on an app store, because that would provide Zhang with the ability to select a user interface, as suggested by Brannon (column 79, lines 65-67, column 96, lines 21-31).
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Application Publications
Berger 11580592 teaches receiving, from a client device of a first user, a request from the first user to engage in an AR shopping experience curated by a store; identifying a first real-world product available for purchase from the store; receiving an image of a real-world environment of the first user; generating a first AR item that represents the first real-world product; comparing visual attributes of the first AR item to physical layouts of a plurality of real-world objects depicted in the image of the real-world environment; and overlaying the first AR item on a first real-world object of the plurality of real-world objects in the image responsive to comparing the visual attributes of the first AR item to the physical layouts of the plurality of real-world objects.
Matas 9507757 teaches constructing a plurality of versions of a first content item respectively for a plurality of device platforms, the first content item comprising one or more second content items. For each version of the first content item corresponding to a specific device platform, selecting at least one of the second content items to be included in the version of the first content item based on a screen configuration of the specific device platform; and arranging the at least one of the second content items for presentation on a screen of the specific device platform according to the screen configuration of the specific device platform.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Evral Bodden whose telephone number is 571-272-3455. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 9am to 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chat Do, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3721. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automatedinterview-request-air-form.
If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/EVRAL E BODDEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2193
Prosecution Insights