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 . 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.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment and remarks filed November 10, 2025, are responsive to the office action mailed June 10, 2025. Claims 1-29 were previously pending. Claims 1, 14, 28, and 29, have been amended and claim 13 has been cancelled. Claims 1-12 and 14-29 are therefore currently pending and considered in this office action.
Response to Arguments
Pertaining to rejection under 35 USC § 101 in the previous office action
Applicant's arguments filed November 10, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claims 1-12 and 14-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Applicant argues that claim 1 recites “specific user interface behavior and device-level implementation details.” There are no device level implementation details in the claims and the “interface behavior” recited merely describes the resulting display, not any behavior on the level of technical implementation. There is no recitation of how any particular device performs (or implements) any of the functions necessary to result in the display. This is detailed further in the rejection. The argument is not persuasive. The rejection is maintained.
Pertaining to rejection under 35 USC § 102 in the previous office action
Applicant's arguments filed November 10, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claims 1-5, 9-12, 15, 17-19, and 21-29, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Perera (Paper No. 20250603; Pub. No. US 2022/0122161 A1).
Applicant argues
“displaying, on a device, a representation of the virtual purchase cart wherein the representation is visible while viewing the short-form video, wherein the displaying of the representation of the virtual purchase cart occupies a portion of a display screen while the short-form video occupies a remaining portion of the display screen, wherein a portion of the short-form video is displayed where the remaining portion of the short-form video is covered by the virtual purchase cart, and wherein, in a vertical orientation, the virtual product cart occupies half or less of the display screen,”
is not disclosed in the prior art. Remarks p.8. In support of this position applicant compares prior art fig.11C with present fig. 8. The figures are clearly different, however prior art fig. 11C is not relevant. It is not currently and was not cited in the previous office action as disclosing any claimed limitation. The argued limitation is clearly taught in the cited portions of the relied upon prior art as detailed below in the body of the rejection. Prior art fig. 2E would have been cited in the previous office action had the presently claimed limitation been claimed previously. It is not understood how applicant intended this argument to be persuasive given the lengthy limitation and applicant’s failure to identify any particular element as being distinguishing. It is noted that “in a vertical orientation” is not described in the specification but is interpreted as referring to a display screen of a device held upright in a vertical orientation rather than placed in a horizontal orientation such as on a table or other surface.
Pertaining to rejection under 35 USC § 103 in the previous office action
Applicant's arguments filed November 10, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The arguments that do not rely upon the argument addressed above are directed only to claims 14 and 20. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perera (Paper No. 20250603; Pub. No. US 2022/0122161 A1) in view of Taylor et al. (Paper No. 20250603; Pub. No. US 2016/0104231 A1) and claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perera (Paper No. 20250603; Pub. No. US 2022/0122161 A1) in view of Ohliger et al. (Paper No. 20250603; Patent No. US 11,432,046 B1).
Regarding claim 14, applicant admits that the prior art “mentions a "semi-transparent banner appears over part of the video file,"” but offers that “it does not show or suggest where a virtual purchase cart that includes all the limitations of currently amended claim 1, rendered in a "partially transparent" manner.” Remarks p.10. Applicant offers no rationale for this position other than the mere assertion and does not address the combination of references or other rationale detailed in the body of the rejection.
One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Regarding claim 20, applicant declares that the prior art “does not show or suggest a "livestream",” also with no further explanation of applicant’s rationale. Ibid.
The detailed rejection of this claim has been further supported with citations to additional portions of the reference and additional explanation of examiner’s position. In addition to the cited portions of the reference, it is noted that the specification describes the video as interchangeably including “a previously recorded livestream” at ¶0059, and there is no further enabling description of the underlying video itself, whether it be streaming, livestreaming, or previously recorded livestreaming. In particular there is no description of “livestream” that would distinguish it from any other video for the purposes of the present disclosure, such as “previously recorded livestream,” which would appear to describe any live action video stream (i.e., not artificially animated), and which would, based on applicant’s description, be included in the more general term “livestream.” It must therefore be interpreted as any one of a variety of generically occurring video streams.). It is also noted that as indicated below, the streaming video described in the prior art includes a live video feed.
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 1-12 and 14-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention (i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) (step 1). If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea) (step 2A), and if so, it must additionally be determined whether the claim is a patent-eligible application of the exception (step 2B). Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 189 L. Ed. 2d 296, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 4303, 110 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1976, 82 U.S.L.W. 4508, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 870, 2014 WL 2765283 (U.S. 2014); MPEP 2106.
Step 1:
In the instant case claims 1-12 and 14-27 are directed to a process, claim 28 is directed to a manufacture, and claim 29 is directed to a machine. All claims are therefore within statutory categories. See MPEP 2106.03, Eligibility Step 1.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
These claims also recite, inter alia,
“rendering a short-form video from a plurality of short-form videos …; selecting a product within the short-form video; adding the product within the short-form video to a virtual purchase cart based on the selecting; displaying … a representation of the virtual purchase cart wherein the representation is visible while viewing the short-form video, wherein the displaying of the representation of the virtual purchase cart occupies a portion of a display screen while the short-form video occupies a remaining portion of the display screen, wherein a portion of the short-form video is displayed where the remaining portion of the shortform
video is covered by the virtual purchase cart, and wherein, in a vertical orientation, the virtual product cart occupies half or less of the display screen; and checking out from the virtual purchase cart.” Claim 1.
A careful analysis of the above limitations, each on its own and all together combined, results in the conclusion that each on its own recites an abstract idea and in combination they altogether simply recite a more detailed abstract idea. The recited abstract idea falls within the grouping of abstract ideas described as certain methods of organizing human activity, for example commercial interactions (including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors). See MPEP 2106.04(a); Eligibility Step 2A1. The claims must therefore be analyzed under the second prong of Eligibility Step 2 (Step 2A2; MPEP 2106.04(d)).
Step 2A, Prong 2:
In order to address prong 2 (MPEP 2106.04(d), Eligibility Step2A2) we must identify whether there are any additional elements beyond the abstract ideas and determine whether those additional elements (if there are any) integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. MPEP 2106.04(d), Eligibility Step 2A2. The additional elements in the present claims are a short-form video server and a device. The short-form video server delivers videos and the device displays them on a screen with a virtual purchase cart. Claims 28 and 29 also include a memory and one or more processors.
These additional elements have been considered individually, in combination, and altogether as a whole together with the functions they perform, e.g., as noted the server delivers videos and the device displays the video on a screen together with a virtual purchase cart. The non-transitory medium and memory simply contain instructions implemented by a processor, and the processor is broadly and generally recited as performing all steps in terms of the intended outcomes of functionally nonspecific activities. These additional elements do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The claims are otherwise almost entirely a recitation of abstract ideas. The substantive process is recited only by descriptions of abstract intended results of steps without indicating any particular functional acts performed by any device or structural element to perform the steps or otherwise obtain the intended results. The additional elements do not improve the functioning of any computer or other technology or technical field, they do not apply the judicial exception with or by use of a particular machine, they do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing, and they fail to apply or use the judicial exception beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. See MPEP 2106.05.
If the disclosure describes any improvements to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field this improvement would need to be identifiable as the subject matter appearing in the claims. An indication that the claimed invention provides an improvement can include a discussion in the specification that identifies technical improvements realized by the claim over the prior art. The disclosure must provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. MPEP 2106.05(a).
Claim limitations can integrate a judicial exception into a practical application by implementing the judicial exception with or using it in conjunction with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim. A general purpose computer that applies a judicial exception by use of generic computer functions does not qualify as a particular machine. Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, (Fed. Cir. 2014); MPEP 2106.05(b),(f). There are no particular machines or manufactures identified in the present claims.
The claims do not affect the transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing. Changing to a different state or thing means more than simply using an article or changing the location of an article. A new or different function or use can be evidence that an article has been transformed. Purely mental processes in which data, thoughts, impressions, or human based actions are "changed" are not considered a transformation. MPEP 2106.05(c).
The claims do not apply or use the judicial exception in any other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. As a result the claim as a whole appears to be a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. MPEP 2106.05(e),(h).
The additional elements have not been found to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B:
Although the additional elements have not been found to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application the claims could still be eligible if they recite additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (“significantly more” than the judicial exception). MPEP 2106.05, Eligibility Step 2B.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the sparse additional elements of the claim are mere props supporting instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer. MPEP 2106.05(f). Simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. MPEP 2106.05(f)(2); see also OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 9721, 115 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1090 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“relying on a computer to perform routine tasks more quickly or more accurately is insufficient to render a claim patent eligible.”). The elements fail to present a technical solution to a technical problem created by the use of the surrounding technology. There is no reference to any surrounding technology wherein any problem or solution could be present, but even if there were, limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself. See Ret. Capital Access Mgmt. Co. v. U.S. Bancorp, 611 Fed. Appx. 1007, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14351 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“It may be very clever; it may be very useful in a commercial context, but they are still abstract ideas,” said Circuit Judge Alan Lourie.). MPEP 2106.05(h).
Finally, it is reiterated that the remaining dependent claims 2-12 and 14-27 do not contribute any additional elements other than those already discussed and do not add "significantly more" to establish eligibility because they merely recite additional abstract ideas that further describe the data and manipulation of data that occurs during implementation of the abstract ideas. A more detailed abstract idea is still abstract. PricePlay.com, Inc. v. AOL Adver., Inc., 627 Fed. Appx. 925, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 611, 2016 WL 80002 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 7, 2016) (in addressing a bundle of abstract ideas stacked together during oral argument, U.S. Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore said, "All of these ideas are abstract…. It’s like you want a patent because you combined two abstract ideas and say two is better than one.").
All of the above leads to the conclusion that additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the claimed subject matter into significantly more than an abstract idea. MPEP 2106.05; Eligibility Step 2B. As a result the claims are rejected under 35 USC 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter because they recite an abstract idea without being directed to a practical application, and they do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. MPEP 2106.05, supra..
The preceding analysis applies to all statutory categories of invention. Accordingly, claims 1-12 and 14-29 are rejected as ineligible for patenting under 35 USC 101 based upon the same analysis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 9-12, 15, 17-19, and 21-29, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Perera (Paper No. 20250603; Pub. No. US 2022/0122161 A1).
Perera teaches all the limitations of claims 1-5, 9-12, 15, 17-19, and 21-29. For example Perera discloses a method for ordering items by selecting items in a video, and Perera further discloses, regarding
Claim 1. A computer-implemented method for ordering items comprising: ● rendering a short-form video from a plurality of short-form videos delivered from a short-form video server (see at least abstract, figs. 1, 7-9, ¶0083 “one or more interactive videos”); ● selecting a product within the short-form video (see at least abstract “a video with an interactive layer that enables a user to add products into a shopping cart within the video…. When the interactive video is played, the interactive layer presents the hotspot in the video, which a user can select to access product information related to products presented in the video. Upon receiving user selection of the hotspot, the interactive layer presents the product information within the video. The user may then select a product from the product information and add it to a shopping cart within the video, thereby enabling the user to add products to the shopping without leaving, exiting, or being navigated away from the video,” fig. 6, 8, ¶0077 “a user selection of a specified product is received. For example, user 506 may click, tap, or otherwise select the product, e.g., from product information 210, to add the corresponding product to a shopping cart integrated into the video”); ● adding the product within the short-form video to a virtual purchase cart based on the selecting (see at least abstract “a video with an interactive layer that enables a user to add products into a shopping cart within the video…. The user may then select a product from the product information and add it to a shopping cart within the video, thereby enabling the user to add products to the shopping without leaving, exiting, or being navigated away from the video,” ¶0005 “enables a user to add products or services ( collectively referred to as "products") into a shopping cart within the video,” ¶0077 “a user selection of a specified product is received. For example, user 506 may click, tap, or otherwise select the product, e.g., from product information 210, to add the corresponding product to a shopping cart integrated into the video”);
● displaying, on a device, a representation of the virtual purchase cart wherein the representation is visible while viewing the short-form video, wherein the displaying of the representation of the virtual purchase cart occupies a portion of a display screen while the short-form video occupies a remaining portion of the display screen, wherein a portion of the short-form video is displayed where the remaining portion of the shortform video is covered by the virtual purchase cart, and wherein, in a vertical orientation, the virtual product cart occupies half or less of the display screen (see at least abstract “a shopping cart within the video,” figs. 2-4 (particularly fig. 2E), 8, 10, ¶0007, ¶¶0016-0017 (describing figs. 2D and 2E), ¶0061 (describes various display presentations), ¶0077 “a shopping cart integrated into the video”. Please note: although the prior art discloses this feature or its equivalent applicant should note that the description of a display arrangement as claimed is nonfunctional descriptive information because it has no functional role in the method. Descriptive material that has no functional role in the method will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability, see In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983). MPEP 2111.05. The rationale behind the printed matter cases has been extended to method claims in which an instructional limitation is added to a method known in the art. Similar to the inquiry for products with printed matter thereon, in such method cases the relevant inquiry is whether a new and unobvious functional relationship with the known method exists. See Praxair Distrib. v. Mallinckrodt Hosp. Prods. IP, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 12707, 2018 WL 2224150 (Fed. Cir. May 16, 2018); In re Kao, 639 F.3d 1057, 98 USPQ2d 1799, 1811-12 (Fed. Cir. 2011); King Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Eon Labs Inc., 616 F.3d 1267, 95 USPQ2d 1833, 1842 (Fed. Cir. 2010); MPEP 2111.05.); and ● checking out from the virtual purchase cart (see at least ¶0006 “After the user adds the products to the shopping cart, the user may proceed with a checkout process,” ¶0046 “The user may proceed to checkout process from the shopping cart 226, e.g., using GUI element”).
Claim 2. The method of claim 1 wherein contents of the virtual purchase cart are visible while the short-form video is being viewed (see at least abstract “product information related to products presented in the video. Upon receiving user selection of the hotspot, the interactive layer presents the product information within the video,” figs. 2E, ¶0005 “products presented in the video and a hotspot that allows the user to access the product information, and enables the user to add one or more products to a shopping cart…. enabling the user to access the product information (e.g., for viewing additional information of the product or for buying) without leaving, exiting, or being navigated away from the video,” ¶¶0034, 0046 “video allows the user to access shopping cart 226 to view or edit a list of products 220 added to shopping cart 226. In some embodiments, the list of products in shopping cart 226 may be overlaid on video 202”).Claim 3. The method of claim 1 wherein the virtual purchase cart comprises a virtual shopping cart (see at least abstract. Please note: these terms are synonymous in the art.).Claim 4. The method of claim 1 wherein the virtual purchase cart includes items that have been selected during an online session (see at least abstract “enabling the user to add products to the shopping without leaving, exiting, or being navigated away from the video, e.g., to another web site,” fig.9, ¶0008 “When the URL is accessed, the player obtains the video and the interactive layer using the configuration file and combines them to play the interactive video”).Claim 5. The method of claim 1 further comprising purchasing contents of the virtual purchase cart (see at least ¶0006 “After the user adds the products to the shopping cart, the user may proceed with a checkout process,” ¶0046 “The user may proceed to checkout process from the shopping cart 226, e.g., using GUI element,” ¶0079 “The user 506 may then proceed with the checkout process to complete the purchase”).Claim 9. The method of claim 1 wherein the checking out from the virtual purchase cart comprises purchasing the product, which was selected, wherein the purchasing the product is accomplished while the short-form video is being viewed (see at least ¶0005 “enabling the user to access the product information (e.g., for viewing additional information of the product or for buying) without leaving, exiting, or being navigated away from the video,” ¶0008 “interactive video that enables a user to buy one or more products offered for sale by the merchant from the interactive video,” ¶0089 “user may input payment details and make the donation. That is, the user may make the donation without leaving, exiting, or otherwise being navigated away (e.g., to another website or application) from video”).Claim 10. The method of claim 1 wherein the displaying of the representation of the virtual purchase cart occupies a portion of a display screen while the short-form video occupies another portion of the display screen (see at least ¶0007 “content is presented along with the video in a window (e.g., a graphical user interface (GUI) element such as a container or frame) of the player such that the content does not overlap with the video”).Claim 11. The method of claim 10 wherein the representation of the virtual purchase cart occupies substantially a third of the display screen (see at least ¶0060 “player window 207 may be a multilayout window in which different portions of the player window 207 present different content. For example, a first portion 402 of the player window 207 may be configured to present video 202, and a second potion 404 may be configured to display one or more hotspots, such as first hotspot 410 and second hotspot 412. The hotspots 410 and 412 may correspond to specific products being presented in video 202. For example, first hotspot 410 may correspond to product information of a first product and second hotspot 412 may correspond to product information of a second product. In some embodiments, the hotspots may indicate a time in video 202 at which the corresponding product may appear in video,” ¶0061 “product information 418 is presented in a third portion 416 of player window”. Please note: although the prior art discloses this feature or its equivalent applicant should note that the description of how much of the display is occupied by one or the other image as claimed is nonfunctional descriptive information because it has no functional role in the method. Descriptive material that has no functional role in the method will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability, see In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983). MPEP 2111.05. The rationale behind the printed matter cases has been extended to method claims in which an instructional limitation is added to a method known in the art. Similar to the inquiry for products with printed matter thereon, in such method cases the relevant inquiry is whether a new and unobvious functional relationship with the known method exists. See Praxair Distrib. v. Mallinckrodt Hosp. Prods. IP, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 12707, 2018 WL 2224150 (Fed. Cir. May 16, 2018); In re Kao, 639 F.3d 1057, 98 USPQ2d 1799, 1811-12 (Fed. Cir. 2011); King Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Eon Labs Inc., 616 F.3d 1267, 95 USPQ2d 1833, 1842 (Fed. Cir. 2010); MPEP 2111.05.).Claim 12. The method of claim 10 wherein the short-form video is shrunk so that the whole video window is shown in the portion of the display screen showing the short-form video (see at least ¶0061 “the dimensions (e.g., size) of the first portion 402 of player window 207 may be reduced, which also results in a reduction of the size of video 202”. Please note: see previous comment regarding nonfunctional descriptive information. The relative sizes and arrangements of images on the screen do not have any functional role in these claims.).Claim 15. The method of claim 1 wherein the selecting of the product is accomplished by clicking on an object in the video (see at least ¶0077 “user 506 may click, tap, or otherwise select the product”).Claim 17. The method of claim 1 wherein the short-form video is recommended based on a user journey (see at least ¶0043 “video presents product information 210 related to content, such as product 208 (e.g., a woman's top) presented in video 202, in response to user selection of hotspot 204…. video may correspond to a product that is being shown in video 202 at the time hotspot 204 was selected by the user”).Claim 18. The method of claim 17 wherein the user journey comprises videos watched, internet interactions, or purchase history (see at least ¶0043 “video presents product information 210 related to content, such as product 208 (e.g., a woman's top) presented in video 202, in response to user selection of hotspot 204…. video may correspond to a product that is being shown in video 202 at the time hotspot 204 was selected by the user”. Please note: the claim language consisting of a series of optional or alternative limitations separated by “or” does not result in further limitation beyond a single alternative because beyond the presence of any single alternative it merely represents contingencies that are not required. Applicant(s) are reminded that optional or conditional elements do not narrow the claims because they can always be omitted. See e.g. MPEP §2111.04 "Claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed, or by claim language that does not limit a claim to a particular structure."; and In re Johnston, 435 F.3d 1381,77 USPQ2d 1788, 1790 (Fed. Cir. 2006) ("As a matter of linguistic precision, optional elements do not narrow the claim because they can always be omitted.")).Claim 19. The method of claim 1 further comprising enabling the virtual purchase cart using a security code for validation (see at least fig. 3A, ¶0050 “store credentials to establish access … such as … "API Key," "API Password," "Storefront Access Token," "Shared Secret," or other credentials …. access credential such as username and password required to access the online store. … credentials such as an account number”).Claim 21. The method of claim 1 wherein the short-form video comprises an advertisement video (see at least ¶0003 “Video is being consumed at an exponential level online. Companies use videos for marketing and advertising their products and services (collectively referred to as "products")”).Claim 22. The method of claim 1 wherein the rendering and the displaying are accomplished on a mobile device (see at least ¶0039 “Client device 104 may include any type of mobile terminal, fixed terminal, or other device”).Claim 23. The method of claim 1 further comprising obtaining information on the product from a website hosted by a third party (see at least ¶0066 “website may be associated with a merchant who is offering the products for sale via the interactive videos, or may be associated with a publisher, e.g., a third-party entity that publishes content associated with the publisher but also presents content from other entities, such as the merchant”).Claim 24. The method of claim 23 further comprising displaying the information on the product while the short-form video is being viewed and the virtual purchase cart is visible (see at least abstract “interactive video by combining a video with an interactive layer that enables a user to add products into a shopping cart within the video. The interactive layer includes product information related to products presented in the video”).Claim 25. The method of claim 23 further comprising augmenting the short-form video with the information on the product (see at least abstract “interactive video by combining a video with an interactive layer that enables a user to add products into a shopping cart within the video. The interactive layer includes product information related to products presented in the video”).Claim 26. The method of claim 1 wherein the product comprises a coupon, a membership, or a service (see at least ¶0003 “Companies use videos for marketing and advertising their products and services (collectively referred to as "products").” Please note: see previous comments concerning optional or alternative limitations and nonfunctional descriptive information. Examiner’s position is that the description of the product has no functional role in the claims.).Claim 27. The method of claim 1 further comprising linking the virtual purchase cart to an email address or a mobile phone number (see at least ¶0008 “a link, e.g., an URL … may be used to access the interactive video. Such an URL may be included in any webpage, e.g., a webpage associated with a publisher who publishes content, social network application, email, etc.”).
Claim 28. A computer program product embodied in a non-transitory computer readable medium for ordering items (see at least claims 30-32), the computer program product comprising code which causes one or more processors to perform operations of: ● rendering a short-form video from a plurality of short-form videos delivered from a short-form video server (see at least abstract, figs. 1, 7-9, ¶0083 “one or more interactive videos”); ● selecting a product within the short-form video (see at least abstract “a video with an interactive layer that enables a user to add products into a shopping cart within the video…. When the interactive video is played, the interactive layer presents the hotspot in the video, which a user can select to access product information related to products presented in the video. Upon receiving user selection of the hotspot, the interactive layer presents the product information within the video. The user may then select a product from the product information and add it to a shopping cart within the video, thereby enabling the user to add products to the shopping without leaving, exiting, or being navigated away from the video,” fig. 6, 8, ¶0077 “a user selection of a specified product is received. For example, user 506 may click, tap, or otherwise select the product, e.g., from product information 210, to add the corresponding product to a shopping cart integrated into the video”); ● adding the product within the short-form video to a virtual purchase cart based on the selecting (see at least abstract “a video with an interactive layer that enables a user to add products into a shopping cart within the video…. The user may then select a product from the product information and add it to a shopping cart within the video, thereby enabling the user to add products to the shopping without leaving, exiting, or being navigated away from the video,” ¶0005 “enables a user to add products or services ( collectively referred to as "products") into a shopping cart within the video,” ¶0077 “a user selection of a specified product is received. For example, user 506 may click, tap, or otherwise select the product, e.g., from product information 210, to add the corresponding product to a shopping cart integrated into the video”); ● displaying, on a device, a representation of the virtual purchase cart wherein the representation is visible while viewing the short-form video, wherein the displaying of the representation of the virtual purchase cart occupies a portion of a display screen while the short-form video occupies a remaining portion of the display screen, wherein a portion of the short-form video is displayed where the remaining portion of the shortform video is covered by the virtual purchase cart, and wherein, in a vertical orientation, the virtual product cart occupies half or less of the display screen (see at least abstract “a shopping cart within the video,” figs. 2-4 (particularly fig. 2E), 8, 10-11, ¶0007, ¶¶0016-0017 (describing figs. 2D and 2E), ¶0061 (describes various display presentations), ¶0077 “a shopping cart integrated into the video”. Please note: see previous comment concerning nonfunctional instructional descriptive information.); and ● checking out from the virtual purchase cart (see at least ¶0006 “After the user adds the products to the shopping cart, the user may proceed with a checkout process,” ¶0046 “The user may proceed to checkout process from the shopping cart 226, e.g., using GUI element”).Claim 29. A computer system for ordering items comprising: ● a memory which stores instructions (see at least claims 30-32); ● one or more processors attached to the memory wherein the one or more processors (see at least ¶0069), when executing the instructions which are stored, are configured to: ● render a short-form video from a plurality of short-form videos delivered from a short-form video server (see at least abstract, figs. 1, 7-9, ¶0083 “one or more interactive videos”); ● select a product within the short-form video (see at least abstract “a video with an interactive layer that enables a user to add products into a shopping cart within the video…. When the interactive video is played, the interactive layer presents the hotspot in the video, which a user can select to access product information related to products presented in the video. Upon receiving user selection of the hotspot, the interactive layer presents the product information within the video. The user may then select a product from the product information and add it to a shopping cart within the video, thereby enabling the user to add products to the shopping without leaving, exiting, or being navigated away from the video,” fig. 6, 8, ¶0077 “a user selection of a specified product is received. For example, user 506 may click, tap, or otherwise select the product, e.g., from product information 210, to add the corresponding product to a shopping cart integrated into the video”); ● add the product within the short-form video to a virtual purchase cart based on the selection (see at least abstract “a video with an interactive layer that enables a user to add products into a shopping cart within the video…. The user may then select a product from the product information and add it to a shopping cart within the video, thereby enabling the user to add products to the shopping without leaving, exiting, or being navigated away from the video,” ¶0005 “enables a user to add products or services ( collectively referred to as "products") into a shopping cart within the video,” ¶0077 “a user selection of a specified product is received. For example, user 506 may click, tap, or otherwise select the product, e.g., from product information 210, to add the corresponding product to a shopping cart integrated into the video”); ● display, on a device, a representation of the virtual purchase cart wherein the representation is visible while viewing the short-form video, wherein the displaying of the representation of the virtual purchase cart occupies a portion of a display screen while the short-form video occupies a remaining portion of the display screen, wherein a portion of the short-form video is displayed where the remaining portion of the short-form video is covered by the virtual purchase cart, and wherein, in a vertical orientation, the virtual product cart occupies half or less of the display screen (see at least abstract “a shopping cart within the video,” figs. 2-4 (particularly fig. 2E), 8, 10-11, ¶0007, ¶¶0016-0017 (describing figs. 2D and 2E), ¶0061 (describes various display presentations), ¶0077 “a shopping cart integrated into the video”. Please note: see previous comment concerning nonfunctional instructional descriptive information.); and ● check out from the virtual purchase cart (see at least ¶0006 “After the user adds the products to the shopping cart, the user may proceed with a checkout process,” ¶0046 “The user may proceed to checkout process from the shopping cart 226, e.g., using GUI element”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 6-8, 14, and 16, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perera (Paper No. 20250603; Pub. No. US 2022/0122161 A1) in view of Taylor et al. (Paper No. 20250603; Pub. No. US 2016/0104231 A1).
Perera teaches all of the above as noted in the rejection under 35 USC 102. It teaches, a) a short form video including products, b) selecting a product in a video for purchase, c) a purchase cart visible while viewing the video, and d) finalizing the purchase of the items in the purchase cart, but does not explicitly disclose finalizing purchase of the product upon conclusion of the short-form video.
Taylor also teaches a) a short form video including products, b) selecting a product in a video for purchase, c) a purchase cart visible while viewing the video, and d) finalizing the purchase of the items in the purchase cart, and further discloses regarding
Claim 6. The method of claim 5 further comprising finalizing purchase of the product upon conclusion of the short-form video (see at least Perera FIG. 2F, ¶0047 “completing a transaction, is performed outside of the interactive video,” in view of Taylor ¶0095 “FIG. 10 …, showing indicators to the buyer that the video is coming to an end and that it is time to finalize the purchases,” ¶0127 “End of video/purchase alert,” ¶0177 “End of video step 1108 monitors the playing/display of the media clip for an end point. When an end point is encountered, the device will then put the customer into the virtual shopping cart, ready for checkout”).Claim 7. The method of claim 6 wherein the finalizing purchase is accomplished using a batch order process (see at least Perera FIG. 2F, ¶0047 “completing a transaction, is performed outside of the interactive video,” in view of Taylor ¶0095 “FIG. 10 …, showing indicators to the buyer that the video is coming to an end and that it is time to finalize the purchases,” ¶0127 “End of video/purchase alert,” ¶0177 “End of video step 1108 monitors the playing/display of the media clip for an end point. When an end point is encountered, the device will then put the customer into the virtual shopping cart, ready for checkout”. Please note: the process of purchasing the entire grouped contents of the shopping cart altogether at one point in time is a batch order process.).Claim 8. The method of claim 7 wherein the batch order processing occurs upon conclusion of the short-form video (see at least Perera FIG. 2F, ¶0047 “completing a transaction, is performed outside of the interactive video,” in view of Taylor ¶0095 “FIG. 10 …, showing indicators to the buyer that the video is coming to an end and that it is time to finalize the purchases,” ¶0127 “End of video/purchase alert,” ¶0177 “End of video step 1108 monitors the playing/display of the media clip for an end point. When an end point is encountered, the device will then put the customer into the virtual shopping cart, ready for checkout”. Please note: see above comment.).
Claim 14. The method of claim 1 wherein the virtual purchase cart is partially transparent showing the short-form video portion being covered (see at least Perera ¶0007 “Note that presenting content (e.g., hotspot or product information) "within" the video may mean that the content is overlaid on the video as an overlay,” ¶0046 “the list of products in shopping cart 226 may be overlaid on video 20,” claim 1 “shopping cart within the second overlay” in view of Taylor ¶0016 “a small, semi-transparent
banner appears over part of the video file” ¶0190 “largely transparent banner across the bottom”. Please note: it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to combine the transparent overlay of Taylor with the overlaid shopping cart of Perera based on the same rationale for combining the references as the “finalizing purchase” limitation, and in fact doing so in this case requires only a personal preference for a certain type of display appearance that is already well known in the prior art in addition to being clearly shown in the Taylor reference. Several of the documents cited as relevant below also disclose various display and control elements shown over the video as including various equivalents of “partially transparent.” This would have been reasonably considered for an official notice determination that it is an old and well known feature were it not in one of the references already cited.).
Claim 16. The method of claim 1 wherein the selecting of the product is accomplished by mousing over an object in the short-form video for a specified duration (see at least Taylor figs. 1-2, 5, 7, 9-16, ¶0095 “a cursor (such as might be used on a non-touch enabled device),” ¶0209 “Cursor 1036 (the smaller arrow) is perhaps shown in the act of clicking”. Please note: examiner’s position is that the description of a cursor and using it to select (click) an item on a non-touch enabled device is referring to a mouse, the only term in general usage for the device used to click/select an item displayed on a non-touch enabled device, at the time of filing.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention (for pre-AIA applications) or filing (for applications filed under the AIA ) to modify the method of Perera to include finalizing purchase of the product upon conclusion of the short-form video, as taught by Taylor since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable and would result in an improvement. This is because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such features even from a variety of technical fields into methods and systems implemented using similar technological structures (i.e., generic computer and/or network hardware such as processors, servers, etc.). In this case the areas of technical endeavor are nonetheless similar and overlapping.
Applicant has not disclosed that the added feature solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose beyond the performance of the functions they performed separately and since each element and its function are shown in the prior art the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. It would therefore have been an obvious matter of design choice to include the feature from Taylor in the method of Perera. Furthermore the combination solved no long felt need. Incorporating cumulative known features is additionally obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art because doing so increases commercial use of a method by attracting users that previously might have chosen between one of the previously known methods.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perera (Paper No. 20250603; Pub. No. US 2022/0122161 A1) in view of Ohliger et al. (Paper No. 20250603; Patent No. US 11,432,046 B1).
Perera teaches all of the above as noted in the rejection under 35 USC 102. It teaches, a) an interactive video including products, b) selecting a product in a video for purchase, c) updating product information in real-time, and d) a purchase cart visible while viewing the video, but does not explicitly disclose livestream video.
Ohliger also teaches a) an interactive video including products, b) selecting a product in a video for purchase, c) updating product information in real-time, and d) a purchase cart visible while viewing the video, and further discloses livestream video. Ohliger teaches, regarding
Claim 20. The method of claim 1 wherein the short-form video comprises a livestream video (see at least Ohliger fig. 16, c1:35-47 “Video can also be viewed through the Internet (World Wide Web) as downloaded video files or streaming files,” c11:20-30 “the term "video frame" is intended to convey an instantaneous (still) image frame of the video or animation at a particular time,” c28:35-40 “feed is a dynamic stream of user-created content”. Please note: the specification describes the video as interchangeably including “a previously recorded livestream” at ¶0059, and there is no further enabling description of the underlying video itself, whether it be streaming, livestreaming, or previously recorded livestreaming. In particular there is no description of “livestream” that would distinguish it from any other video for the purposes of the present disclosure, such as “previously recorded livestream,” which would appear to describe any live action video stream (i.e., not artificially animated), and which would, based on applicant’s description, be included in the more general term “livestream.” It must therefore be interpreted as any one of a variety of generically occurring video streams.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention (for pre-AIA applications) or filing (for applications filed under the AIA ) to modify the method of Perera to include livestream video, as taught by Ohliger since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable and would result in an improvement. This is because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such features even from a variety of technical fields into methods and systems implemented using similar technological structures (i.e., generic computer and/or network hardware such as processors, servers, etc.). In this case the areas of technical endeavor are nonetheless similar and overlapping.
Applicant has not disclosed that the added feature solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose beyond the performance of the functions they performed separately and since each element and its function are shown in the prior art the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. It would therefore have been an obvious matter of design choice to include the feature from Ohliger in the method of Perera. Furthermore the combination solved no long felt need. Incorporating cumulative known features is additionally obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art because doing so increases commercial use of a method by attracting users that previously might have chosen between one of the previously known methods.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
● Baxter et al., teaches the invention with the additional improvement of a persistent shopping card that is translucent and overlays multiple videos.
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 ADAM LEVINE whose telephone number is (571)272-8122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9am-7:30pm.
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, Marissa Thein can be reached at 571.272.6764. 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.
/ADAM L LEVINE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689 February 19, 2026