DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice for all US Patent Applications filed on or after March 16, 2013
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 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.
Status of the Claims
This communication is in response to communications received on 12/5/25. Claim(s) 1, 8, and 11 is/are amended, claim(s) 16-17 is/are cancelled, claim(s) none is/are new, and applicant states support can be found at instant specification Figs. 4A-4B and [0105-0107, 0135-0145]. Therefore, Claims 1-15 and 18-20 is/are pending and have been addressed below.
Claims Without Prior Art Rejections
Claims 1-15 and 18-20 do not have prior art rejections. The remaining rejections are 101 as noted below.
Closest prior art to the invention claims without rejections include
Tessler (US 2018/0165656 A1) in view of Jung (US 2013/0198304 A1), Troop messenger, published July 18, 2020 (reference U on the Notice of References Cited), and Arena et al. (US 2016/0316016 A1) for claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, and 8-10,
Tessler in view of Jung, Troop messenger, and Arena as applied to claim(s) 1 above and further in view of Burdick et al. (US 2004/0107203 A1) for claim(s) 5,
Jung in view of Troop messenger and Arena for claim(s) 11, 14-15 and 19,
Jung in view of Troop messenger and Arena, as applied to claim(s) 11 above and further in view of Google, published December 14, 2017 (reference V on the Notice of References Cited) for claim(s) 12-13,
Jung in view of Troop messenger and Arena, as applied to claim(s) 11 above and further in view of Facebook, published February 1, 2021 (reference W on the Notice of References Cited) for claim(s) 18, and
Jung in view of Troop messenger and Arena, as applied to claim(s) 19 above and further in view of Troop messenger 2, published September 25, 2020 (reference X on the Notice of References Cited) for claim(s) 20.
Regarding claim(s) 1, 8, and 11, none of the references teaches wherein the shared file message includes a GUI button to re-share the file to another chat panel.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remarks, filed 12/5/25, with respect to rejections under 35 USC 102 and 103 for claim(s) 1-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Examiner respectfully withdraws rejections under 102 and 103 for claim(s) 1-20.
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remarks, filed 12/5/25, with respect to rejections under 35 USC 101 for claim(s) 1-20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as far as they apply to the amended 101 rejection(s) below.
Applicant respectfully traversed the rejection on pg. 11-16.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees because the claims here are not like those the Federal Circuit found patent eligible in DDR because applicant’s claim(s) here is/are not solving an internet-centric problem specifically arising in the realm of computers or computer networks nor is/are the claimed solution(s) necessarily rooted in computer technology.
The claims here are not like those the Federal Circuit (Court) found patent eligible in Trading Technologies because the patent claims here are not “directed to a specific improvement to the way computers operate,” id., for the claimed graphical user interface method imparts a specific functionality to a trading system “directed to a specific implementation of a solution to a problem in the software arts.” Specifically, the claims here do not “ “solve problems of prior graphical user interface devices … in the context of computerized trading [] relating to speed, accuracy and usability.” Dist. Ct. op., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22039, [WL] at *4 (citations omitted). The court found that these patents are directed to improvements in existing graphical user interface devices that have no “pre-electronic trading analog,” and recite more than “‘setting, displaying, and selecting’ data or information that is visible on the [graphical user interface] device.” Id.” as it relates to this invention’s field. Furthermore unlike Trading Technologies the specification does not show that the invention “improves the current state or provides a solution to the current problem by utilizing a software implemented programmatic met.”
The claims here are not like those the Federal Circuit (Court) found patent eligible in Core Wireless because the claims here are not directed to an improved user interface for computing devices such as a particular manner of summarizing and presenting information in electronic devices. For example the claims here do not require “restraining the type of data that can be displayed in the summary window or that the summary window “is displayed while the one or more applications are in an un-launched state,” a requirement that the device applications exist in a particular state.” The claims here do not disclose “limitations disclose a specific manner of displaying a limited set of information to the user, rather than using conventional user interface methods to display a generic index on a computer.”
Thus, the argument(s) are unpersuasive.
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.
Claim(s) 1-15 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as noted below.
The limitation(s) below for representative claim(s) 1, 8, and 11 that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, is directed to a messaging system with integrated cloud storage.
Step 1: The claim(s) as drafted, is/are a process (claim(s) 1-15 and 18-20 recites a series of steps).
Step 2A – Prong 1: The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) (emphasis added):
Claim 1: generating a graphical user interface (GUI) with an event creation display corresponding to a user account of a messaging system, wherein the GUI includes a GUI object allowing a user to select an events system;
receiving a user interaction with the GUI object that selects the events system;
receiving, via the event creation display, a text string;
executing a first application programming interface (API) call to the events system to retrieve one or more contact records corresponding to a user account from the events system, wherein the first API call includes the text string;
displaying the one or more contact records in the event creation display;
receiving a user selection of the one or more contact records; and
executing a second API call to the events system to generate an event and send an event invitation to the one or more contact records corresponding to the user selection;
generating a GUI with a workspace to display one or more file identifiers retrieved from a cloud storage system corresponding to the user account of the messaging system;
receiving a command to share a file corresponding to a file identifier from the one or more file identifiers to a chat panel provided by the messaging system; and
posting a link to the file corresponding to the file identifier in the chat panel by generating a shared file message including the link to the file and metadata corresponding to the file;
wherein the shared file message includes a GUI button to re-share the file to another chat panel.
Claim(s) 8: generating a graphical user interface (GUI) with a video conference invitation display corresponding to a user account of a messaging system, wherein the GUI includes a search bar;
receiving, via the search bar, a text string;
executing one or more application programming interface (API) calls to one or more events systems linked to the user account of the messaging system to retrieve one or more contact records, wherein the one or more API calls include the text string;
displaying the one or more contact records in the video conference invitation display;
receiving a user selection of a contact record from the one or more contact records; and
transmitting a video conference link to the contact record corresponding to the user selection;
generating a GUI with a workspace to display one or more file identifiers retrieved from a cloud storage system corresponding to the user account of the messaging system;
receiving a command to share a file corresponding to a file identifier from the one or more file identifiers to a chat panel provided by the messaging system; and
posting a link to the file corresponding to the file identifier in the chat panel by generating a shared file message including the link to the file and metadata corresponding to the file;
wherein the shared file message includes a GUI button to re-share the file to another chat panel.
Claim(s) 11: generating a graphical user interface (GUI) with a workspace corresponding to a user account of a messaging system, wherein the GUI includes a GUI object linking a login process corresponding to a cloud storage system;
receiving a user interaction with the GUI object;
executing a first application programming interface (API) call to the cloud storage system to access the login process;
identifying a user account from the cloud storage system via the login process;
executing a second API call to the cloud storage system to retrieve one or more file identifiers corresponding to the user account from the cloud storage system;
updating the workspace to display the one or more file identifiers;
receiving a command to share a file corresponding to a file identifier from the one or more file identifiers to a chat panel provided by the messaging system; and
posting a link to the file corresponding to the file identifier in the chat panel;
generating a GUI with a workspace to display one or more file identifiers retrieved from a cloud storage system corresponding to the user account of the messaging system;
receiving a command to share a file corresponding to a file identifier from the one or more file identifiers to a chat panel provided by the messaging system; and
posting a link to the file corresponding to the file identifier in the chat panel by generating a shared file message including the link to the file and metadata corresponding to the file;
wherein the shared file message includes a GUI button to re-share the file to another chat panel.
Dependent claims 2-7, 9-10, 12-15, and 17-20 recite the same or similar abstract idea(s) as independent claim(s) 1, 8, and 11 with merely a further narrowing of the abstract idea(s): .
The identified limitations of the independent and dependent claims above fall well-within the groupings of subject matter identified by the courts as being abstract concepts of:
a method of organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, or business relations) because the invention is directed to economic and/or business relationships as they are associated with messaging system with integrated cloud storage.
Step 2A – Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because:
The additional elements unencompassed by the abstract idea include a graphical user interface (GUI) (claim(s) 1, 8, 11), graphical user interface (GUI), a messaging system, event creation display, application programming interfaces (APIs), events system (claim(s) 1), graphical user interface (GUI), a video conference invitation display, messaging system, one or more application programming interface (API), one or more events systems (claim(s) 8), a graphical user interface (GUI), a messaging system, a cloud storage system, application programming interfaces (APIs) (claim(s) 11), API (claim(s) 3, 7), database (claim(s) 4), messaging system (claim(s) 4, 6-7), event system (claim(s) 5-7), API (claim(s) 9), API (claim(s) 12, 14, 19), system (claim(s) 12, 14-15, 19-20).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 fails to describe:
Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine – see MPEP 2106.05(b)
Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo.
Thus the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 merely amount to (as additionally noted by instant specification [0066, 0076, 0089]) invoked as a tool and/or general purpose computer to apply instructions of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and/or mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(f)&(h)).
Step 2B: The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 are merely (as additionally noted by instant specification [0066, 0076, 0089]) invoked as a tool and/or a general purpose computer to apply instructions of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and/or mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application and thus similarly the combination and arrangement of the above identified additional elements when analyzed under Step 2B also fails to necessitate a conclusion that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons as set forth above (MPEP 2106.05(f)&(h)).
Conclusion
When responding to the office action, any new claims and/or limitations should be accompanied by a reference as to where the new claims and/or limitations are supported in the original disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP §706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES WEBB whose telephone number is (313)446-6615. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10-3.
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, Jerry O’Connor can be reached on (571) 272-6787. 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.
/J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3624
/Jerry O'Connor/Supervisory Patent Examiner,Group Art Unit 3624