DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Amendment
This communication is responsive to the amendment filed 7/1/2025.
The application is a continuation of application 15/682,186, now US Patent #11,615,161 and a provisional priority 04/07/2010.
The application has been amended such that claims 2, 9, 16, and 22-27 have been amended, claims 1, 3, 10, and 17 have been previously canceled, and no claims have been added.
Claims 2, 4-9, 11-16, 18-27 are pending with claims 2, 9, and 16 as independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-27 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Karidi et al. (US 2007/0061412, published 03/15/2007, hereinafter as Karidi) in view of Karidi et al. (US 2007/0061421, hereinafter as Karidi2) in view of Butler et al. (US 2006/0265495, hereinafter as Butler).
Claim 2. A computer-implemented method comprising:
transmitting default tag code [associated with generating an internet cookie corresponding to a user visiting a webpage] provided by a content server, wherein, when a browser at a computing device receives the default tag code, the browser executes the default tag code to generate a tag module, and wherein the tag module is stored within the computing device and executes one or more tag codes at the browser; (Karidi teaches in [0004] “When someone accesses a server on the Web, the user's Web browser will send an information request to a Web server. The Web server will respond to the request by transmitting the desired information to the user's computer. There, the user's browser will display the received information on the user's screen.” And in [0032] “a user 10 requests a web page 20 from server 11…web page 20 includes embedded code that defines each area 21. Areas 21 are populated based in part on business rules.” And in [0031] “The user requests a web page containing SmartBar.TM. content and the web page and SmartBar.TM. content is provided by a single server. The second embodiment, a first web server retrieves SmartBar.TM. content from a second server and provides the content to a user. In the third preferred embodiment, a user requests a web page containing SmartBar.TM. content from a server. The SmartBar.TM. content has scripts that retrieve content from a SmartBar.TM. server.” And in [0018] “the rules engine identifies whether a current visitor is a returning customer or a new customer and initiates the appropriate outcome or outcomes.” And in [0044-0045] “As show in FIG. 3B, web page 102 includes SmartBar.TM. cells 21A, 121, and SmartBar.TM. 221. SmartBar.TM. 121 is an example of a single-cell SmartBar.TM.. SmartBar.TM. cells 221 and 121 are generated based on business rules and user activity… If the user selects the camera designated in SmartBar.TM. cell 121 the user is brought to a webpage 104 depicted in FIG. 3C.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note.: the term “user-session data” may be interpreted as the content of requested webpage. The default tag code may be transmitted, in a response based on the request to webpage 20 from web server 11, as embedded code in webpage 20 such that when a web browser executes the embedded code, the web browser generates a tag module that displays area 21 and populates area 21 with content as shown in fig. 3A.)
Yet, Karidi does not explicitly disclose generating an internet cookie corresponding to a user visiting. However, Karidi2, in an analogous art, discloses in [0039] “a user 10 requests a web page 20 from server 30. In the case in which user 10 has not previously requested web page 20, server 30 causes a cookie 12 (shown in FIG. 2) to be stored on the user's computer. Additionally, a follow up record 36 (shown in FIG. 3A) is created for user 10 and stored in database 34, based on the user's activity.” And in [0051] “FIG. 2 is representative of a cookie 12 created by server 30 and stored on user's 10 computer. The cookie preferably includes a visitor ID, a date the record was set, and a database record expiration date. Thus, when user 10 visits website 20, the cookie identifies the user as well as the date the cookie was created.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: Karidi teaches that if a visitor selects a camera in cell 121 in webpage 102 shown in fig. 3b, displayed by SmartBar server (server 30), the visitor would be brought to webpage 104 shown in fig. 3c. Thus, the visitor selection of the camera in cell 121 may be a request directed to server 30. Karidi2 teaches request to webpage from server 30, for a new visitor, would cause generation of a cookie 12 and storing it in the visitor computer, wherein the cookie is associated with an identifier for the visitor.
Karidi does not explicitly disclose the tag module is stored within the computing device and executes one or more tag code at the browser. However, Karidi teaches in [0008] “Cookies are pieces of information generated by a web server and stored in the user's computer, for future access. Cookies are embedded in the http information flowing back and forth between the user's computer and the servers. Cookies allow user-side customization of web information.” And in [0009] “cookies make use of user-specific information transmitted by the web server onto the user's computer so that the information might be available for later access by itself or other servers…. not only does the storage of personal information into a cookie go unnoticed, so does access to it… Web servers automatically gain access to relevant cookies whenever the user establishes a connection to them, usually in the form of web requests.” And in [0018] “the rules engine identifies whether a current visitor is a returning customer or a new customer and initiates the appropriate outcome or outcomes.” And in [0030] “module 32 is housed in another computer.”
Butler, also, teaches in [0009] “the web site includes a bit of client-side script (typically, JavaScript) in each page. This script executes on the visitor's computer resulting in an HTTP request to a third-party tracking service. The tracking service typically places its own cookie on the visitor's computer to uniquely identify the visitor.”
Karidi further discloses receiving an update associated with the tag module, wherein the update includes an indication of user interactions across webpages associated with a plurality of additional content servers, and wherein the user interactions are tracked by the tag module; (Karidi teaches in [0015] “The first component is the SmartBar.TM. tool. The SmartBar.TM. is an online marketing tool that provides a point of reference on the web page for information and communication that is relevant to the specific viewer. In a preferred embodiment, the SmartBar.TM. is placed at the same location on each web page for a given site.” And in [0034] “The system then generates the web page including any SmartBar.TM. cells 21… The content of the SmartBar.TM. calls is determined based on user activity and business rules. If there has not yet been any user interaction, business rules and embedded code determine the content of SmartBar.TM. cells 21.” And in [0035] “Once the web page 20 is generated, the user's activity on that page, and subsequently viewed pages, is monitored and evaluated. (Step 120). The user's activity includes time spent on a particular page, additional data requests, adding items to a cart, and the like. The system revises the web page being displayed (Step 130) based on the user's activity or alternatively generates a new page based on the activity (Step 110).” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: user interaction on the page may be monitored and communicated to server to request content modification based on satisfying business rule condition.)
Karidi teaches in [0050-0056] “SmartBar.TM. cells are dynamic cells embedded in web pages… the HTML code embedded in the web page pulls information from a dedicated web server… a clickable image is defined. The marketer enters the name, description, resource type URL, destination URL. In a preferred embodiment, the user enters the height and width of the clickable content on this screen. Further, once the template is established, rules are associated with the specific SmartBar.TM..” And in [0019] “This speeds the customization process and enables marketers to quickly develop campaigns.” And in [0038] “Marketers or others define the content of the cells. Web designers place calls for SmartBars.TM. and SmartBar.TM. cell content. The management of the page is done using a template. The template for a SmartBar.TM. is preferably stored in a content library, not on a web page.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: the URL defines a webpage or a website of a marketer (client) that allows the SmartBar to customize her/his website’s visitors. Therefore, different marketers may utilize the SmartBar for their websites in order to customize, using user interactions based on rules associated with conditions, their websites. Thus, the SmartBar sends requests to corresponding customization servers to customize (update) corresponding website for that particular marketer,
determining an occurrence of a condition associated with one or more rules, wherein the one or more rules are associated with the tag module, wherein the occurrence of the condition is determined based on the user interactions satisfying the one or more rules; (Karidi teaches in [0039] “a rule that is set for "when a visitor enters site" will be triggered for processing each time a visitor enters the site. When the user visits the site, the conditions specified by the rule will be checked and if found true, the actions specified in the rule will be performed by the system.” And in [0040] “Conditions may include the type of page, section of a page or a specific URL. Additionally, if the user reaches a page via a hyperlink or by typing a URL, that scenario can be monitored without taking any action. The time a user spends on a specific page may also be a condition.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: Table 1 indicates that a condition may be “time in seconds” or a period of time. Thus, a rule may be triggered by “when a visitor enters site” and the rule may be satisfied by a condition indicated by the time in seconds the visitor spent on the site)
Yet, Karidi does not explicitly disclose the occurrence of the condition indicates an authorization to generate and store the internet cookie. However, Karidi2 teaches in [0039] “a user 10 requests a web page 20 from server 30. In the case in which user 10 has not previously requested web page 20, server 30 causes a cookie 12 (shown in FIG. 2) to be stored on the user's computer”. (emphasis added) Examiner Note: condition of selecting URL such as requesting webpage 104 based on selecting camera link in webpage 102 and/or condition of new visitor may be met, which authorizes or permits server 30 to creates and stores cookie 12 on the visitor computer,
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Karidi with the teaching of Karidi2 because, “When the visitor interacts with the website, the follow up engine will store the expiration date of the visitor's follow up record 36 on the visitor's cookie 12. In this manner, when the user returns, the engine can efficiently detect that the visitor has follow up information 36.” Karidi2 [0048].
transmitting targeted tag code after determining the occurrence of the condition, wherein when the tag module receives the targeted tag code, [the tag module executes the targeted tag code to generate the internet cookie at the browser]. Karidi teaches in [0031-0032] a user requests a web page containing SmartBar.TM. content from a server. The SmartBar.TM. content has scripts that retrieve content from a SmartBar.TM. server… a user 10 requests a web page 20 from server 11. Web server 11 retrieves web page 20 from database 22. The web server, or other computer, in conjunction with server 30 and module 32, populates areas 21 in web page 20. Areas 21 are populated based in part on business rules… web page 20 includes embedded code that defines each area 21. These areas 21 are populated based on the embedded code, the user's activity, and the application of business rules.” And in [0044-0045] “As show in FIG. 3B, web page 102 includes SmartBar.TM. cells 21A, 121, and SmartBar.TM. 221. SmartBar.TM. 121 is an example of a single-cell SmartBar.TM…. SmartBar.TM. cells 221 and 121 are generated based on business rules and user activity. For example, SmartBar.TM. frame 221 displays various cameras and camcorders based on popularity… If the user selects the camera designated in SmartBar.TM. cell 121 the user is brought to a webpage 104 depicted in FIG. 3C.”
Karidi does not explicitly disclose the tag module executes the targeted tag code to generate the internet cookie at the browser. However, Karidi2 teaches in [0039 and 0044] “a user 10 requests a web page 20 from server 30. In the case in which user 10 has not previously requested web page 20, server 30 causes a cookie 12 (shown in FIG. 2) to be stored on the user's computer… Conditions may include the type of page, section of a page or a specific URL, can trigger a specific condition. Additionally, if the user reaches a page via a hyperlink or by typing a URL, that condition may be monitored. The time a user spends on a specific page may also be a condition. For example, the system can monitor whether a user spends more or less than a specified time on a page or group of pages. Matching pages can also be in a condition as are negative conditions such as whether a user has been on a page, added items to a cart but taken no further action, or not gone to a checkout.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: it appears that when a user request a webpage, server 11 transmits the webpage and retrieves SmartBar content and/or scripts from second server (server 30). The user interacts with the webpage by clicking on the camera link in cell 121 in webpage 102 shown in fig. 3B to generate webpage 104 shown in fig. 3C. The selection of the camera link in webpage 102 may detected by server 30 such that server 30 identifies the user as a new visitor. Accordingly, server 30 creates and transmits to and stores cookie 12 in the new visitor computer and/or web browser.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Karidi with the teaching of Karidi2 because to minimize “removing third-party visitor-tracking cookies diminishes the efficacy of the tracking technique in that it reduces the accuracy of the counts based upon those cookies. Web users are less inclined to delete first-party cookies, since those cookies are perceived to be helpful.” Butler [0011].
Karidi does not explicitly disclose the tag module is stored within the computing device and executes one or more tag code at the browser. However, Karidi teaches in [0008] “Cookies are pieces of information generated by a web server and stored in the user's computer, for future access. Cookies are embedded in the http information flowing back and forth between the user's computer and the servers. Cookies allow user-side customization of web information.” And in [0009] “cookies make use of user-specific information transmitted by the web server onto the user's computer so that the information might be available for later access by itself or other servers…. not only does the storage of personal information into a cookie go unnoticed, so does access to it… Web servers automatically gain access to relevant cookies whenever the user establishes a connection to them, usually in the form of web requests.” And in [0018] “the rules engine identifies whether a current visitor is a returning customer or a new customer and initiates the appropriate outcome or outcomes.” And in [0030] “module 32 is housed in another computer.”
Butler, also, teaches in [0009] “the web site includes a bit of client-side script (typically, JavaScript) in each page. This script executes on the visitor's computer resulting in an HTTP request to a third-party tracking service. The tracking service typically places its own cookie on the visitor's computer to uniquely identify the visitor.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: the teaching of Karidi and Butler indicates that module 32 (tag module) can be stored on client-site computer, similar to the well known cookie, such that when a user re-visit a website, the module would communicate with the web server serving the re-visited website to provide customized content based on the identity of the user.
Karidi and Karidi2 do not expressly disclose the targeted tag includes code for generating the internet cookie at the browser. However, Butler, in an analogous art, teaches in [0043-0048] Responsive to the web page request from visitor computer 14, web site server 12 returns the web page requested together with extra code, such as JavaScript code, in step (2) that assists in performing the invention. The web site includes a bit of JavaScript code on each page delivered to its visitors… In step (3), the web page sent from web server 12 is received at visitor computer 14 and displayed via a browser program operating on the computer. This step is performed by the APPENDIX script noted at line 139. The additional script also operates on the computer and browser to look for a first-party cookie associated with the site being viewed. If no cookie exists, then the script requests a third party unique ID using a one bit call embedded within the original web page. That is, this JavaScript uses HTTP to request a bit of text from the third-party tracking service and along with that request the third-party cookie is sent (as per HTTP protocol). The call is a request made to the third party tracking server 17… Upon receiving the request from visitor computer 14, third-party server assigns in step (4) a third-party unique ID to the visiting computer 14, and returns the ID as a JavaScript statement. That is, the tracking service receives the request along with the attendant cookie containing the visitor's unique identifier; the service then extracts the unique identifier and returns it as a bit of text that forms a JavaScript statement that assigns the unique identifier to a JavaScript variable. This step is performed by the APPENDIX script noted at line 140. This ID is received by computer 14 and in step (5), and using the JavaScript statement embedded within the web page and returned to the visitor in step (2), causes the computer 14 to set a first-party cookie value using the third-party unique ID.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: steps 1-5 explains how the first-party cookie is generated using the additional JS code to create first-party cookie with the third-party unique ID. In other words, Karidi teaches transmitting JS code with the response to the webpage but never explicitly teaches using the JS code to generate cookie on the client. Kridi2 teaches generating cookie 12 but never explicitly teaches generating cookie 12 from the JS code transmitted with the response of the requested webpage. However, Butler teaches generating first-party cookie using third-party ID from additional JS code transmitted with the response to requested webpage as shown in fig. 2.
authorizing access to the internet cookie via the browser wherein when a website provider accesses the internet cookie, the website provider generates customized content for another web page using the internet cookie; the teaching of Karidi2 by creating cookie 12 that stores record for particular identified visitor allows the teaching of Karidi to customize the requested webpage in accordance with the particular identity of the visitor when the visitor return to the website such as a second or repeat visit. Karidi can customize the webpage using cells, templates or areas 121, 221, and 21 as shown in fig. 3.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Karidi and Karidi2 with the teaching of Butler because to minimize “removing third-party visitor-tracking cookies diminishes the efficacy of the tracking technique in that it reduces the accuracy of the counts based upon those cookies. Web users are less inclined to delete first-party cookies, since those cookies are perceived to be helpful.” Butler [0011]. The advantage of the teaching of Butler is to allow third-party (domain) tracking service to monitor and customize webpage provided by a first party (domain) website.
Claims 4, 11, and 18. The rejection of the computer-implemented method of claim 2 is incorporated, wherein the one or more rules are defined by a user device, wherein the one or more rules include rules for determining when to transmit the targeted tag code to the tag module; (Karidi teaches in [0037] “The business rules engine uses rules that are based on conditions and actions taken while a user is visiting a specified website or series of web pages. Certain conditions will result in specific actions being taken. The conditions include both the activities that a user that performs while on a site and the user's behavior while on a page, and if available, the past activity, IP address, search activity, and the like… Conditions specify which actions are triggered.” And in [0039] “When the user visits the site, the conditions specified by the rule will be checked and if found true, the actions specified in the rule will be performed by the system.” And in [0046] “It should be noted that cell 21B changes its content based on conditions present during user interaction. Based on the business rules used to generate the web pages, if the user selects the Sony item in cell 21B a new screen 110 as shown in FIG. 3F is generated.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: the target tag code may be transmitted when the user interaction satisfies a condition, which triggers an action such as if the user select Sony item (this is a condition being satisfied), new screen 110 is displayed in fig. 3F).
Claims 5, 12, and 19. The rejection of the computer-implemented method of claim 2 is incorporated, Karidi does not explicitly disclose wherein the internet cookie for the webpage is generated based on code provided by a particular web domain, and wherein one or more website providers associated with the particular web domain are authorized to access the internet cookie of the webpage. However, Butler teaches in[0043-48] “The web page is stored on a web site server 12. The web site owner is using a tracking service operated on servers 17 by a third-party operator… Responsive to the web page request from visitor computer 14, web site server 12 returns the web page requested together with extra code, such as JavaScript code, in step (2) that assists in performing the invention. The web site includes a bit of JavaScript code on each page delivered to its visitors… Upon receiving the request from visitor computer 14, third-party server assigns in step (4) a third-party unique ID to the visiting computer 14, and returns the ID as a JavaScript statement. That is, the tracking service receives the request along with the attendant cookie containing the visitor's unique identifier; the service then extracts the unique identifier and returns it as a bit of text that forms a JavaScript statement that assigns the unique identifier to a JavaScript variable. This step is performed by the APPENDIX script noted at line 140. This ID is received by computer 14 and in step (5), and using the JavaScript statement embedded within the web page and returned to the visitor in step (2), causes the computer 14 to set a first-party cookie value using the third-party unique ID.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: assuming the particular web domain that serves the webpage is the first party website server 12. Then, server 12 serves the webpage with extra JS code to the visitor computer 14. The one or more website providers may be tracking service based on servers 17 or third-party service provider associated with first-party website server 12. Accordingly, the third-party tracking service provider is authorized to access the first party cookie because of the extra JS code configures the first party cookie to store the third party tracking service provider (servers 17) unique ID.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Karidi with the teaching of Butler because to minimize “removing third-party visitor-tracking cookies diminishes the efficacy of the tracking technique in that it reduces the accuracy of the counts based upon those cookies. Web users are less inclined to delete first-party cookies, since those cookies are perceived to be helpful.” Butler [0011].
Claims 6, 13, and 20. The rejection of the computer-implemented method of claim 2 is incorporated, Karidi does not explicitly disclose wherein the tag module, upon receiving the targeted tag code, executes the targeted tag code to modify security configurations associated with the internet cookie. However, Butler teaches in [0047] “In step (3), the web page sent from web server 12 is received at visitor computer 14 and displayed via a browser program operating on the computer. This step is performed by the APPENDIX script noted at line 139. The additional script also operates on the computer and browser to look for a first-party cookie associated with the site being viewed. If no cookie exists, then the script requests a third party unique ID using a one bit call embedded within the original web page. That is, this JavaScript uses HTTP to request a bit of text from the third-party tracking service and along with that request the third-party cookie is sent (as per HTTP protocol). The call is a request made to the third party tracking server 17.”
And in [0048] “Upon receiving the request from visitor computer 14, third-party server assigns in step (4) a third-party unique ID to the visiting computer 14, and returns the ID as a JavaScript statement. That is, the tracking service receives the request along with the attendant cookie containing the visitor's unique identifier; the service then extracts the unique identifier and returns it as a bit of text that forms a JavaScript statement that assigns the unique identifier to a JavaScript variable. This step is performed by the APPENDIX script noted at line 140. This ID is received by computer 14 and in step (5), and using the JavaScript statement embedded within the web page and returned to the visitor in step (2), causes the computer 14 to set a first-party cookie value using the third-party unique ID. That is, the page's JavaScript then uses that variable to set the value in a first-party cookie. In this way, the third-party and first-party IDs are always associated for statistics tracking purposes. Step (5) is performed by the APPENDIX script located at line 65 (which sets a variable), and line 109 (which sets the cookie using that variable).” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: the additional script may be the tag code such that when executed by the visitor computer the additional script changes the security configuration of the cookie by requesting for the third party unique ID as indicated in step 3 because the standard security configuration of any internet cookie is to set the domain created the webpage as the unique ID. See Karidi2 [0015].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Karidi with the teaching of Butler because to minimize “removing third-party visitor-tracking cookies diminishes the efficacy of the tracking technique in that it reduces the accuracy of the counts based upon those cookies. Web users are less inclined to delete first-party cookies, since those cookies are perceived to be helpful.” Butler [0011].
Claims 7, 14, and 21. The rejection of the computer-implemented method of claim 2 is incorporated, wherein the internet cookie for the webpage is generated and stored without modifying original code for the webpage; (Karidi teaches in [0032] “a user 10 requests a web page 20 from server 11. Web server 11 retrieves web page 20 from database 22. The web server, or other computer, in conjunction with server 30 and module 32, populates areas 21 in web page 20. Areas 21 are populated based in part on business rules. It should be noted that areas 21 are not fixed for every page but can vary in position and size depending on page layout. In another embodiment, areas 21 are overlays or pop-ups.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: the requested webpage 20 may be served from web server 11 whereas content of area 21 is populated from server 30. Thus, the source code of webpage 20 is not modified by custom server 30. Also, the cookie 12, as taught by Karidi2, is created by server 30 and stored in the visitor’s web browser/ computer).
Claims 8 and 15. The rejection of the computer-implemented method of claim 2 is incorporated, wherein the internet cookie for the webpage is configured to collect statistical data associated with one or more users that access the webpage; (Karidi teaches in [0035] “Once the web page 20 is generated, the user's activity on that page, and subsequently viewed pages, is monitored and evaluated. (Step 120). The user's activity includes time spent on a particular page, additional data requests, adding items to a cart, and the like.” And in [0040] “the system can monitor whether a user spends more or less than a specified time on a page or group of pages. Conditions relate to events that occur as well as events that do not occur. For example, adding items to a cart but not checking out.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: user activities such as time spent in particular page, item added to cart, event that do not occur, etc. may be statistical data collected from a user visiting a webpage. The cookie 12 stores the visitor’s follow-up record, which includes visitor ID, session ID, ticket ID, follow-up date, expiration date, recovery mode, and content. See Karidi2 [0047-0048]).
Claim 9. The claim is directed towards a system, comprising one or more processors; and memory storing thereon instructions that, as a result of being executed by the one or more processors, cause the system to perform the steps of the method of claim 1. Therefore is similarly rejected as claim 1. Further, Karidi teaches in [0057] “the present invention may employ various integrated circuit components, e.g., memory elements, processing elements, logic elements, look-up tables, and the like, which may carry out a variety of functions under the control of one or more microprocessors or other control devices.” (emphasis added).
Claim 16. The claim is directed towards a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium storing thereon executable instructions that, as a result of being executed by one or more processors of a computer system, cause the computer system to perform operations of the method of claim 1. Therefore, the claim is similarly rejected as claim 1.
Claims 22, 24, and 26. The rejection of the computer-implemented method of claim 2 is incorporated, wherein the browser receiving the default tag code further includes the browser determining that the webpage includes a user identifier associated with the user, wherein the user identifier is determined based on one or more embedded tags associated with the webpage, and wherein the one or more embedded tags are configured to monitor interactions between the user and the webpage; Karidi teaches in [0031] “a user requests a web page containing SmartBar.TM. content from a server. The SmartBar.TM. content has scripts that retrieve content from a SmartBar.TM. server.” And in [0018] “the rules engine identifies whether a current visitor is a returning customer or a new customer and initiates the appropriate outcome or outcomes.” And in [0035] “Once the web page 20 is generated, the user's activity on that page, and subsequently viewed pages, is monitored and evaluated. (Step 120). The user's activity includes time spent on a particular page, additional data requests, adding items to a cart, and the like.” (emphasis added). Examiner Note: by identifying, by the business rules, whether the current visitor is a returning customer or a new customer, the business rules may be configured to uniquely identify the current user. Accordingly, the business rules uniquely identifies the user visiting or interacting with the webpage and monitor the activities of the user.
Claims 23, 25, and 27. The rejection of the computer-implemented method of claim 2 is incorporated, wherein the browser receiving the default tag code further includes the browser determining that the webpage includes a user identifier associated with the user, wherein the user identifier is generated by a custom content server when the user visits the webpage; Karidi teaches in [0030] “a second server 30 includes a module 32 for the application of business rules and dynamic web page generation or SmartBar.TM. cell population.” And in [0032] “a user 10 requests a web page 20 from server 11. Web server 11 retrieves web page 20 from database 22. The web server, or other computer, in conjunction with server 30 and module 32, populates areas 21 in web page 20. Areas 21 are populated based in part on business rules…These areas 21 are populated based on the embedded code, the user's activity, and the application of business rules.” (emphasis added) Examiner Note: the business rules may be added to original webpage 20 as embedded code. The embedded code tracks user activities on the webpage and business rules may be applied by uniquely identifying the webpage visitor as a returning visitor or new visitor as one of the conditions associated with the business rules.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/11/2024 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument: Applicant’s argues “Without acquiescing to the propriety of the rejection and to expedite prosecution, independent claims 2, 9, and 16 are being amended as noted above, and the remaining claims depend from these amended independent claims. Applicant respectfully submits that the cited art of record does not teach or suggest, alone or in combination, each and every element of claims 2, 9, and 16.”
Response: Applicant has not pointed out elements not taught by the prior art. The amended claims has been addressed in the detailed rejections above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
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 AHAMED I NAZAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3174. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am to 7 pm Mon-Fri.
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, Stephen Hong can be reached at 571-272-4124. 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.
/AHAMED I NAZAR/Examiner, Art Unit 2178 10/18/2025
/MOHAMMED H ZUBERI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178