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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in response to amendment filed on 22 January 2026. Claims 1, 8, and 15 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,720,919 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: though the wording are different, the limitation carried are either inherently implied or would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art. 18/115,931 recites a communication platform communicatively connected to a plurality of channels used to send communication to user devices …, to generate a channel model based on the previous communication. One skill in the art would have contemplated that the act of communicably connected plurlity of channel used to send communication to user device…., to generate model based on the previous communication includes generating a frequency model based on identified number of communication. Conversely, the act of generating a frequency model…, would implies previous communication consider before the frequency model generated. 18/115,931 recites “receiving via an engagement Application Programming Interface (API) instruction” vs “receiving by one or more processor a communication request the wording are different, the limitation carried are ither inherently implied or would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art. 18/115,931 differs with the patent at the step determining based on the channel model first preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending a first communication to a first user during a time period … The patent however recites determining by the frequency that identifies a maximum number of communication to transmit to user per period of time and determining one or more send time to send the one or more communication .., with the period of time .., therefore one ordinary skill in the art would have contemplated that prior to identifying the maximum number the prefeed channel must be determined to establish the channel communication. 18/115,931 differs with the parent at the step of determining first preferred channel during the time period by increasing a communication priority at the start time period to a relatively higher communication priority before the end of the time period. The patent however, recites send one or more commucation to the first user at the determined one or more send time by providing the computer system with a non-zero engagement score that correspond to the first user, therefore one ordinary skill in the art would have contemplated that prior to providing the lower communication must be determined to score the non-engagement scored that corresponds th the first user. Further, it is widely known in the art that, in order to effectively preserve record for future reference and/or preventing/or queuing commucation is merely a routine work contemplatable by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Furthermore, there is no apparent reason why applicant was prevented from presenting claims corresponding to those of the instant application during prosecution of the application which matured into a patent. See In re Schneller, 397 F.2d 350, 158 USPQ 210 (CCPA 1968). See also MPEP § 804.
The reason for overcoming the 35 U.S.C 101 rejections:
Step 1: The claims recite a series of steps and, therefore, are a process.
Step 2A-Prong 1: the independent claims 1, 11 and 15 recite the limitation of determining preferred channel for sending communication. The determining limitation, as drafted, is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting "by the channel model" nothing in the claim precludes the determining step from practically being performed in the human mind. For example, but for the "by the channel model" language, the claim encompasses the user manually calculating or counting the amount of communions of use for each user. This limitation is a mental process.
Step 2A-Prong 2: The claims recite the additional limitations: one or more processors of a communication platform communicatively connected to plurlity of channels used to send communication to user device, train a machine -learning program by one or more processors go generate a channel model based previous communication to user devices to determine the preferred channel of the plurality channel for sending a communication to , an engagement Application Programming Interface (API) of the communication platform for receiving an instruction and causing one or more processor the first communication to be sent by communication platform in response determined preferred channel having a scored provided by the channel model during the time period by increasing a communication period to the first communication from a relatively lower communication period at the start time and queuing the first communication in a first que of a plurlity of queues each associated with a respective channel of the plurality of channel. The claims as a whole integers the metal process into a practical application. Specifically, the addition elements recites a specific manner of queuing the first communication during the time period which provide specific improvement over the prior system resulting in an improved commutation delivery. Thus, the claims are eligible because it is not directed to the recited judicial exception.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SREENIVASAN et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0012897 Al) in view of Davis et al (US Pub., 2009/0150507 A1) and futher view of O, Brien et al. (US Pub., 2018/0219830 A1)
With respect to claim 1, SREENIVASAN teaches a method comprising:
training, by one or more processors, of a communication platform communicatively connected to a plurality of channels used to send communications to campaign target devices , a machine-learning program to generate a channel model, the training being based on previous communications to campaign target devices, the generated channel model being configured to determine a preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending a communication to a campaign target device (paragraphs [0005]-[0010], discloses receive input training data that includes a plurlity of behavioral determines a supervised learing model.., output the predictive behavior, and paragraph [0041], discloses the vector can be inserted into the machine learing based recommendation model which can output using the combination of behavioral determinant a suggested communication channel to arrive at the target behavior ).
SREENIVASAN teaches the above elements including provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period(paragraph [0041], discloses recommendation model select the appropriate communication channel having a height likelihood of success) and
causing, by the one or more processors, the first communication to be sent by the communication platform the first campaign target device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period by increasing commucation priority of the first communication from a relatively lower communication priority at the start of the time period to a relatively higher commucation priority before the end of the time period ((paragraph[0010], discloses determine a recommended communication channel for the subject to follow to achieve predicted behavior, paragraph [0021], discloses the communication system may take into account patient communication preferences as a factor in order to achieve the desired outcome, paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage .. and paragraph [0041], discloses select the appropriate communication channel having a highest likelihood of success ), and
causing, by the one or more processors, the first communication to be sent to the first user through the determined first preferred channel (paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channels over which the outreach will be delivered ).
SREENIVASAN failed to teach the receiving, via an engagement Application Programming Interface (API) of the communications platform, and from a campaigning device, an instruction to send a first communication to a first campaign target device, corresponding recommended communication channel is determined based on the channel model, a first preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending the first commucation to the first user device during the time period the first preferred channel having a first score provided by the channel model that is indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period and wherein the commucation prior of the first communication is increase to a state of the first queue, and wherein causing the first communication to be sent by the communications platform to the first campaign target device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period comprises queueing the first communication in a first queue of a plurality of queues each associated with a respective channel of the plurality of channels
However, Davis teaches receiving, via an engagement Application Programming Interface (API) of the communications platform, and from a campaigning device, an instruction to send a first communication to a first campaign target device(Fig. 8, discloses ongoing data collection by W4 comm, receive communication IO, generate priority score for communication IO, deliver communication IO to recipient(s) based on priority score , and paragraph [0005], discloses encoding instructions for performing a method for priority delivery of a communication to a recipient via a first communication channel , the encoded method dynamically identifies one or more relationship between the recipient and information know about the commucation…, receiving via a second communication channel and identifying one or more relationship between the recipients and information known about communication based on the retrieved one or more of social data , ); and
determining based on the channel model, a first preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending the first commucation to the first user device during the time period the first preferred channel having a first score provided by the channel model (paragraph [0078], discloses ability to prioritize delivery of individual messes or commucation s from the different communication channels handled by the W4COMM, prioritize is personal infoatmion management .., prioritization is done by using a value-based ranking to cone all incoming communication …., and paragraph [0079], discloses flag and prioritize email response . W4 Prioritization is a value-based ranking implementation that produces importance .., create dynamic ranking of every communication in very channel ) ; and wherein the commucation prior of the first communication is increase to a state of the first queue wherein causing the first communication to be sent by the communications platform to the first user device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period comprises queueing the first communication in a first queue of a plurlity of queues each associated with a respective channel of the plurality of channels and (Fig. 15, and paragraphs [0082], discloses queues of various communication channels, the W4 prioritizing process can also return expected or suggested response time based on ranking for the specific common of message type.., delivering communications instead of a time-order ..[commucation prior of the first commucation] ) ,. Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies in order identifying one or more relationships between the recipient and information known about the communication, (see Davis , abstract).
SREENIVASAN and Davis teaches the above elements, SREENIVASAN further teaches machine learing based recommendation and channel selection model takes training input.., and based on the effectiveness of an interion of a specific (recommended)) channel (paragraph [0040]) and Davis teaches prior communications on any communication channel. Based on the identified relationships, a priority score is generated for the communication and the communication is delivered to the recipient via one of a plurality of delivery modes based on the priority score(abstract). SREENIVASAN failed to teach the corrosinding specific channel recommendation is based on indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period and Davis failed to teach the corresponding scoring and prioritization is based on indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period,
However, O’Brien teaches s indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period (paragraph [0012], discloses the probability of engagement may be a calculation of a likelihood that a recipient will open the message, paragraph [0019], discloses determine a probability of a recipient engaging with the new message based on the sender quality score and paragraph [0102], discloses an algorithm for computing a quality score may include logistic regression to estimate a probability that a message send to recipient will result that a message..). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies with scoring probability system for determining the probability of user opening the message of O’Brien in order to increasing quantity step while tracking the quantity of logical connections (see O’Brien, paragraph [0025])
With respect to claim 2, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O’Brien teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore SREENIVASAN the method further comprising: receiving a request to send the first communication to the first user(paragraph [0056], discloses the outreach/channel requestor 520 combines the outreach request from the planned patient outreach module). SREENIVASAN failed to teach presenting to a user of the campaigning device, information about the deterred first preferred channel using graph ser interface of commucation.
However, Davis presenting to a user of the campaigning device, information about the deterred first preferred channel using graph user interface of commucation (paragraph [0099], discloses priority score generated for each recipients will indicate higher prior .. ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies in order identifying one or more relationships between the recipient and information known about the communication, (see Davis , abstract).
With respect to claim 3, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and further view of O’Brien teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore SREENIVASAN the method wherein: the training of the machine-learning program is based on at least one of email data abstract, paragraphs [0005]-[0007], discloses training using the training input data that includes a plurality of behavior determinants, wherein the supervised learning model outputs a predicted behavior of a subject, and a channel selection module configured to receive the subject input data and the predicted behavior and to determine a recommended communication channel (paragraph [0003], i.e., communication channel such as text messaging, e-mail, communication via tablet or computer system, telephone calls, letters, smartphones etc. and paragraph [0028] discloses communication may switch to a phone call, email etc.). SREENIVASAN failed teach the corrosinding communication includes , recipient Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, the corrosinding sent email is flagged indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected, and indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications.
However, Davis teaches recipient Internet Protocol (IP) addresses(paragraphs [0069] discloses recipients IP address) flags indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected (paragraph [0079], discloses the communication to flag and prioritize email response.., and paragraph [0091], dislcies flag an email with a visual indicator identifying an email as being relatively more or less important ) Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis in order to identify email as being relatively more or less important (see , Davis , paragraph [0091]).
SREENIVASAN, and Davis failed to teach flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications
However, O'Brien teaches flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications (paragraph [0072], discloses a recipients may explicitly unsubscribe from the massage, paragraphs [0077]-[0078], discloses recipient status of unsubscribe from sender ..). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis and the system of Carlyle with the status of unsubscribe from the email of O’Brien in order to uniquely identifies the sender and recipient, their respective domains, and an identifier for the specific message to which the unsubscribe was attributed. (see , O'Brien, paragraph [0072]).
With respect to claim 4, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O’Brien teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore SREENIVASAN the method further comprising:
collecting information about the users and the responses of the campaign target devices to the previous communications(Fig. 1, paragraph [0019], discloses optimal subject engagement may include a profile to build so that the subject may be contacted .., and paragraph [0024], discloses the subject’s psycho-social profile and interaction context become important is when a subject is enrolled into a specific care program);
sub-sampling the collected information(paragraph [0057], discloses a collection of interaction to be delivered on one or mor channels..) ; and
generating training data for the machine-learning program based on the collected information about the users and the responses of the users to the previous communications(paragraphs [0025], discloses method for learing the appropriate communication channel for subject engagement based on a behavior profile) wherein generating the training data comprises embedding the collected information about the user and response of the users to the previous communication into anonymize vector (paragraphs [0005]-[0010], discloses receive input training data that includes a plurlity of behavioral determines a supervised learing model.., output the predictive behavior, and paragraph [0041], discloses the vector can be inserted into the machine learing based recommendation model which can output using the combination of behavioral determinant a suggested communication channel to arrive at the target behavior ); and wherein:
the training of the machine-learning program is based on the generated training data(abstract, paragraphs [0005]-[0007], discloses training using the training input data that includes a plurality of behavior determinants, wherein the supervised learning model outputs a predicted behavior of a subject, and a channel selection module configured to receive the subject input data and the predicted behavior and to determine a recommended communication channel (paragraph [0003], i.e., communication channel such as text messaging, e-mail, communication via tablet or computer system, telephone calls, letters, smartphones etc.).
With respect to claim 5, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O'Brien teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, SREENIVASAN teaches determining the first preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending a first commucation to the first camping target device during the time period is futher based on the generated training data associated with the user of the campaign target devices(paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channels over which the outreach will be delivery to improve the likelihood that those targeted will engage); and
the determined first preferred channel of the plurlity of channels is optimized for all user of the campaign targe device(paragraph [0029], discloses communication system a success or failure of the outreach effect, and further optimize for future subject-provider interaction) .
SREENIVASAN teaches the above elements but failed to teach wherein: the responses of the users to the previous communications include at least one of flags indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected, or flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications.
However, Davis teaches flags indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected (paragraph [0079], discloses the communication to flag and prioritize email response.., and paragraph [0091], dislcies flag an email with a visual indicator identifying an email as being relatively more or less important ) Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis in order to identify email as being relatively more or less important (see , Davis , paragraph [0091]).
SREENIVASAN, and Davis failed to teach flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications.
However, O'Brien teaches flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications (paragraph [0072], discloses a recipients may explicitly unsubscribe from the massage, paragraphs [0077]-[0078], discloses recipient status of unsubscribe from sender ..). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis and the system of Carlyle with the status of unsubscribe from the email of O’Brien in order to uniquely identifies the sender and recipient, their respective domains, and an identifier for the specific message to which the unsubscribe was attributed. (see , O'Brien, paragraph [0072]).
With respect to claim 6, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O’Brien teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore SREENIVASAN teaches the method wherein: sending the first communication to the first user is based on at least one of a first user profile of the first campaign targe device or first responses of the first user to previous communications sent to the first campaign targe device (paragraph [0019], discloses optimal subject engagement may include a profile to be built so that the subject bay e contacted and engaged through an optimal communication to receive content.., direct the subject to interacted .. to achieve a desired goal and paragraph [0025], discloses learning the appropriate communication channel for subject engagement based on a behavior profile of subject.. ). SREENIVASAN failed to explicitly teach to corrosinding learned appropriate channel is determined as first preferred channel for sending the first communication to the first user.
However, Davis teaches determining of the first preferred channel for sending the first communication to the first campaign target device(paragraph [0099], discloses priority score generated for each recipients will indicate higher prior .. ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies in order identifying one or more relationships between the recipient and information known about the communication, (see Davis , abstract).
With respect to claim 7, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O’Brien teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, SREENIVASAN teaches the method wherein: the first communication includes at least one of an email message or a Short Message Service (SMS) message (paragraph [0044], discloses communication through a text messaging [SMS]).
With respect to claim 8, SREENIVASAN teaches a system comprising:
one or more processors; and memory storing instruction that when executed by the one or more processor, cause the system to perform operation (paragraphs [0025], [0030] discloses computer-implements method .., paragraph [0039], discloses memory and paragraph [0040], discloses machine learning based recommendation model ) comprising:
training, by one or more processors, of a communication platform communicatively connected to a plurality of channels used to send communications to campaign target device, a machine-learning program to generate a channel model, the training being based on previous communications to campaign target devices, the generated channel model being configured to determine a preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending a communication to a user device (paragraphs [0005]-[0010], discloses receive input training data that includes a plurlity of behavioral determines a supervised learing model.., output the predictive behavior, and paragraph [0041], discloses the vector can be inserted into the machine learing based recommendation model which can output using the combination of behavioral determinant a suggested communication channel to arrive at the target behavior ).
SREENIVASAN teaches the above elements including provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target will engage communication through the first preferred channels during the time period(paragraph [0041], discloses recommendation model select the appropriate communication channel having a height likelihood of success) and causing, by the one or more processors, the first communication to be sent by the communication platform the first campaign target through the determined first preferred channel during the time period by increasing commucation priority of the first communication from a relatively lower communication priority at the start of the time period to a relatively higher commucation priority before the end of the time period ((paragraph[0010], discloses determine a recommended communication channel for the subject to follow to achieve predicted behavior, paragraph [0021], discloses the communication system may take into account patient communication preferences as a factor in order to achieve the desired outcome, paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage .. and paragraph [0041], discloses select the appropriate communication channel having a highest likelihood of success ) and causing, by the one or more processors, the first communication to be sent to the first user through the determined first preferred channel (paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channels over which the outreach will be delivered ).
SREENIVASAN failed to teach the receiving, via an engagement Application Programming Interface (API) of the communications platform, and from a campaigning device, an instruction to send a first communication to a first campaign target device, corresponding recommended communication channel is determined based on the channel model, a first preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending the first commucation to the first user device during the time period the first preferred channel having a first score provided by the channel model that is indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period and wherein the commucation prior of the first communication is increase to a state of the first queue and wherein causing the first communication to be sent by the communications platform to the first campaign target device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period comprises queueing the first communication in a first queue of a plurlity of queues each associated with a respective channel of the plurality of channels
However, Davis teaches receiving, via an engagement Application Programming Interface (API) of the communications platform, and from a campaigning device, an instruction to send a first communication to a first campaign target device(Fig. 8, discloses ongoing data collection by W4 comm, receive communication IO, generate priority score for communication IO, deliver communication IO to recipient(s) based on priority score , and paragraph [0005], discloses encoding instructions for performing a method for priority delivery of a communication to a recipient via a first communication channel , the encoded method dynamically identifies one or more relationship between the recipient and information know about the commucation…, receiving via a second communication channel and identifying one or more relationship between the recipients and information known about communication based on the retrieved one or more of social data , ); and
determining based on the channel model, a first preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending the first commucation to the first user device during the time period the first preferred channel having a first score provided by the channel model (paragraph [0078], discloses ability to prioritize delivery of individual messes or commucation s from the different communication channels handled by the W4COMM, prioritize is personal infoatmion management .., prioritization is done by using a value-based ranking to cone all incoming communication …., and paragraph [0079], discloses flag and prioritize email response . W4 Prioritization is a value-based ranking implementation that produces importance .., create dynamic ranking of every communication in very channel ) ; and wherein the commucation prior of the first communication is increase to a state of the first queue wherein causing the first communication to be sent by the communications platform to the first user device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period comprises queueing the first communication in a first queue of a plurlity of queues each associated with a respective channel of the plurality of channels and (Fig. 15, and paragraphs [0082], discloses queues of various communication channels, the W4 prioritizing process can also return expected or suggested response time based on ranking for the specific common of message type.., delivering communications instead of a time-order ..[commucation prior of the first commucation] ) , Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies in order identifying one or more relationships between the recipient and information known about the communication, (see Davis , abstract).
SREENIVASAN and Davis teaches the above elements, SREENIVASAN further teaches machine learing based recommendation and channel selection model takes training input.., and based on the effectiveness of an interion of a specific (recommended)) channel (paragraph [0040]) and Davis teaches prior communications on any communication channel. Based on the identified relationships, a priority score is generated for the communication and the communication is delivered to the recipient via one of a plurality of delivery modes based on the priority score(abstract). SREENIVASAN failed to teach the corrosinding specific channel recommendation is based on indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period and Davis failed to teach the corresponding scoring and prioritization is based on indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period,
However, O’Brien teaches s indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period (paragraph [0012], discloses the probability of engagement may be a calculation of a likelihood that a recipient will open the message, paragraph [0019], discloses determine a probability of a recipient engaging with the new message based on the sender quality score and paragraph [0102], discloses an algorithm for computing a quality score may include logistic regression to estimate a probability that a message send to recipient will result that a message..). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies with scoring probability system for determining the probability of user opening the message of O’Brien in order to increasing quantity step while tracking the quantity of logical connections (see O’Brien, paragraph [0025])
With respect to claim 9, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O’Brien, teaches elements of claim 8, furthermore SREENIVASAN the system further comprising: receiving a request to send the first communication to the first user(paragraph [0056], discloses the outreach/channel requestor 520 combines the outreach request from the planned patient outreach module). SREENIVASAN failed to teach presenting to a user of the campaigning device, information about the deterred first preferred channel using graph ser interface of commucation.
However, Davis presenting to a user of the campaigning device , information about the deterred first preferred channel using graph ser interface of commucation (paragraph [0099], discloses priority score generated for each recipients will indicate higher prior .. ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies in order identifying one or more relationships between the recipient and information known about the communication, (see Davis , abstract).
With respect to claim 10, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and further view of O'Brien teaches elements of claim 8, furthermore SREENIVASAN the system wherein: the training of the machine-learning program is based on at least one of email data abstract, paragraphs [0005]-[0007], discloses training using the training input data that includes a plurality of behavior determinants, wherein the supervised learning model outputs a predicted behavior of a subject, and a channel selection module configured to receive the subject input data and the predicted behavior and to determine a recommended communication channel (paragraph [0003], i.e., communication channel such as text messaging, e-mail, communication via tablet or computer system, telephone calls, letters, smartphones etc. and paragraph [0028] discloses communication may switch to a phone call, email etc.). SREENIVASAN failed teach the corrosinding communication includes , recipient Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, the corrosinding sent email is flagged indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected, and indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications.
However, Davis teaches recipient Internet Protocol (IP) addresses(paragraphs [0069] discloses recipients IP address) flags indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected (paragraph [0079], discloses the communication to flag and prioritize email response.., and paragraph [0091], dislcies flag an email with a visual indicator identifying an email as being relatively more or less important ) Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis in order to identify email as being relatively more or less important (see , Davis , paragraph [0091]).
SREENIVASAN, and Davis failed to teach flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications
However, O'Brien teaches flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications (paragraph [0072], discloses a recipients may explicitly unsubscribe from the massage, paragraphs [0077]-[0078], discloses recipient status of unsubscribe from sender ..). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis and the system of Carlyle with the status of unsubscribe from the email of O’Brien in order to uniquely identifies the sender and recipient, their respective domains, and an identifier for the specific message to which the unsubscribe was attributed. (see , O'Brien, paragraph [0072]).
With respect to claim 11, SREENIVASAN in view of Davies and further view of O’Brien, teaches elements of claim 8, furthermore SREENIVASAN the method further comprising:
collecting information about the users and the responses of the campaign target device to the previous communications(Fig. 1, paragraph [0019], discloses optimal subject engagement may include a profile to build so that the subject may be contacted .., and paragraph [0024], discloses the subject’s psycho-social profile and interaction context become important is when a subject is enrolled into a specific care program);
sub-sampling the collected information(paragraph [0057], discloses a collection of interaction to be delivered on one or mor channels..); and
generating training data for the machine-learning program based on the collected information about the users and the responses of the users to the previous communications(paragraphs [0025], discloses method for learing the appropriate communication channel for subject engagement based on a behavior profile) ) wherein generating the training data comprises embedding the collected information about the user and response of the users to the previous communication into anonymize vector (paragraphs [0005]-[0010], discloses receive input training data that includes a plurlity of behavioral determines a supervised learing model.., output the predictive behavior, and paragraph [0041], discloses the vector can be inserted into the machine learing based recommendation model which can output using the combination of behavioral determinant a suggested communication channel to arrive at the target behavior ) and wherein:
the training of the machine-learning program is based on the generated training data(abstract, paragraphs [0005]-[0007], discloses training using the training input data that includes a plurality of behavior determinants, wherein the supervised learning model outputs a predicted behavior of a subject, and a channel selection module configured to receive the subject input data and the predicted behavior and to determine a recommended communication channel (paragraph [0003], i.e., communication channel such as text messaging, e-mail, communication via tablet or computer system, telephone calls, letters, smartphones etc.).
With respect to claim 12 , SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O'Brien teaches elements of claim 11, furthermore, SREENIVASAN teaches determining the first preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending a first commucation to the first camping target device during the time period is futher based on the generated training data associated with the user of the campaign target devices(paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channels over which the outreach will be delivery to improve the likelihood that those targeted will engage); and
the determined first preferred channel of the plurlity of channels is optimized for all user of the campaign targe device(paragraph [0029], discloses communication system a success or failure of the outreach effect, and further optimize for future subject-provider interaction) .
SREENIVASAN teaches the above elements but failed to teach wherein: the responses of the users to the previous communications include at least one of flags indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected, or flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications.
However, Davis teaches flags indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected (paragraph [0079], discloses the communication to flag and prioritize email response.., and paragraph [0091], dislcies flag an email with a visual indicator identifying an email as being relatively more or less important ) Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis in order to identify email as being relatively more or less important (see , Davis , paragraph [0091]).
SREENIVASAN, and Davis failed to teach flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications.
However, O'Brien teaches flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications (paragraph [0072], discloses a recipients may explicitly unsubscribe from the massage, paragraphs [0077]-[0078], discloses recipient status of unsubscribe from sender ..). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis and the system of Carlyle with the status of unsubscribe from the email of O’Brien in order to uniquely identifies the sender and recipient, their respective domains, and an identifier for the specific message to which the unsubscribe was attributed. (see , O'Brien, paragraph [0072]).
With respect to claim 13, SREENIVASAN in view of Davies and further view of O’Brien, teaches elements of claim 8, furthermore SREENIVASAN teaches the system wherein: sending the first communication to the first campaign target device is based on at least one of a first user profile of the first user or first responses of the first campaign target device to previous communications sent to the first user (paragraph [0019], discloses optimal subject engagement may include a profile to be built so that the subject bay e contacted and engaged through an optimal communication to receive content.., direct the subject to interacted .. to achieve a desired goal and paragraph [0025], discloses learning the appropriate communication channel for subject engagement based on a behavior profile of subject.. ). SREENIVASAN failed to explicitly teach to corrosinding learned appropriate channel is determined as first preferred channel for sending the first communication to the first user.
However, Davis teaches determining of the first preferred channel for sending the first communication to the first campaign target device (paragraph [0099], discloses priority score generated for each recipients will indicate higher prior .. ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies in order identifying one or more relationships between the recipient and information known about the communication, (see Davis , abstract).
With respect to claim 14, SREENIVASAN in view of Davies and further view of O’Brien, teaches elements of claim 8, furthermore, SREENIVASAN teaches the system wherein: the first communication includes at least one of an email message or a Short Message Service (SMS) message (paragraph [0044], discloses communication through a text messaging [SMS]).
With respect to claim 15, SREENIVASAN teaches a non-transitory medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors; and memory storing instruction that when executed by the one or more processor, cause the system to perform operation (paragraphs [0025], [0030] discloses computer-implements method .., paragraph [0039], discloses memory and paragraph [0040], discloses machine learning based recommendation model ) comprising:
training, by one or more processors, of a communication platform communicatively connected to a plurality of channels used to send communications to campaign target device, a machine-learning program to generate a channel model, the training being based on previous communications to user devices, the generated channel model being configured to determine a preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending a communication to a campaign target device (paragraphs [0005]-[0010], discloses receive input training data that includes a plurlity of behavioral determines a supervised learing model.., output the predictive behavior, and paragraph [0041], discloses the vector can be inserted into the machine learing based recommendation model which can output using the combination of behavioral determinant a suggested communication channel to arrive at the target behavior ).
SREENIVASAN teaches the above elements including provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will engage communication through the first preferred channels during the time period(paragraph [0041], discloses recommendation model select the appropriate communication channel having a height likelihood of success) and causing, by the one or more processors, the first communication to be sent by the communication platform the first user device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period by increasing commucation priority of the first communication from a relatively lower communication priority at the start of the time period to a relatively higher commucation priority before the end of the time period ((paragraph[0010], discloses determine a recommended communication channel for the subject to follow to achieve predicted behavior, paragraph [0021], discloses the communication system may take into account patient communication preferences as a factor in order to achieve the desired outcome, paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage .. and paragraph [0041], discloses select the appropriate communication channel having a highest likelihood of success ) and causing, by the one or more processors, the first communication to be sent to the first user through the determined first preferred channel (paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channels over which the outreach will be delivered ).
SREENIVASAN failed to teach the receiving, via an engagement Application Programming Interface (API) of the communications platform, and from a campaigning device, an instruction to send a first communication to a first campaign target device, corresponding recommended communication channel is determined based on the channel model, a first preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending the first commucation to the first user device during the time period the first preferred channel having a first score provided by the channel model that is indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period and wherein the commucation prior of the first communication is increase to a state of the first queue and wherein causing the first communication to be sent by the communications platform to the first campaign target device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period comprises queueing the first communication in a first queue of a plurlity of queues each associated with a respective channel of the plurality of channels.
However, Davis teaches receiving, via an engagement Application Programming Interface (API) of the communications platform, and from a campaigning device, an instruction to send a first communication to a first campaign target device(Fig. 8, discloses ongoing data collection by W4 comm, receive communication IO, generate priority score for communication IO, deliver communication IO to recipient(s) based on priority score , and paragraph [0005], discloses encoding instructions for performing a method for priority delivery of a communication to a recipient via a first communication channel , the encoded method dynamically identifies one or more relationship between the recipient and information know about the commucation…, receiving via a second communication channel and identifying one or more relationship between the recipients and information known about communication based on the retrieved one or more of social data , ); and
determining based on the channel model, a first preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending the first commucation to the first user device during the time period the first preferred channel having a first score provided by the channel model (paragraph [0078], discloses ability to prioritize delivery of individual messes or commucation s from the different communication channels handled by the W4COMM, prioritize is personal infoatmion management .., prioritization is done by using a value-based ranking to cone all incoming communication …., and paragraph [0079], discloses flag and prioritize email response . W4 Prioritization is a value-based ranking implementation that produces importance .., create dynamic ranking of every communication in very channel ) ; and wherein the commucation prior of the first communication is increase to a state of the first queue and wherein causing the first communication to be sent by the communications platform to the first user device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period comprises queueing the first communication in a first queue of a plurlity of queues each associated with a respective channel of the plurality of channels (Fig. 15, and paragraphs [0082], discloses queues of various communication channels, the W4 prioritizing process can also return expected or suggested response time based on ranking for the specific common of message type.., delivering communications instead of a time-order ..[commucation prior of the first commucation] )). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies in order identifying one or more relationships between the recipient and information known about the communication, (see Davis , abstract).
SREENIVASAN and Davis teaches the above elements, SREENIVASAN further teaches machine learing based recommendation and channel selection model takes training input.., and based on the effectiveness of an interion of a specific (recommended)) channel (paragraph [0040]) and Davis teaches prior communications on any communication channel. Based on the identified relationships, a priority score is generated for the communication and the communication is delivered to the recipient via one of a plurality of delivery modes based on the priority score(abstract). SREENIVASAN failed to teach the corrosinding specific channel recommendation is based on indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period and Davis failed to teach the corresponding scoring and prioritization is based on indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period,
However, O’Brien teaches s indictive of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will read commucation sent through the first preferred channel during the time period and a second score provided by the channel model and indicative of a probability that a user of the first campaign target device will respond communication sent through the first preferred channels during the time period (paragraph [0012], discloses the probability of engagement may be a calculation of a likelihood that a recipient will open the message, paragraph [0019], discloses determine a probability of a recipient engaging with the new message based on the sender quality score and paragraph [0102], discloses an algorithm for computing a quality score may include logistic regression to estimate a probability that a message send to recipient will result that a message..). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies with scoring probability system for determining the probability of user opening the message of O’Brien in order to increasing quantity step while tracking the quantity of logical connections (see O’Brien, paragraph [0025])
With respect to claim 16, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O’Brien teaches elements of claim 15, furthermore SREENIVASAN the non-transitory medium further comprising: receiving a request to send the first communication to the first user(paragraph [0056], discloses the outreach/channel requestor 520 combines the outreach request from the planned patient outreach module). SREENIVASAN failed to teach SREENIVASAN failed to teach presenting to a user of the campaigning device, information about the deterred first preferred channel using graph ser interface of commucation .
However, Davis teaches presenting to a user of the campaigning device, information about the deterred first preferred channel using graph ser interface of commucation (paragraph [0099], discloses priority score generated for each recipients will indicate higher prior .. ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies in order identifying one or more relationships between the recipient and information known about the communication, (see Davis , abstract).
With respect to claim 17, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and further view of O'Brien teaches elements of claim 15, furthermore SREENIVASAN the system wherein: the training of the machine-learning program is based on at least one of email data abstract, paragraphs [0005]-[0007], discloses training using the training input data that includes a plurality of behavior determinants, wherein the supervised learning model outputs a predicted behavior of a subject, and a channel selection module configured to receive the subject input data and the predicted behavior and to determine a recommended communication channel (paragraph [0003], i.e., communication channel such as text messaging, e-mail, communication via tablet or computer system, telephone calls, letters, smartphones etc. and paragraph [0028] discloses communication may switch to a phone call, email etc.). SREENIVASAN failed teach the corrosinding communication includes , recipient Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, the corrosinding sent email is flagged indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected, and indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications.
However, Davis teaches recipient Internet Protocol (IP) addresses(paragraphs [0069] discloses recipients IP address) flags indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected (paragraph [0079], discloses the communication to flag and prioritize email response.., and paragraph [0091], dislcies flag an email with a visual indicator identifying an email as being relatively more or less important ) Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis in order to identify email as being relatively more or less important (see , Davis , paragraph [0091]).
SREENIVASAN, and Davis failed to teach flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications
However, O'Brien teaches flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications (paragraph [0072], discloses a recipients may explicitly unsubscribe from the massage, paragraphs [0077]-[0078], discloses recipient status of unsubscribe from sender ..). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis and the system of Carlyle with the status of unsubscribe from the email of O’Brien in order to uniquely identifies the sender and recipient, their respective domains, and an identifier for the specific message to which the unsubscribe was attributed. (see , O'Brien, paragraph [0072]).
With respect to claim 18, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O’Brien teaches elements of claim 15, furthermore SREENIVASAN the non-transitory medium further comprising:
collecting information about the users and the responses of the users to the previous communications(Fig. 1, paragraph [0019], discloses optimal subject engagement may include a profile to build so that the subject may be contacted .., and paragraph [0024], discloses the subject’s psycho-social profile and interaction context become important is when a subject is enrolled into a specific care program);
sub-sampling the collected information(paragraph [0057], discloses a collection of interaction to be delivered on one or mor channels..); and
generating training data for the machine-learning program based on the collected information about the users and the responses of the users to the previous communications(paragraphs [0025], discloses method for learing the appropriate communication channel for subject engagement based on a behavior profile) ) wherein generating the training data comprises embedding the collected information about the user and response of the users to the previous communication into anonymize vector (paragraphs [0005]-[0010], discloses receive input training data that includes a plurlity of behavioral determines a supervised learing model.., output the predictive behavior, and paragraph [0041], discloses the vector can be inserted into the machine learing based recommendation model which can output using the combination of behavioral determinant a suggested communication channel to arrive at the target behavior ) and wherein:
the training of the machine-learning program is based on the generated training data(abstract, paragraphs [0005]-[0007], discloses training using the training input data that includes a plurality of behavior determinants, wherein the supervised learning model outputs a predicted behavior of a subject, and a channel selection module configured to receive the subject input data and the predicted behavior and to determine a recommended communication channel (paragraph [0003], i.e., communication channel such as text messaging, e-mail, communication via tablet or computer system, telephone calls, letters, smartphones etc.).
With respect to claim 19, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O'Brien teaches elements of claim 18, furthermore, SREENIVASAN teaches determining the first preferred channel of the plurality of channels for sending a first commucation to the first camping target device during the time period is futher based on the generated training data associated with the user of the campaign target devices(paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channels over which the outreach will be delivery to improve the likelihood that those targeted will engage); and
the determined first preferred channel of the plurlity of channels is optimized for all user of the campaign targe device(paragraph [0029], discloses communication system a success or failure of the outreach effect, and further optimize for future subject-provider interaction) .
SREENIVASAN teaches the above elements but failed to teach wherein: the responses of the users to the previous communications include at least one of flags indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected, or flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications.
However, Davis teaches flags indicating whether the previous communications were read, flags indicating whether links in the previous communications were selected (paragraph [0079], discloses the communication to flag and prioritize email response.., and paragraph [0091], dislcies flag an email with a visual indicator identifying an email as being relatively more or less important ) Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis in order to identify email as being relatively more or less important (see , Davis , paragraph [0091]).
SREENIVASAN, and Davis failed to teach flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications.
However, O'Brien teaches flags indicating whether recipients unsubscribed from the previous communications, or times when recipients engaged with the previous communications (paragraph [0072], discloses a recipients may explicitly unsubscribe from the massage, paragraphs [0077]-[0078], discloses recipient status of unsubscribe from sender ..). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with flag an email with a visual indicator of Davis and the system of Carlyle with the status of unsubscribe from the email of O’Brien in order to uniquely identifies the sender and recipient, their respective domains, and an identifier for the specific message to which the unsubscribe was attributed. (see , O'Brien, paragraph [0072]).
With respect to claim 20, SREENIVASAN in view of Davis and futher view of O’Brien teaches elements of claim 15, furthermore SREENIVASAN teaches the non-transitory medium wherein: sending the first communication to the first user is based on at least one of a first user profile of the first user or first responses of the first user to previous communications sent to the first user (paragraph [0019], discloses optimal subject engagement may include a profile to be built so that the subject bay e contacted and engaged through an optimal communication to receive content.., direct the subject to interacted .. to achieve a desired goal and paragraph [0025], discloses learning the appropriate communication channel for subject engagement based on a behavior profile of subject.. ). SREENIVASAN failed to explicitly teach to corrosinding learned appropriate channel is determined as first preferred channel for sending the first communication to the first user.
However, Davis teaches determining of the first preferred channel for sending the first communication to the first user(paragraph [0099], discloses priority score generated for each recipients will indicate higher prior .. ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage of SREENIVASAN with ranking and prioritizing channels based on ranking of Davies in order identifying one or more relationships between the recipient and information known about the communication, (see Davis , abstract).
Prior art on the record:
SREENIVASAN et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0012897 Al) focused on a machine learning based recommendation model, including a supervised learning classifier configured to receive input training data that includes a plurality of behavioral determinants, a supervised learning model configured to receive subject input data that includes a plurality of behavior determinants, wherein the supervised learning model outputs a predicted behavior of a subject, and a channel selection module configured to receive the subject input data and the predicted behavior and to determine a recommended communication channel for the subject to follow to achieve the predicted behavior.
George et al (US Pub., 2020/0351403 A1) discloses assigning an appropriate channel in an omni-channel contact center environment includes receiving, by a computer of the contact center, an incoming contact via a first communication channel, the incoming contact assignable to a plurality of available communication channels; queueing, by the computer, the incoming contact in a first queue associated with the first communication channel
THOMASON et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0304451 Al) discloses a computer-implemented method includes receiving, at a gateway, a message for a recipient, responsive to the message being sent to the recipient at a first address. One or more rules are evaluated to select a preferred communication channel of the recipient, from among two or more communication channels. A channel-specific address of the recipient on the preferred communication channel is determined, where the channel-spec address differs from the first address. The message is directed, by the gateway, to the channel-specific address of the recipient to deliver the message to the recipient through the preferred communication channel.
O'Brien et al. (US Pub. No.: US 2018/0219830 Al) discloses provided herein is an electronic message management platform that enables management and execution of electronic message campaigns while appropriately managing challenges presented by spam filters, black lists, and domain blocking technologies, and that includes elements for managing an electronic message campaign based on dynamic conditions, quality measures, engagement factors, and other measures, factors and conditions.
Davis et al (US Pub., 2009/0150507 A1) discloses the disclosure describes systems and methods for prioritizing delivery of a communication to a recipient via a first communication channel, such as email, voice, voicemail, IM, SMS, or even physical parcel. Prioritization is done by dynamically identifying one or more relationships between the recipient and information known about the communication, the relationships determined from social, spatial, temporal,
and logical data previously collected by the system from prior communications on any communication channel
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments of the 35 U.S.C 103 rejection filed on 22 January2026 with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but is persuasive. Applicants’ arguments of the proposed combination of cited reference does not tech or suggest “ causing, by the one or more processors, the first communication to be sent by the communication platform the first user device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period by increasing commucation priority of the first communication from a relatively lower communication priority at the start of the time period to a relatively higher commucation priority before the end of the time period…” is not persuasive.
While SREENIVASAN teaches causing, by the one or more processors, the first communication to be sent by the communication platform the first user device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period by increasing commucation priority of the first communication from a relatively lower communication priority at the start of the time period to a relatively higher commucation priority before the end of the time period ((paragraph[0010], discloses determine a recommended communication channel for the subject to follow to achieve predicted behavior, paragraph [0021], discloses the communication system may take into account patient communication preferences as a factor in order to achieve the desired outcome, paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channel over which the outreach will be delivered to improve the likelihood that those target will engage .. and paragraph [0041], discloses select the appropriate communication channel having a highest likelihood of success ) and causing, by the one or more processors, the first communication to be sent to the first user through the determined first preferred channel (paragraph [0022], discloses selecting the communication channels over which the outreach will be delivered ), Davis teaches wherein the commucation prior of the first communication is increase to a state of the first queue wherein causing the first communication to be sent by the communications platform to the first user device through the determined first preferred channel during the time period comprises queueing the first communication in a first queue of a plurlity of queues each associated with a respective channel of the plurality of channels and (Fig. 15, and paragraphs [0082], discloses queues of various communication channels, the W4 prioritizing process can also return expected or suggested response time based on ranking for the specific common of message type.., delivering communications instead of a time-order ..[commucation prior of the first commucation] ) , Therefore, the cited reference address the claimed limitation. Thus, the 35 U.S.C 103 rejections with respect to claims 1-20 is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SABA DAGNEW whose telephone number is (571)270-3271. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6:45.
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, Waseem Ashraf can be reached on (571) 270 -3948. 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.
/SABA DAGNEW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3682