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 reply to the communications filed on June 12, 2026. The Applicant’s Amendment and Request for Reconsideration has been received and entered.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7-10, 13-17, and 19-20 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 1, 5, 7-8, 10, 13, 17, and 19 have been amended.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on June 12, 2026, has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejections under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues at page 12 of Applicant’s Reply dated June 12, 2026 (hereinafter “Applicant’s Reply”), that similar to Example 37, the instant claims provide “a method for automatically aggregating product objects corresponding to a same logistics plan on a graphical user interface (GUI) on a screen” and references the steps of generating a tab page by separating the multiple product objects into multiple groups, aggregating the plurality of target product objects as a first group, displaying the plurality of target product objects in a first area in the tab page, aggregating remaining product object as a second group, displaying the remaining product objects in a second area in the tab page, wherein the first area does not overlap with the second area and is separated from the second area by a dividing line showing a prompt. Applicant further argues at pages 12-13 of Applicant’s Reply that these “additional elements recite a specific manner of automatically aggregating product objects for display to a user…, resulting in an improved user interface for electronic devices.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Per MPEP 2106.04(d), in order to determine if a claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application, the considerations set forth in MPEP 2106.05 (a)-(c) and (e)-(h) are evaluated. MPEP 2106.04(d) clearly states that “a specific way of achieving a result is not a stand-alone consideration...However, the specificity of the claim limitations is relevant to the evaluation of several considerations including the use of a particular machine, particular transformation and whether the limitations are mere instructions to apply an exception.” The Examiner notes that the considerations include improvements to computer functionality, improvements to any other technology or technical field, and a particular machine or transformation.
Further, per MPEP 2106.05(a), in order to constitute a technical improvement, the specification "must describe the invention such that the improvement would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. Conversely, if the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner (i.e., a bare assertion of an improvement without the detail necessary to be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art), the examiner should not determine the claim improves technology." Further, per MPEP 2106.05(a), "if the specification sets forth an improvement in technology, the claim must be evaluated to ensure that the claim itself reflects the disclosed improvement."
With this guidance in mind, the Examiner respectfully asserts that the claimed improvement is an alleged improvement to the abstract idea of displaying products according to the logistics plan and not to any improvement to the graphical user interface itself. At page 11 of Applicant’s as-filed disclosure, for example, the disclosure states: “when it is necessary to display a page of collection of data objects such as a "shopping cart", the data objects in the collection can be determined first. At least one target data object that meets a certain target logistics plan is selected, and aggregated into the same area on the page for display. In this way, it facilitates a user to select product objects that support the same target logistics plan when placing an order, and avoids situations such as missing a selection, etc., which is more conducive to achieving the condition(s) set by the target logistics plan, improving a conversion rate, and reducing a waste of resources.” Thus, displaying the products that support the target logistics plan assist the user in selecting products for purchase, which is directed to the abstract idea. The particular way of displaying the products is not an improvement to the graphical user interface. The interface displays information in the same way regardless of which products are displayed in which portion of the interface, i.e., the information displayed is non-functional and is not integrated with how the information itself is displayed.
Regarding Example 37, the Examiner respectfully asserts that the instant claims are not analogous to Example 37. The Examiner first notes that claim 1 of Example 37 recites “A method of rearranging icons on a graphical user interface (GUI) of a computer system, the method comprising: receiving, via the GUI, a user selection to organize each icon based on a specific criteria, wherein the specific criteria is an amount of use of each icon; determining, by a processor, the amount of use of each icon over a predetermined period of time; and automatically moving the most used icons to a position on the GUI closest to the start icon of the computer system based on the determined amount of use.”
The discussion as to why claim 1 is eligible states: “The claim recites the combination of additional elements of receiving, via a GUI, a user selection to organize each icon based on the amount of use of each icon, a processor for performing the determining step, and automatically moving the most used icons to a position on the GUI closest to the start icon of the computer system based on the determined amount of use. The claim as a whole integrates the mental process into a practical application. Specifically, the additional elements recite a specific manner of automatically displaying icons to the user based on usage which provides a specific improvement over prior systems, resulting in an improved user interface for electronic devices.”
The Examiner notes that the graphical user interface was integrated with the steps of the claim in Example 37, in that the use of each icon on the graphical user interface was determined and then the icons on the graphical user interface where automatically rearranged according to that usage. Thus, the graphical user interface was functionally integrated with the recited steps of the claim.
With this in mind, the Examiner respectfully asserts that the instant claims are not analogous to Example 37. First, no user interaction with the graphical user interface is recited at all in the instant claims. Further, the elements of the claim are not functionally integrated with the graphical user interface. For example, generating a tab page that displays different groups of information is merely displaying data on a page. The interface itself does not affect how the data is displayed, i.e., the interface displays information in the same way regardless of which products are displayed in which portion of the interface. The products are not functionally integrated with the interface in the same way that the icons in Example 37 are functionally integrated with the interface.
Instead, the information is arranged to assist the user, i.e., which is directed to the abstract idea, and is not an improvement to the user interface itself. Per MPEP 2106.05a, arranging transactional information on a graphical user interface in a manner that assists traders in processing information more quickly is not sufficient to impart eligibility. Trading Technologies V. IBG LLC, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093-94, 2019 USPQ2d 138290 (Fed. Cir. 2019).
Thus, the rejection under 35 USC 101 is maintained.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejections under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but, as they are directed to the instantly amended claims, they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
As discussed further below, with regard to claim 1, the Examiner has cited Tepfenhart as disclosing generating a tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text; para. [0051]; the Examiner notes that a single page may correspond to a tab page), generating the tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan comprising: separating the multiple product objects into multiple groups based at least in part on the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051]); aggregating the plurality of target product objects as a first group of the multiple groups, and displaying the plurality of target product objects in a first area in the tab page (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051]); and aggregating remaining product objects of the multiple product objects in the target collection that do not support the target logistics plan as a second group of the multiple groups, and displaying the remaining product objects in a second area in the tab page (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051]), wherein: the first area does not overlap with the second area, and is separated from the second area by a dividing line showing a prompt indicating that the remaining product objects displayed in the second area do not support the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment; in Figure 7, the Store Pickup Items are separated from the Ship to Store items by a dividing line (i.e., the bottom line of the Happy Birthday Custom Cake item and the line about Ship to Store items); the heading “Ship to Store items” corresponds to the prompt because it indicates that it is a different shipping type than the previously listed Store Pickup items).
Applicant’s remaining arguments have been fully considered but they have either been addressed above or they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7-10, 13-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “generating a tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan, generating the tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan comprising.” This limitation is unclear. It is unclear if this is intended to recite two different “generating” steps or if this is intended to recite a generating step that comprises other steps. For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting this portion of claim 1 as reciting “generating a tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan, wherein generating the tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan comprises.”
Claims 17 and 19 are rejected for similar reasons.
Claims 3, 5, 7-10, 13-16, and 20 inherit the deficiencies of claims 1 and 19.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7-10, 13-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claims 1, 17, and 19 recite a method, a non-transitory medium, and an apparatus to display products and shipping options. With respect to claim 1, claim elements determining multiple product objects, determining a plurality of target product objects supporting a target logistics plan, querying a product object information database, determining respective identification of one or more target logistics plans, separating the multiple product objects into multiple groups, aggregating the plurality of target product objects as a first group, aggregating remaining product objects as a second group, the first area does not overlap the second area and is separated by a dividing line, determining whether the plurality of target objects satisfies one or more conditions, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects, and aggregating the at least one product object with the plurality of target product objects, as drafted, illustrate a series of steps that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover a method of organizing a human activity, such as a commercial or legal interaction, i.e., sales activities.
Claim 17 recites similar limitations.
With respect to claim 19, claim elements determining multiple product objects, determining at least one target product object that supports a target logistics plan, querying a product object information database, determining respective identification of one or more target logistics plans, separating the multiple product objects into multiple groups, aggregating the plurality of target product objects as a first group, aggregating remaining product objects as a second group, the first area does not overlap the second area and is separated by a dividing line, determining whether the plurality of target objects satisfies one or more conditions, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects, and aggregating the at least one product object with the plurality of target product objects, as drafted, illustrate a series of steps that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover a method of organizing a human activity, such as a commercial or legal interaction, i.e., sales activities.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claims 1, 17, and 19 recite generating (displaying) a tab page, displaying product objects in various areas, and displaying the at least one product object with the plurality of target products and claim 17 recites receiving a request. These elements are considered to recite insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, claim 19 recites one or more processors and memory at a high level of generality, i.e., as generic computer components performing generic computer functions. Accordingly, these additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on the abstract idea.
Thus, claims 1, 17, and 19 are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, claim 19 recites one or more processors and memory at a high level of generality, i.e., as generic computer components performing generic computer functions. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept.
Further, regarding the displaying and receiving elements, per MPEP 2106.05(d}(ll), elements such as receiving, transmitting, or displaying data over a network, i.e., using the internet to gather data, and storing and retrieving information in memory are considered to be computer functions that are well-understood, routine, and conventional functions. See Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1308, 1334, 115 USPG2d 1681,1701 (Fed. Cir, 2015); OIP Techs Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPG2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 785 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPG2d 1093, 1098 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network)).
Thus, claims 1, 17, and 19 are not patent eligible.
Claims 3, 5, 7-10, 13-16, and 20 depend from claims 1, 17, and 19. Claim 3 is directed to determining the target logistics plan and is further directed to the abstract idea. Claim 5 is directed to providing tab options on the tab page and is further directed to the abstract idea. Claim 7 is further directed to generating (i.e., displaying) multiple second tab pages which, as discussed above, is an activity that is well-understood, routine, and conventional. Claim 8 is directed to providing interface objects on the page and aggregating the at least one target product object and is further directed to the abstract idea. Claims 9-10 are directed to providing information and are further directed to the abstract idea. Claim 13 is directed to providing an interface object on the page and is further directed to the abstract idea. Claim 14 is directed to the type of target logistics plan and is further directed to the abstract idea. Claim 15 is directed to combining multiple target objects and is further directed to the abstract idea. Claim 16 is directed to determining information, providing the information, and generating a logistics order and is further directed to the abstract idea. Claim 20 is directed to combining and delivering the target product objects and is further directed to the abstract idea.
Thus, the claims are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 9-10, 14-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2017/0024804 A1 to Tepfenhart, JR. et al. (hereinafter “Tepfenhart”), in view of US 2015/0254758 A1 to Wadhawan et al. (hereinafter “Wadhawan”), and further in view of US 2011/0161182 A1 to Racco (hereinafter “Racco).
Claim 1: Tepfenhart discloses “systems and methods for receiving and processing online orders for items and/or services to be fulfilled by the retailer using multiple different fulfillment channels or methods for multiple items in a single order.” (See Tepfenhart, at least Abstract). Tepfenhart further discloses:
determining multiple product objects in a target collection associated with a user, wherein the multiple product objects are added into the target collection by the user (See Tepfenhart, at least para. [0031], customer using a client device accesses retailer’s server system to order and/or purchase items from the retailer; para. [0036], customer adds one or more items to a virtual shopping cart);
determining a plurality of target product objects supporting a target logistics plan from the target collection (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text; para. [0033], available fulfillment options for each item are stored in a product catalog database that accessed by the online retail system; para. [0032], shopping cart displays a listing for each of a plurality of items that includes available fulfilment options or channels for each item; in the example of Figure 1, each item in the cart has 4 different fulfillment options), wherein determining the plurality of target product objects supporting the target logistics plan comprises:
querying a product object information database based at least in part on corresponding identifications of the multiple product objects (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text; para. [0033], available fulfillment options for each item are stored in a product catalog database that accessed by the online retail system); and
determining respective identifications of one or more target logistics plans supported by the multiple product objects based at least in part on records stored in the product information database (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text; para. [0033], available fulfillment options for each item are stored in a product catalog database that accessed by the online retail system; para. [0032], shopping cart displays a listing for each of a plurality of items that includes available fulfilment options or channels for each item; in the example of Figure 1, each item in the cart has 4 different fulfillment options);
generating a tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment; the Examiner notes that a single page may correspond to a tab page), generating the tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan comprising:
separating the multiple product objects into multiple groups based at least in part on the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment);
aggregating the plurality of target product objects as a first group of the multiple groups, and displaying the plurality of target product objects in a first area in the tab page (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment); and
aggregating remaining product objects of the multiple product objects in the target collection that do not support the target logistics plan as a second group of the multiple groups, and displaying the remaining product objects in a second area in the tab page (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment), wherein:
the first area does not overlap with the second area, and is separated from the second area by a dividing line showing a prompt indicating that the remaining product objects displayed in the second area do not support the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment; in Figure 7, the Store Pickup Items are separated from the Ship to Store items by a dividing line (i.e., the bottom line of the Happy Birthday Custom Cake item and the line about Ship to Store items); the heading “Ship to Store items” corresponds to the prompt because it indicates that it is a different shipping type than the previously listed Store Pickup items; the Examiner notes that paragraph [0080] of Applicant’s published application also indicates that a “prompt” may be merely text, i.e., “Not eligible for Ten Days Arrived”).
Tepfenhart does not expressly disclose determining whether the plurality of target products objects satisfies one or more conditions associated with the target logistics plan…; in response to determining that the plurality of target products objects satisfies the one or more conditions associated with the target logistic plan…, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects that support the target logistics plan to the target collection associated with the user; and after the user selects at least one product object of the other product objects, aggregating and displaying the at least one product object with the plurality of target products objects in the first area.
However, Wadhawan discloses a system and method to “provide users with access to a weight-based shipping service that enables the users to purchase a group of items and pay a flat shipping fee. These systems and methods can enable a user to combine certain items into a box or set of boxes based on weight for a reduced shipping cost.” (See Wadhawan, at least Abstract). Wadhawan further discloses:
determining whether the plurality of target products objects satisfies one or more conditions associated with the target logistics plan…(See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, Tide Original Laundry Detergent, Price $11.99, weight 7 pounds, available in the Weighted Shipping Zone; FIG. 8 and associated text, item 802, 7 pounds in box, you can add 33 more (prompt); condition satisfied is the 40 pounds; para. [0044], box allocation module 152 can determine whether there is enough room (e.g., based on weight, volume, or any other physical or logical metric) in the existing box(es) to fit the selected item; box allocation module 152 can determine the available capacity of a physical box; box allocation module 152 may determine a representation of what a physical box's capacity would be if one or more items were added to the physical box);
in response to determining that the plurality of target products objects satisfies the one or more conditions associated with the target logistic plan…, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects that support the target logistics plan to the target collection associated with the user (See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 8 and associated text, item 802, 7 pounds in box, you can add 33 more (prompt); condition satisfied is the 40 pounds; item 804 displays other products available under Weighted Shipping to add to the box; para. [0044], box allocation module 152 can determine whether there is enough room (e.g., based on weight, volume, or any other physical or logical metric) in the existing box(es) to fit the selected item; box allocation module 152 can determine the available capacity of a physical box; para. [0045], box allocation module 152 provides to the user a box status (e.g., via a user interface display) indicating the total weight of the items placed in the box(es), para. [0084], set of item recommendations 804 displayed to the user based on the current items already in the weight-based shipping container); and
after the user selects at least one product object of the other product objects, aggregating and displaying the at least one product object with the plurality of target products objects in the first area (See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, Tide Original Laundry Detergent, Price $11.99, weight 7 pounds, available in the Weighted Shipping Zone; FIG. 8 and associated text, item 802, 7 pounds in box; item 804, Customers Who Bought Tide Original Laundry…Also Bought, i.e., the Tide Laundry Detergent is in the box and system is recommending other products; FIG. 10 and associated text, products available for Weighted Shipping are displayed along with their respective weights; para. [0088], FIGS. 11A illustrates the process of adding items to the weight-based shipping container; in this case, the Pepperidge Farm Goldfish, Cheddar 30-ounce carton weighting 2 pounds and costing $6.78 is added to the box so that the box weight now equals 9 pounds; Figure 13 displays the box/shopping cart with both the Tide and the Goldfish crackers in it).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart the ability of determining whether the plurality of target products objects satisfies one or more conditions associated with the target logistics plan…; in response to determining that the plurality of target products objects satisfies the one or more conditions associated with the target logistic plan…, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects that support the target logistics plan to the target collection associated with the user; and after the user selects at least one product object of the other product objects, aggregating and displaying the at least one product object with the plurality of target products objects in the first area as disclosed by Wadhawan since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to allow users “to purchase a group of items and a pay a flat shipping fee.” (See Wadhawan, at least para. [0023]).
Neither Tepfenhart nor Wadhawan expressly discloses that the target logistics plan is in a cross-border logistics scenario.
However, Racco discloses a system and method for listing an item for sale online. (See Racco, at least Abstract). Racco further discloses that the target logistics plan is in a cross-border logistics scenario (See Racco, at least FIG. 20 and associated text; para. [0172], sellers can specify how they will ship their item to buyers; for example, Canadian and US sellers may choose different shipping methods to buyers in Canada, the United States and international buyers; if the seller is not from Canada or the US, they would have a fourth option allowing them to specify their shipping method to buyers in their own country; for example, if the user is from Australia, they can specify a shipping method for shipping within Australia, shipping to Canada, the United States and shipping internationally; the seller in Australia may want to offer free shipping to buyers within Australia, offer a flat shipping rate to buyers in the United States, use calculated shipping (using UPS, Fed-Ex, the United States Postal Service etc. to automatically calculate the shipping price based on the buyer's location and weight and dimensions of the packaged items), and finally require that international buyers make individual shipping requests to the seller so that they could determine shipping on a per user basis).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart and the shipping system and method of Wadhawan the ability that the target logistics plan is in a cross-border logistics scenario as disclosed by Racco since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a tool that allows a seller “to be flexible and ‘mix and match’ their shipping options to different geographic regions.” (See Racco, at least para. [0172]).
Claim 3: The combination of Tepfenhart and Wadhawan and Racco discloses all the limitations of claim 1 discussed above.
Neither Tepfenhart nor Wadhawan expressly discloses determining the target logistics plan associated with a target country where the user is located, wherein determining the plurality of target product objects supporting the target logistics plan from the target collection comprises: determining the plurality of target product objects supporting the target logistics plan associated with the target country from the target collection.
However, Racco discloses determining the target logistics plan associated with a target country where the user is located, wherein determining the plurality of target product objects supporting the target logistics plan from the target collection comprises: determining the plurality of target product objects supporting the target logistics plan associated with the target country from the target collection (See Racco, at least FIGs. 13 and 20 and associated text; para. [0142], seller can list a single item for sale; everything seller needs is on a single page as shown in Figure 13 including links to list the item, add details of the item, shipping and payment information (item 183), etc. para. [0172], selecting item 183 in Figure 13 leads to Figure 20; sellers can specify how they will ship their item to buyers; for example, Canadian and US sellers may choose different shipping methods to buyers in Canada, the United States and international buyers; if the seller is not from Canada or the US, they would have a fourth option allowing them to specify their shipping method to buyers in their own country; for example, if the user is from Australia, they can specify a shipping method for shipping within Australia, shipping to Canada, the United States and shipping internationally; the seller in Australia may want to offer free shipping to buyers within Australia, offer a flat shipping rate to buyers in the United States, use calculated shipping (using UPS, Fed-Ex, the United States Postal Service etc. to automatically calculate the shipping price based on the buyer's location and weight and dimensions of the packaged items), and finally require that international buyers make individual shipping requests to the seller so that they could determine shipping on a per user basis).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart and the shipping system and method of Wadhawan the ability of determining the target logistics plan associated with a target country where the user is located, wherein determining the plurality of target product objects supporting the target logistics plan from the target collection comprises: determining the plurality of target product objects supporting the target logistics plan associated with the target country from the target collection as disclosed by Racco since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a tool that allows a seller “to be flexible and ‘mix and match’ their shipping options to different geographic regions.” (See Racco, at least para. [0172]).
Claim 9: The combination of Tepfenhart and Wadhawan and Racco discloses all the limitations of claim 1 discussed above.
Tepfenhart further discloses providing label information about the target logistics plan supported by the plurality of target product objects in the first area (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text, first 2 items in the top half of the page have a product availability option of “Ship to Store—Free”).
Claim 10: The combination of Tepfenhart and Wadhawan and Racco discloses all the limitations of claim 1 discussed above.
Tepfenhart does not expressly disclose providing information of one or more conditions and prompt information indicating whether the plurality of target product objects currently included in the target collection satisfies the one or more conditions in the first area.
However, Wadhawan discloses providing information of one or more conditions (See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 8 and associated text, What is Weighted Shipping explains how weight-based shipping works including delivery fee and weight allowance for each box) and prompt information indicating whether the plurality of target product objects currently included in the target collection satisfies the one or more conditions in the first area (See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 8 and associated text, item 802, 7 pounds in box, you can add 33 more (prompt); condition satisfied is the 40 pounds).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system and method of Tepfenhart- Wadhawan-Racco the ability of providing information of one or more conditions and prompt information indicating whether the plurality of target product objects currently included in the target collection satisfies the one or more conditions in the first area as further disclosed by Wadhawan since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to allow users “to purchase a group of items and a pay a flat shipping fee.” (See Wadhawan, at least para. [0023]).
Claim 14: The combination of Tepfenhart and Wadhawan and Racco discloses all the limitations of claim 1 discussed above.
Tepfenhart further discloses wherein the target logistics plan comprises: one target logistics plan selected by the user from a plurality of selectable logistics plans (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text, each item in the cart has 4 different fulfillment options; para. [0033], each fulfillment option includes a radio button (or other type of manipulable selector suitable for interactive interfaces in client systems) that may be selected by a customer to assign a fulfillment channel for each item).
Claim 15: The combination of Tepfenhart and Wadhawan and Racco discloses all the limitations of claim 1 discussed above.
Tepfenhart further discloses after receiving a request for generating a transaction order, combining the plurality of target product objects…into a same transaction order if the plurality of target product objects…[is] included in the request (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text; para. [0048], user activates “Proceed to Checkout” button; system confirms that items and selected fulfillment channels are confirmed; para. [0049], checkout displays each include an order summary section that shows all of the items in the customer’s order grouped by their selected fulfillment channels; In Figure 7, the Order Summary displays separate sections for Store Pickup, Ship to Store, Ship to Home, and Delivery items).
Tepfenhart does not expressly disclose combining the target product object and the at least one product object into a same transaction order if the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are included in the request.
However, Wadhawan discloses combining the target product object and the at least one product object into a same transaction order if the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are included in the request (See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 13 and associated text, shopping cart including both the Tide (the target product object) and the Pepperidge Farm Goldfish crackers (the at least one product object) are displayed together) .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system and method of Tepfenhart- Wadhawan-Racco the ability of combining the target product object and the at least one product object into a same transaction order if the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are included in the request as further disclosed by Wadhawan since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to allow users “to purchase a group of items and a pay a flat shipping fee.” (See Wadhawan, at least para. [0023]).
Claim 17: Tepfenhart discloses:
receiving a request to display a page corresponding to a target collection (See Tepfenhart, at least para. [0038], customer refreshes the shopping cart display in browser);
determining multiple product objects in the target collection (See Tepfenhart, at least para. [0031], customer using a client device accesses retailer’s server system to order and/or purchase items from the retailer; para. [0036], customer adds one or more items to a virtual shopping cart), and a plurality of target product objects supporting a target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text; para. [0033], available fulfillment options for each item are stored in a product catalog database that accessed by the online retail system; para. [0032], shopping cart displays a listing for each of a plurality of items that includes available fulfilment options or channels for each item; in the example of Figure 1, each item in the cart has 4 different fulfillment options), wherein determining the plurality of target product objects supporting the target logistics plan comprises:
querying a product object information database based at least in part on corresponding identifications of the multiple product objects (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text; para. [0033], available fulfillment options for each item are stored in a product catalog database that accessed by the online retail system); and
determining respective identifications of one or more target logistics plans supported by the multiple product objects based at least in part on records stored in the product information database (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text; para. [0033], available fulfillment options for each item are stored in a product catalog database that accessed by the online retail system; para. [0032], shopping cart displays a listing for each of a plurality of items that includes available fulfilment options or channels for each item; in the example of Figure 1, each item in the cart has 4 different fulfillment options);
generating a tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment; the Examiner notes that a single page may correspond to a tab page), generating the tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan comprising:
separating the multiple product objects into multiple groups based at least in part on the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment);
aggregating the plurality of target product objects as a first group of the multiple groups, and displaying the plurality of target product objects in a first area in the tab page (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment); and
aggregating remaining product objects of the multiple product objects in the target collection that do not support the target logistics plan as a second group of the multiple groups, and displaying the remaining product objects in a second area in the tab page (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment), wherein:
the first area does not overlap with the second area, and is separated from the second area by a dividing line showing a prompt indicating that the remaining product objects displayed in the second area do not support the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment; in Figure 7, the Store Pickup Items are separated from the Ship to Store items by a dividing line (i.e., the bottom line of the Happy Birthday Custom Cake item and the line about Ship to Store items); the heading “Ship to Store items” corresponds to the prompt because it indicates that it is a different shipping type than the previously listed Store Pickup items; the Examiner notes that paragraph [0080] of Applicant’s published application also indicates that a “prompt” may be merely text, i.e., “Not eligible for Ten Days Arrived”).
Tepfenhart does not expressly disclose determining whether the plurality of target products objects satisfies one or more conditions associated with the target logistics plan…; in response to determining that the plurality of target products objects satisfies the one or more conditions associated with the target logistic plan…, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects that support the target logistics plan to the target collection associated with a user; and after the user selects at least one product object of the other product objects, aggregating and displaying the at least one product object with the plurality of target products objects in the first area.
However, Wadhawan discloses:
determining whether the plurality of target products objects satisfies one or more conditions associated with the target logistics plan…(See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, Tide Original Laundry Detergent, Price $11.99, weight 7 pounds, available in the Weighted Shipping Zone; FIG. 8 and associated text, item 802, 7 pounds in box, you can add 33 more (prompt); condition satisfied is the 40 pounds; para. [0044], box allocation module 152 can determine whether there is enough room (e.g., based on weight, volume, or any other physical or logical metric) in the existing box(es) to fit the selected item; box allocation module 152 can determine the available capacity of a physical box; box allocation module 152 may determine a representation of what a physical box's capacity would be if one or more items were added to the physical box);
in response to determining that the plurality of target products objects satisfies the one or more conditions associated with the target logistic plan…, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects that support the target logistics plan to the target collection associated with a user (See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 8 and associated text, item 802, 7 pounds in box, you can add 33 more (prompt); condition satisfied is the 40 pounds; item 804 displays other products available under Weighted Shipping to add to the box; para. [0044], box allocation module 152 can determine whether there is enough room (e.g., based on weight, volume, or any other physical or logical metric) in the existing box(es) to fit the selected item; box allocation module 152 can determine the available capacity of a physical box; para. [0045], box allocation module 152 provides to the user a box status (e.g., via a user interface display) indicating the total weight of the items placed in the box(es), para. [0084], set of item recommendations 804 displayed to the user based on the current items already in the weight-based shipping container); and
after the user selects at least one product object of the other product objects, aggregating and displaying the at least one product object with the plurality of target products objects in the first area (See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, Tide Original Laundry Detergent, Price $11.99, weight 7 pounds, available in the Weighted Shipping Zone; FIG. 8 and associated text, item 802, 7 pounds in box; item 804, Customers Who Bought Tide Original Laundry…Also Bought, i.e., the Tide Laundry Detergent is in the box and system is recommending other products; FIG. 10 and associated text, products available for Weighted Shipping are displayed along with their respective weights; para. [0088], FIGS. 11A illustrates the process of adding items to the weight-based shipping container; in this case, the Pepperidge Farm Goldfish, Cheddar 30-ounce carton weighting 2 pounds and costing $6.78 is added to the box so that the box weight now equals 9 pounds; Figure 13 displays the box/shopping cart with both the Tide and the Goldfish crackers in it).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart the ability of determining whether the plurality of target products objects satisfies one or more conditions associated with the target logistics plan…; in response to determining that the plurality of target products objects satisfies the one or more conditions associated with the target logistic plan…, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects that support the target logistics plan to the target collection associated with a user; and after the user selects at least one product object of the other product objects, aggregating and displaying the at least one product object with the plurality of target products objects in the first area as disclosed by Wadhawan since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to allow users “to purchase a group of items and a pay a flat shipping fee.” (See Wadhawan, at least para. [0023]).
Neither Tepfenhart nor Wadhawan expressly discloses that the target logistics plan is in a cross-border logistics scenario.
However, Racco discloses that the target logistics plan is in a cross-border logistics scenario (See Racco, at least FIG. 20 and associated text; para. [0172], sellers can specify how they will ship their item to buyers; for example, Canadian and US sellers may choose different shipping methods to buyers in Canada, the United States and international buyers; if the seller is not from Canada or the US, they would have a fourth option allowing them to specify their shipping method to buyers in their own country; for example, if the user is from Australia, they can specify a shipping method for shipping within Australia, shipping to Canada, the United States and shipping internationally; the seller in Australia may want to offer free shipping to buyers within Australia, offer a flat shipping rate to buyers in the United States, use calculated shipping (using UPS, Fed-Ex, the United States Postal Service etc. to automatically calculate the shipping price based on the buyer's location and weight and dimensions of the packaged items), and finally require that international buyers make individual shipping requests to the seller so that they could determine shipping on a per user basis).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart and the shipping system and method of Wadhawan the ability that the target logistics plan is in a cross-border logistics scenario as disclosed by Racco since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a tool that allows a seller “to be flexible and ‘mix and match’ their shipping options to different geographic regions.” (See Racco, at least para. [0172]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tepfenhart in view of Wadhawan and further in view of Racco as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 10,489,841 B1 to Ogborn et al. (hereinafter “Ogborn”).
The combination of Tepfenhart and Wadhawan and Racco discloses all the limitations of claim 1 discussed above.
Neither Tepfenhart nor Wadhawan nor Racco expressly discloses providing a second operation option for modifying the target logistics plan of a target product object in the first area to another logistics plan different from the target logistics plan.
However, Ogborn discloses a system and method in which selected offers for items are assembled for a transaction and in which a fulfillment option benefit, such as a delivery or shipping benefit, is identified for a first one of the items. (See Ogborn, at least Abstract). Ogborn further discloses that the system “determines whether an offer for a second one of the items contributes to qualification for the same fulfillment option benefit. When the offer for the second item does not contribute, the system searches for any other second item offers that do contribute to qualification for the benefit. If multiple other offers are found, the system ranks the other offers to identify a preferred other offer for the second item. The system then calculates a difference between the originally-selected offer and the preferred offer for the second item and generates a qualification contribution notification that highlights the preferred other offer as contributing to the fulfillment option benefit.” (See Ogborn, at least Abstract). Ogborn further discloses providing a second operation option for modifying the target logistics plan of a target product object in the first area to another logistics plan different from the target logistics plan (See Ogborn, at least FIGs 4A-4B and associated text; col. 11, lines 58-67, offer optimizer presents an alternative offer to get free two-day shipping if the product is priced $.50 more).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart and the shipping system and method of Wadhawan and the cross-border selling system of Racco the ability of providing a second operation option for modifying the target logistics plan of a target product object in the first area to another logistics plan different from the target logistics plan as disclosed by Ogborn since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to assist users to qualify for and maximize benefits provided by online retailers. (See Ogborn, at least col. 2, lines 60-67).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tepfenhart in view of Wadhawan and further in view of Racco as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 9,047,607 B1 to Curial et al. (hereinafter “Curial”).
The combination of Tepfenhart and Wadhawan and Racco discloses all the limitations of claim 1 discussed above.
Tepfenhart further discloses providing an operation object on the tab page according to an identification of the target logistics plan; and…aggregating the plurality of target product objects…for display in response to an operation request on the operation object (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text; para. [0048], user activates “Proceed to Checkout” button; system confirms that items and selected fulfillment channels are confirmed; para. [0049], checkout displays each include an order summary section that shows all of the items in the customer’s order grouped by their selected fulfillment channels; In Figure 7, the Order Summary displays separate sections for Store Pickup, Ship to Store, Ship to Home, and Delivery items).
Neither Tepfenhart nor Wadhawan nor Racco expressly discloses providing a floating layer.
However, Curial discloses systems and methods for “determining eligibility for a location-based shipping option for multiple fulfillment networks.” (See Curial, at least Abstract). Curial further discloses that the system displays information to a user “to indicate whether items are eligible for an enhanced shipping option based upon the shipping origin of the item and a predicted shipping destination.” (See Curial, at least Abstract). Curial further discloses providing a floating layer (See Curial, at least col. 17, lines 1-6, user interface element containing Order With Enhanced Shipping options may be presented as a pop-up menu).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart and the shipping system and method of Wadhawan and the cross-border selling system of Racco the ability of providing a floating layer as disclosed by Curial since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to “compete with the advantage of traditional stores, namely the near instant receipt of purchased items.” (See Curial, at least col. 1, lines 20-35).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tepfenhart in view of Wadhawan and further in view of Racco as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of US 2008/0301009 A1 to Plaster et al. (hereinafter “Plaster”).
The combination of Tepfenhart and Wadhawan and Racco discloses all the limitations of claim 15 discussed above.
Neither Tepfenhart nor Wadhawan nor Racco expressly discloses determining information of destination of collection of goods in a first logistics stage according to the target logistics plan, and providing the information of destination of collection of goods to one or more dispatchers associated with the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object; and generating a logistics order for a second logistics stage to combine and deliver the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object for shipping to a delivery address associated with the user.
However, Plaster discloses systems and methods “for providing inventory fulfillment services to customers who have small quantities of heterogeneous items to sell.” (See Plaster, at least Abstract). Plaster further discloses:
determining information of destination of collection of goods in a first logistics stage according to the target logistics plan, and providing the information of destination of collection of goods to one or more dispatchers associated with the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object (See Plaster, at least para. [0077], order received from a customer containing items from different merchants; paras. [0078]-[0079], items are retrieved by pickers from warehouse and delivered to a packaging area within the fulfilment center); and
generating a logistics order for a second logistics stage to combine and deliver the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object for shipping to a delivery address associated with the user (See Plaster, at least para. [0079], at least two of the retrieved items corresponding to two different merchants are packaged into a single package for shipment; para. [0080], package containing at least two items is tendered to a carrier for shipping to the customer; para. [0115], carriers include postal service, UPS, couriers).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart and the shipping system and method of Wadhawan and the cross-border selling system of Racco the ability of determining information of destination of collection of goods in a first logistics stage according to the target logistics plan, and providing the information of destination of collection of goods to one or more dispatchers associated with the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object; and generating a logistics order for a second logistics stage to combine and deliver the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object for shipping to a delivery address associated with the user as disclosed by Plaster since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “packaging and shipping a group of items…separately may cost more than packaging and shipping those items together.” (See Plaster, at least para. [0075]).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tepfenhart, in view of Wadhawan, and further in view of Racco, and further in view of Plaster.
Claim 19: Tepfenhart discloses:
one or more processors (See Tepfenhart, at least para. [0022], processor); and
memory storing executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors (See Tepfenhart, at least para. [0022], memory) cause the one or more processors to perform acts comprising:
determining multiple product objects in a target collection associated with a first user (See Tepfenhart, at least para. [0031], customer using a client device accesses retailer’s server system to order and/or purchase items from the retailer; para. [0036], customer adds one or more items to a virtual shopping cart), wherein:
determining a plurality of target product object that supports a target logistics plan from the target collection (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text; para. [0033], available fulfillment options for each item are stored in a product catalog database that accessed by the online retail system; para. [0032], shopping cart displays a listing for each of a plurality of items that includes available fulfilment options or channels for each item; in the example of Figure 1, each item in the cart has 4 different fulfillment options), wherein determining the plurality of target product object that supports the target logistics plan comprises:
querying a product object information database based at least in part on corresponding identifications of the multiple product objects (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text; para. [0033], available fulfillment options for each item are stored in a product catalog database that accessed by the online retail system); and
determining respective identifications of one or more target logistics plans supported by the multiple product objects based at least in part on records stored in the product information database (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 1 and associated text; para. [0033], available fulfillment options for each item are stored in a product catalog database that accessed by the online retail system; para. [0032], shopping cart displays a listing for each of a plurality of items that includes available fulfilment options or channels for each item; in the example of Figure 1, each item in the cart has 4 different fulfillment options);
generating a tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment; the Examiner notes that a single page may correspond to a tab page), generating the tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan comprising:
separating the multiple product objects into multiple groups based at least in part on the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment);
aggregating the plurality of target product objects as a first group of the multiple groups, and displaying the plurality of target product objects in a first area in the tab page (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment); and
aggregating remaining product objects of the multiple product objects in the target collection that do not support the target logistics plan as a second group of the multiple groups, and displaying the remaining product objects in a second area in the tab page (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment), wherein:
the first area does not overlap with the second area, and is separated from the second area by a dividing line showing a prompt indicating that the remaining product objects displayed in the second area do not support the target logistics plan (See Tepfenhart, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, there are 2 groups included: Store Pickup Items and Ship to Store items; para. [0051], in Figure 7, the checkout page includes two active areas 74 and 75 listing the items selected for in-store pick-up and ship-to-store fulfillment; in Figure 7, the Store Pickup Items are separated from the Ship to Store items by a dividing line (i.e., the bottom line of the Happy Birthday Custom Cake item and the line about Ship to Store items); the heading “Ship to Store items” corresponds to the prompt because it indicates that it is a different shipping type than the previously listed Store Pickup items; the Examiner notes that paragraph [0080] of Applicant’s published application also indicates that a “prompt” may be merely text, i.e., “Not eligible for Ten Days Arrived”).
Tepfenhart does not expressly disclose determining whether the plurality of target products objects satisfies one or more conditions associated with the target logistics plan…; in response to determining that the plurality of target products objects satisfies the one or more conditions associated with the target logistic plan…, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects that support the target logistics plan to the target collection associated with the first user; and after the first user selects at least one product object of the other product objects, aggregating and displaying the at least one product object with the plurality of target products objects in the first area.
However, Wadhawan discloses:
determining whether the plurality of target products objects satisfies one or more conditions associated with the target logistics plan…(See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, Tide Original Laundry Detergent, Price $11.99, weight 7 pounds, available in the Weighted Shipping Zone; FIG. 8 and associated text, item 802, 7 pounds in box, you can add 33 more (prompt); condition satisfied is the 40 pounds; para. [0044], box allocation module 152 can determine whether there is enough room (e.g., based on weight, volume, or any other physical or logical metric) in the existing box(es) to fit the selected item; box allocation module 152 can determine the available capacity of a physical box; box allocation module 152 may determine a representation of what a physical box's capacity would be if one or more items were added to the physical box);
in response to determining that the plurality of target products objects satisfies the one or more conditions associated with the target logistic plan…, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects that support the target logistics plan to the target collection associated with the first user (See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 8 and associated text, item 802, 7 pounds in box, you can add 33 more (prompt); condition satisfied is the 40 pounds; item 804 displays other products available under Weighted Shipping to add to the box; para. [0044], box allocation module 152 can determine whether there is enough room (e.g., based on weight, volume, or any other physical or logical metric) in the existing box(es) to fit the selected item; box allocation module 152 can determine the available capacity of a physical box; para. [0045], box allocation module 152 provides to the user a box status (e.g., via a user interface display) indicating the total weight of the items placed in the box(es), para. [0084], set of item recommendations 804 displayed to the user based on the current items already in the weight-based shipping container); and
after the first user selects at least one product object of the other product objects, aggregating and displaying the at least one product object with the plurality of target products objects in the first area (See Wadhawan, at least FIG. 7 and associated text, Tide Original Laundry Detergent, Price $11.99, weight 7 pounds, available in the Weighted Shipping Zone; FIG. 8 and associated text, item 802, 7 pounds in box; item 804, Customers Who Bought Tide Original Laundry…Also Bought, i.e., the Tide Laundry Detergent is in the box and system is recommending other products; FIG. 10 and associated text, products available for Weighted Shipping are displayed along with their respective weights; para. [0088], FIGS. 11A illustrates the process of adding items to the weight-based shipping container; in this case, the Pepperidge Farm Goldfish, Cheddar 30-ounce carton weighting 2 pounds and costing $6.78 is added to the box so that the box weight now equals 9 pounds; Figure 13 displays the box/shopping cart with both the Tide and the Goldfish crackers in it).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart the ability of determining whether the plurality of target products objects satisfies one or more conditions associated with the target logistics plan…; in response to determining that the plurality of target products objects satisfies the one or more conditions associated with the target logistic plan…, providing a first operation option for adding other product objects that support the target logistics plan to the target collection associated with a first user; and after the first user selects at least one product object of the other product objects, aggregating and displaying the at least one product object with the plurality of target products objects in the first area as disclosed by Wadhawan since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to allow users “to purchase a group of items and a pay a flat shipping fee.” (See Wadhawan, at least para. [0023]).
Neither Tepfenhart nor Wadhawan expressly discloses determining multiple product objects in a target collection associated with a first user, wherein: the multiple product objects are associated with at least one second user, the multiple product objects are added into the target collection by the at least one second user, the first user is a user of a first country, and the at least one second user is a user of a second country and that the target logistics plan is in a cross-border logistics scenario.
However, Racco discloses determining multiple product objects in a target collection associated with a first user, wherein: the multiple product objects are associated with at least one second user, the multiple product objects are added into the target collection by the at least one second user, the first user is a user of a first country, and the at least one second user is a user of a second country (See Racco, at least FIG. 20 and associated text; para. [0172], sellers can specify how they will ship their item to buyers; for example, Canadian and US sellers may choose different shipping methods to buyers in Canada, the United States and international buyers; if the seller is not from Canada or the US, they would have a fourth option allowing them to specify their shipping method to buyers in their own country; for example, if the user is from Australia, they can specify a shipping method for shipping within Australia, shipping to Canada, the United States and shipping internationally; the seller in Australia may want to offer free shipping to buyers within Australia, offer a flat shipping rate to buyers in the United States, use calculated shipping (using UPS, Fed-Ex, the United States Postal Service etc. to automatically calculate the shipping price based on the buyer's location and weight and dimensions of the packaged items), and finally require that international buyers make individual shipping requests to the seller so that they could determine shipping on a per user basis; para. [0173], buyer chooses three items to be shipped); and that the target logistics plan is in a cross-border logistics scenario (See Racco, at least FIG. 20 and associated text; para. [0172], sellers can specify how they will ship their item to buyers; for example, Canadian and US sellers may choose different shipping methods to buyers in Canada, the United States and international buyers; if the seller is not from Canada or the US, they would have a fourth option allowing them to specify their shipping method to buyers in their own country; for example, if the user is from Australia, they can specify a shipping method for shipping within Australia, shipping to Canada, the United States and shipping internationally; the seller in Australia may want to offer free shipping to buyers within Australia, offer a flat shipping rate to buyers in the United States, use calculated shipping (using UPS, Fed-Ex, the United States Postal Service etc. to automatically calculate the shipping price based on the buyer's location and weight and dimensions of the packaged items), and finally require that international buyers make individual shipping requests to the seller so that they could determine shipping on a per user basis).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart and the shipping system and method of Wadhawan the ability of determining multiple product objects in a target collection associated with a first user, wherein: the multiple product objects are associated with at least one second user, the multiple product objects are added into the target collection by the at least one second user, the first user is a user of a first country, and the at least one second user is a user of a second country and that the target logistics plan is in a cross-border logistics scenario as disclosed by Racco since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a tool that allows a seller “to be flexible and ‘mix and match’ their shipping options to different geographic regions.” (See Racco, at least para. [0172]).
Neither Tepfenhart nor Wadhawan nor Racco expressly discloses combining, after receiving a request for generating a transaction order, the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object included in the request into a same transaction order, to facilitate transportation and delivery through the target logistics plan, wherein the target logistics plan includes a first logistics stage and a second logistics stage, the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are respectively transported to a target collection destination in the second country in the first logistics stage, and the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are consolidated for shipping to a delivery address associated with the first user in the first country in the second logistics stage.
However, Plaster discloses combining, after receiving a request for generating a transaction order, the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object included in the request into a same transaction order, to facilitate transportation and delivery through the target logistics plan, wherein the target logistics plan includes a first logistics stage and a second logistics stage, the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are respectively transported to a target collection destination in the second country in the first logistics stage, and the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are consolidated for shipping to a delivery address associated with the first user in the first country in the second logistics stage (See Plaster, at least para. [0079], at least two of the retrieved items corresponding to two different merchants are packaged into a single package for shipment; para. [0080], package containing at least two items is tendered to a carrier for shipping to the customer) .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart and the shipping system and method of Wadhawan and the cross-border selling system of Racco the ability of combining, after receiving a request for generating a transaction order, the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object included in the request into a same transaction order, to facilitate transportation and delivery through the target logistics plan, wherein the target logistics plan includes a first logistics stage and a second logistics stage, the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are respectively transported to a target collection destination in the second country in the first logistics stage, and the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are consolidated for shipping to a delivery address associated with the first user in the first country in the second logistics stage as disclosed by Plaster since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “packaging and shipping a group of items…separately may cost more than packaging and shipping those items together.” (See Plaster, at least para. [0075]).
Claim 20: The combination of Tepfenhart and Wadhawan and Racco and Plaster discloses all the limitations of claim 19 discussed above.
Neither Tepfenhart nor Wadhawan nor Racco expressly discloses wherein: the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are combined and delivered to the delivery address associated with the first user in the first country in the second logistics stage.
However, Plaster discloses wherein: the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are combined and delivered to the delivery address associated with the first user in the first country in the second logistics stage (See Plaster, at least para. [0079], at least two of the retrieved items corresponding to two different merchants are packaged into a single package for shipment; para. [0080], package containing at least two items is tendered to a carrier for shipping to the customer; para. [0115], carriers include postal service, UPS, couriers).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the product fulfilment system and method of Tepfenhart and the shipping system and method of Wadhawan and the cross-border selling system of Racco the ability wherein: the plurality of target product objects and the at least one product object are combined and delivered to the delivery address associated with the first user in the first country in the second logistics stage as disclosed by Plaster since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “packaging and shipping a group of items…separately may cost more than packaging and shipping those items together.” (See Plaster, at least para. [0075]).
Potentially Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, and 35 USC 101 set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With respect to claim 5, the prior art of record, alone or combined neither anticipates nor renders obvious the combination of claims 1 and 5, and in particular “wherein generating the tab page corresponding to the target logistics plan comprises: providing a first tab option and a second tab option on the tab page, wherein the first tab option corresponds to a default product object sorting method, and the second tab option corresponds to the target logistics plan.”
With respect to claim 7, the prior art of record, alone or combined neither anticipates nor renders obvious the combination of claims 1 and 7, and in particular generating multiple second tab pages corresponding to different target logistics plans respectively if the target logistics plan comprises the different target logistics plans.
In the event the claims are amended, they will be subject to further examination.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNE MARIE GEORGALAS whose telephone number is (571)270-1258 E.S.T.. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Marissa Thein can be reached on 571-272-6764. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Anne M Georgalas/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689
Prosecution Insights