DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is response to communication filed on February 19, 2026.
Status of claims within the present application:
Claims 1 – 20 are pending.
Claims 1, 3, 9, and 17 are amended.
Response to Amendment
With respect to claims 1 – 2 and 4 – 20 that were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220019480 A1 to Hankinson in view of US 20200228604 A1 to Wang et al., (hereinafter, “Wang’), applicant’s remarks, see page [8 – 10] filed on February 19, 2026, have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Therefore, the applicant is directed to the response below:
With respect to claims 1, 9, and 17, applicant argued that the prior art does not teach “after sending the service request data, receiving, at the portal interface, (i) an order request, for at least one of a product or a service, generated in response to an affirmative user selection associated with the service request data” where the order request is a service or a product. Examiner noted that, within the para. 23 and para. 100 of Wang, the prior art discussed having a service request and a content request being used after user requests usage of a service apparatus which is mapped to the amended limitation. Therefore, the rejection still stands.
With respect to claim 3 that was rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220019480 A1 to Hankinson in view of US 20200228604 A1 to Wang et al., (hereinafter, “Wang’) in further view of US 20230139695 A1 to Xu et al., applicant’s remarks, see page [8 – 10] filed on February 19, 2026, have been considered but are moot because of the new interpretation the previously reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220019480 A1 to Hankinson in view of US 20200228604 A1 to Wang et al., (hereinafter, “Wang’).
Regarding claim 1, Hankinson teaches a method, comprising: receiving a query comprising a first identifier of a first entity at a portal interface controlled by a second entity; [Hankinson, para. 7 discloses a first client, of the plurality of clients, sends a request to perform a task to the software provider and raw data to the cloud. The software provider maintains a library of user defined functions (UDFs). The cloud hosts a collaboration software module. Para. 8 discloses the software provider identifies a set of UDFs of the library of UDFs applicable to performing the task. The software provider further embeds an encryption key into the set of UDFs to produce a set of secure UDFs then sends the secure UDFs and an identifier of the first client, referenced as a first identifier, to the cloud.] validating the first entity based on the first identifier to generate a validated first entity; [Hankinson, para. 8 discloses the collaboration software module residing in the cloud causes a processor of the cloud to apply the set of UDFs to the raw data, subject to a determination that the first identifier matches a cloud's known identifier of the first client, and to place a result of applying the UDFs in a memory space of the cloud. The first client is permitted to accesses the result based on the first identifier.], but Hankinson does not teach generating a first credential based on (i) the validated first entity and (ii) a second identifier generated by the second entity for the first entity; sending the first credential to the first entity; sending service request data to the first entity; after sending the service request data, receiving, at the portal interface, (i) an order request, for at least one of a product or a service, generated in response to an affirmative user selection associated with the service request data and (ii) a second credential; and responsive to validating that the second credential received at the portal interface matches the first credential generated based on the validated first entity and the second identifier and sent to the first entity, sending an order response corresponding to the order request.
However, Wang does teach generating a first credential based on (i) the validated first entity and (ii) a second identifier generated by the second entity for the first entity; [Wang, para. 87 discloses a mapping of the given client identifier to the given service identifier is created (308). In some implementations, the mapping is created in a data structure that is stored in a database, as discussed above. For example, the service apparatus can create an entry in the data structure that links, associates, or otherwise indicates that the given client identifier and the given service identifier represent a same user. Para. 98 discloses the tag information that includes the given publisher identifier and the given client identifier may be received with a different service identifier (318). For example, assume that the user first accesses the publisher resource using a mobile device, and later accesses the publisher resource using a tablet device, as discussed above. In this situation, the service identifier assigned to the user will differ on a per-device basis.] sending the first credential to the first entity; [Wang, para. 94 discloses A list of client identifiers is received from a publisher (310). In some implementations, the list of client identifiers is received by way of an API that enables the publisher to upload the client identifiers to the service apparatus. The list of client identifiers includes client identifiers that have been assigned to various users by the publisher.] sending service request data to the first entity; [Wang, para. 89 discloses assume that the user is currently logged in to a service (e.g., a video streaming service) offered by the service apparatus when the tag information is received from the client device (e.g., when the user visits the publisher resource). In this example, the service apparatus can identify the account identifier of the user, and use the account identifier to identify other service identifiers in other services (e.g., in other cookie spaces) that the service apparatus has assigned to the user.] after sending the service request data, receiving, at the portal interface, (i) an order request, for at least one of a product or a service, generated in response to an affirmative user selection associated with the service request data [Wang, para. 23 discloses those requests will include a service identifier that represents a user in the domain of the service apparatus. The received service identifier can then be compared to the list of service identifiers that represent the user that the publisher has elected to receive user-specific information. When the service apparatus identifies a match between the received service identifier and the list, the service apparatus can transmit the user-specific information in response to the request. Para. 100 discloses the component request 112 can include event data specifying features such as a name (or network location) of a server from which the digital component is being requested, a name (or network location) of the requesting device (e.g., the client device 106), and/or information that the service apparatus 110 can use to select one or more digital components, or other content, provided in response to the request.] (ii) a second credential; [Wang, para. 101 discloses when the client device provides a corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service identifiers, first content reserved for (e.g., specified for) users specified by the publisher can be transmitted to the client device.] and responsive to validating that the second credential received at the portal interface matches the first credential generated based on the validated first entity and the second identifier and sent to the first entity, [Wang, para. 101 discloses when the client device provides a corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service identifiers, first content reserved for (e.g., specified for) users specified by the publisher can be transmitted to the client device. For example, assume that the publisher has specified particular content (e.g., an image, message, or video) be provided to users represented by the list of client identifiers uploaded by the publisher. In this situation, the corresponding service identifiers for those users will be included in the list of matched service identifiers, and the particular content can be transmitted (or otherwise distributed to) the client device based on the client device having submitted a service identifier that is included in the list of service identifiers.] sending an order response corresponding to the order request. [Wang, para. 101 discloses the user-specific information can be delivered while the user is accessing a service provided by the service apparatus, such that the content is presented while the user is accessing a different second level domain than the domain of the publisher.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filling date to combine Wang’s system with Hankinson’s system, with a motivation for the different content can be any content that is otherwise available for distribution to the client device, e.g., based on one or more factors discussed with reference to FIG. 1. In some implementations, no third-party content will be provided for presentation with the service being accessed by the user when the client device does not provide the corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service providers. [Wang, para. 102]
As per claim 2, modified Hankinson teaches the method of claim 1, wherein: sending the first credential comprises encrypting the first credential; [Hankinson, para. 386 discloses Exchange 2720 applies the set of UDF's received from the provider to the client's data to produce the task's requisite results as encrypted results 2822. Client-1 may then acquire the encrypted results from exchange 2720 and use the UDF with the embedded encryption key to further process the result.] and validating that the second credential matches the first credential comprises decrypting the second credential. [Hankinson, para. 405 discloses Client C.sub.2 then sends a query 3212 to provider 2610 and raw data 3225 to exchange 2720. The provider then sends the exchange another custom secured UDF relevant to query 3212. The secure function has an embedded decryption key. The function produces specific results based on query 3212 from client C.sub.2.]
Regarding claim 3, modified Hankinson teaches the method of claim 1, but Hankinson does not teach the service request data comprises a link address that references a list of available services associated with the service request, the list being managed by an application domain controlled by the second entity.
However, Wang does teach the service request data comprises a link address that references a list of available services associated with the service request, the list being managed by an application domain controlled by the second entity. [Wang, para. 3 discloses obtaining, from the client device, a given service identifier assigned to the user by the service apparatus; creating, by the service apparatus and in a data structure, a mapping the given service identifier to the given client identifier; receiving, from the publisher and by way of an API, a list of client identifiers assigned to a set of users by the publisher; determining that the list of client identifiers includes the given client identifier that is mapped to the given service identifier; storing, by the service apparatus, the given service identifier that is mapped to the given client identifier in a list of matched service identifiers based on the determination; receiving, by the service apparatus, multiple content requests from multiple different client devices accessing services provided by the service apparatus; responding to the content requests based on whether the client devices provide service identifiers that are included in the list of matched service identifiers,]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filling date to combine Wang’s system with Hankinson’s system, with a motivation for the different content can be any content that is otherwise available for distribution to the client device, e.g., based on one or more factors discussed with reference to FIG. 1. In some implementations, no third-party content will be provided for presentation with the service being accessed by the user when the client device does not provide the corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service providers. [Wang, para. 102]
Regarding claim 4, modified Hankinson teaches the method of claim 1, wherein: the query comprises a first address; [Hankinson, para. 7 discloses a first client, of the plurality of clients, sends a request to perform a task to the software provider and raw data to the cloud. The software provider maintains a library of user defined functions (UDFs). The cloud hosts a collaboration software module. Para. 8 discloses the software provider identifies a set of UDFs of the library of UDFs applicable to performing the task. The software provider further embeds an encryption key into the set of UDFs to produce a set of secure UDFs then sends the secure UDFs and an identifier of the first client, referenced as a first identifier, to the cloud.], but Hankinson does not teach the method comprises: mapping the first address to a second address; and forwarding the query from the portal interface to the second address.
However, Wang does teach the method comprises: mapping the first address to a second address; [Wang, para. 87 discloses a mapping of the given client identifier to the given service identifier is created (308). In some implementations, the mapping is created in a data structure that is stored in a database, as discussed above. For example, the service apparatus can create an entry in the data structure that links, associates, or otherwise indicates that the given client identifier and the given service identifier represent a same user. Para. 98 discloses the tag information that includes the given publisher identifier and the given client identifier may be received with a different service identifier (318). For example, assume that the user first accesses the publisher resource using a mobile device, and later accesses the publisher resource using a tablet device, as discussed above. In this situation, the service identifier assigned to the user will differ on a per-device basis.] and forwarding the query from the portal interface to the second address. [Wang, para. 94 discloses A list of client identifiers is received from a publisher (310). In some implementations, the list of client identifiers is received by way of an API that enables the publisher to upload the client identifiers to the service apparatus. The list of client identifiers includes client identifiers that have been assigned to various users by the publisher.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filling date to combine Wang’s system with Hankinson’s system, with a motivation for the different content can be any content that is otherwise available for distribution to the client device, e.g., based on one or more factors discussed with reference to FIG. 1. In some implementations, no third-party content will be provided for presentation with the service being accessed by the user when the client device does not provide the corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service providers. [Wang, para. 102]
Regarding claim 5, modified Hankinson teaches the method of claim 1, but Hankinson does not teach wherein generating the first credential based on the validated first entity comprises: generating the first credential based on at least one of a public business identifier or a network identifier associated with the validated first entity.
However, Wang does teach wherein generating the first credential based on the validated first entity comprises: generating the first credential based on at least one of a public business identifier or a network identifier associated with the validated first entity [Wang, para. 87 discloses a mapping of the given client identifier to the given service identifier is created (308). In some implementations, the mapping is created in a data structure that is stored in a database, as discussed above. For example, the service apparatus can create an entry in the data structure that links, associates, or otherwise indicates that the given client identifier and the given service identifier represent a same user. Para. 98 discloses the tag information that includes the given publisher identifier and the given client identifier may be received with a different service identifier (318). For example, assume that the user first accesses the publisher resource using a mobile device, and later accesses the publisher resource using a tablet device, as discussed above. In this situation, the service identifier assigned to the user will differ on a per-device basis.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filling date to combine Wang’s system with Hankinson’s system, with a motivation for the different content can be any content that is otherwise available for distribution to the client device, e.g., based on one or more factors discussed with reference to FIG. 1. In some implementations, no third-party content will be provided for presentation with the service being accessed by the user when the client device does not provide the corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service providers. [Wang, para. 102]
Regarding claim 6, modified Hankinson teaches the method of claim 1, but Hankinson does not teach wherein: the query comprises a query type; and validating the first entity based on the validated first entity comprises validating that the first entity is authorized for the query type based on the validated first entity.
However, Wang does teach wherein: the query comprises a query type; [Wang, para. 31 discloses The component request 112 can include event data specifying other event features, such as the electronic document being requested and characteristics of locations of the electronic document at which digital component can be presented. For example, event data specifying a reference (e.g., URL) to an electronic document (e.g., webpage) in which the digital component will be presented, available locations of the electronic documents that are available to present digital components, sizes of the available locations, and/or media types that are eligible for presentation in the locations can be provided to the service apparatus 110. Similarly, event data specifying keywords associated with the electronic document (“document keywords”) or entities (e.g., people, places, or things) that are referenced by the electronic document can also be included in the component request 112 (e.g., as payload data) and provided to the service apparatus 110 to facilitate identification of digital components that are eligible for presentation with the electronic document. The event data can also include a search query that was submitted from the client device 106 to obtain a search results page.] and validating the first entity based on the validated first entity comprises validating that the first entity is authorized for the query type based on the validated first entity. [Wang, para. 101 discloses when the client device provides a corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service identifiers, first content reserved for (e.g., specified for) users specified by the publisher can be transmitted to the client device. For example, assume that the publisher has specified particular content (e.g., an image, message, or video) be provided to users represented by the list of client identifiers uploaded by the publisher. In this situation, the corresponding service identifiers for those users will be included in the list of matched service identifiers, and the particular content can be transmitted (or otherwise distributed to) the client device based on the client device having submitted a service identifier that is included in the list of service identifiers. The user-specific information can be delivered while the user is accessing a service provided by the service apparatus, such that the content is presented while the user is accessing a different second level domain than the domain of the publisher.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filling date to combine Wang’s system with Hankinson’s system, with a motivation for the different content can be any content that is otherwise available for distribution to the client device, e.g., based on one or more factors discussed with reference to FIG. 1. In some implementations, no third-party content will be provided for presentation with the service being accessed by the user when the client device does not provide the corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service providers. [Wang, para. 102]
Regarding claim 7, modified Hankinson teaches the method of claim 1, but Hankinson does not teach comprising: invalidating the first credential after a predetermined time period, and rejecting the order request responsive to receiving the order request after invalidating the first credential.
However, Wang does teach comprising: invalidating the first credential after a predetermined time period, and rejecting the order request responsive to receiving the order request after invalidating the first credential. [Wang, para. 76 discloses When the query fails to return an indication that the publisher list database 258 includes a matching service identifier 272, which is an indication that the client device did not provide a service identifier that is included in the list of matched service identifiers provided by a publisher, the service apparatus 110 can either not provide any content to populate the content slot 270, or the service apparatus 110 can provide content that is not reserved for (or specifically specified) for users represented by the lists of matched service identifiers.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filling date to combine Wang’s system with Hankinson’s system, with a motivation for the different content can be any content that is otherwise available for distribution to the client device, e.g., based on one or more factors discussed with reference to FIG. 1. In some implementations, no third-party content will be provided for presentation with the service being accessed by the user when the client device does not provide the corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service providers. [Wang, para. 102]
Regarding claim 8, modified Hankinson teaches the method of claim 1, comprising: receiving a second query at the portal interface from a third entity using an authenticated interface; [Hankinson, para. 7 discloses a first client, of the plurality of clients, sends a request to perform a task to the software provider and raw data to the cloud. The software provider maintains a library of user defined functions (UDFs). The cloud hosts a collaboration software module. Para. 8 discloses the software provider identifies a set of UDFs of the library of UDFs applicable to performing the task. The software provider further embeds an encryption key into the set of UDFs to produce a set of secure UDFs then sends the secure UDFs and an identifier of the first client, referenced as a first identifier, to the cloud.], but Hankinson does not teach sending second service request data to the third entity; receiving at the portal interface a second order request associated with the second service request data; and sending a second order response corresponding to the second order request.
However, Wang does teach sending second service request data to the third entity; [Wang, para. 89 discloses assume that the user is currently logged in to a service (e.g., a video streaming service) offered by the service apparatus when the tag information is received from the client device (e.g., when the user visits the publisher resource). In this example, the service apparatus can identify the account identifier of the user, and use the account identifier to identify other service identifiers in other services (e.g., in other cookie spaces) that the service apparatus has assigned to the user.] receiving at the portal interface a second order request associated with the second service request data; [Wang, para. 100 discloses Content requests are received from multiple different client devices that are accessing services provided by the service apparatus (324). In some implementations, the content requests are component requests, as discussed with reference to FIG. 1. The content requests can be requests for third-party content to be delivered to the client device for incorporation into a portion of a display (or user interface) at the client device. Para. 101 discloses when the client device provides a corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service identifiers, first content reserved for (e.g., specified for) users specified by the publisher can be transmitted to the client device.] sending a second order response corresponding to the second order request. [Wang, para. 101 discloses when the client device provides a corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service identifiers, first content reserved for (e.g., specified for) users specified by the publisher can be transmitted to the client device. For example, assume that the publisher has specified particular content (e.g., an image, message, or video) be provided to users represented by the list of client identifiers uploaded by the publisher. In this situation, the corresponding service identifiers for those users will be included in the list of matched service identifiers, and the particular content can be transmitted (or otherwise distributed to) the client device based on the client device having submitted a service identifier that is included in the list of service identifiers. The user-specific information can be delivered while the user is accessing a service provided by the service apparatus, such that the content is presented while the user is accessing a different second level domain than the domain of the publisher.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filling date to combine Wang’s system with Hankinson’s system, with a motivation for the different content can be any content that is otherwise available for distribution to the client device, e.g., based on one or more factors discussed with reference to FIG. 1. In some implementations, no third-party content will be provided for presentation with the service being accessed by the user when the client device does not provide the corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service providers. [Wang, para. 102]
Regarding claim 9, Hankinson teaches a communication system, comprising: a portal interface, comprising: a routing module configured to receive a query comprising a first identifier of a first entity; [Hankinson, para. 7 discloses a first client, of the plurality of clients, sends a request to perform a task to the software provider and raw data to the cloud. The software provider maintains a library of user defined functions (UDFs). The cloud hosts a collaboration software module. Para. 8 discloses the software provider identifies a set of UDFs of the library of UDFs applicable to performing the task. The software provider further embeds an encryption key into the set of UDFs to produce a set of secure UDFs then sends the secure UDFs and an identifier of the first client, referenced as a first identifier, to the cloud.] a validation module configured to validate the first entity based on the first identifier to generate a validated first entity; [Hankinson, para. 8 discloses the collaboration software module residing in the cloud causes a processor of the cloud to apply the set of UDFs to the raw data, subject to a determination that the first identifier matches a cloud's known identifier of the first client, and to place a result of applying the UDFs in a memory space of the cloud. The first client is permitted to accesses the result based on the first identifier.], but Hankinson does not teach a credential generation module configured to generate a first credential based on (i) the validated first entity and (ii) a second identifier generated by a second entity for the first entity, wherein: the routing module is configured to: send the first credential to the first entity, send service request data to the first entity, and after sending the service request data, receive, at the portal interface, (i) an order request generated in response to an affirmative user selection associated with the service request data and (ii) a second credential, the credential generation module is configured to validate that the second credential received at the portal interface matches the first credential generated based on the validated first entity and the second identifier and sent to the first entity, the routing module is configured to, responsive to the credential generation module validating that the second credential matches the first credential, send an order response corresponding to the order request and at least one of: the order request is for at least one of a product or a service, or the order response corresponds to at least one of a status of the order request or a link to access information associated with the order request.
However, Wang does teach generating a first credential based on (i) the validated first entity and (ii) a second identifier generated by the second entity for the first entity; [Wang, para. 87 discloses a mapping of the given client identifier to the given service identifier is created (308). In some implementations, the mapping is created in a data structure that is stored in a database, as discussed above. For example, the service apparatus can create an entry in the data structure that links, associates, or otherwise indicates that the given client identifier and the given service identifier represent a same user. Para. 98 discloses the tag information that includes the given publisher identifier and the given client identifier may be received with a different service identifier (318). For example, assume that the user first accesses the publisher resource using a mobile device, and later accesses the publisher resource using a tablet device, as discussed above. In this situation, the service identifier assigned to the user will differ on a per-device basis.] wherein: the routing module is configured to: send the first credential to the first entity, [Wang, para. 94 discloses A list of client identifiers is received from a publisher (310). In some implementations, the list of client identifiers is received by way of an API that enables the publisher to upload the client identifiers to the service apparatus. The list of client identifiers includes client identifiers that have been assigned to various users by the publisher.] send service request data to the first entity, [Wang, para. 89 discloses assume that the user is currently logged in to a service (e.g., a video streaming service) offered by the service apparatus when the tag information is received from the client device (e.g., when the user visits the publisher resource). In this example, the service apparatus can identify the account identifier of the user, and use the account identifier to identify other service identifiers in other services (e.g., in other cookie spaces) that the service apparatus has assigned to the user.] and after sending the service request data, receive, at the portal interface, (i) an order request generated in response to an affirmative user selection associated with the service request data [Wang, para. 23 discloses those requests will include a service identifier that represents a user in the domain of the service apparatus. The received service identifier can then be compared to the list of service identifiers that represent the user that the publisher has elected to receive user-specific information. When the service apparatus identifies a match between the received service identifier and the list, the service apparatus can transmit the user-specific information in response to the request. Para. 100 discloses Content requests are received from multiple different client devices that are accessing services provided by the service apparatus (324). In some implementations, the content requests are component requests, as discussed with reference to FIG. 1. The content requests can be requests for third-party content to be delivered to the client device for incorporation into a portion of a display (or user interface) at the client device.] and (ii) a second credential, [Wang, Para. 101 discloses when the client device provides a corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service identifiers, first content reserved for (e.g., specified for) users specified by the publisher can be transmitted to the client device.] the credential generation module is configured to validate that the second credential received at the portal interface matches the first credential generated based on the validated first entity and the second identifier and sent to the first entity [Wang, para. 101 discloses when the client device provides a corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service identifiers, first content reserved for (e.g., specified for) users specified by the publisher can be transmitted to the client device. For example, assume that the publisher has specified particular content (e.g., an image, message, or video) be provided to users represented by the list of client identifiers uploaded by the publisher. In this situation, the corresponding service identifiers for those users will be included in the list of matched service identifiers, and the particular content can be transmitted (or otherwise distributed to) the client device based on the client device having submitted a service identifier that is included in the list of service identifiers.] the routing module is configured to, responsive to the credential generation module validating that the second credential matches the first credential, send an order response corresponding to the order request [Wang, para. 101 discloses the user-specific information can be delivered while the user is accessing a service provided by the service apparatus, such that the content is presented while the user is accessing a different second level domain than the domain of the publisher.] and at least one of: the order request is for at least one of a product or a service, [Wang, para. 100 discloses Content requests are received from multiple different client devices that are accessing services provided by the service apparatus (324). In some implementations, the content requests are component requests, as discussed with reference to FIG. 1. The content requests can be requests for third-party content to be delivered to the client device for incorporation into a portion of a display (or user interface) at the client device.] or the order response corresponds to at least one of a status of the order request or a link to access information associated with the order request. [Wang, para. 30 discloses the digital component script can enable the client device 106 to generate a packetized data request including a header and payload data. The component request 112 can include event data specifying features such as a name (or network location) of a server from which the digital component is being requested, a name (or network location) of the requesting device (e.g., the client device 106), and/or information that the service apparatus 110 can use to select one or more digital components, or other content, provided in response to the request. The component request 112 is transmitted, by the client device 106, over the network 102 (e.g., a telecommunications network) to a server of the service apparatus 110.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filling date to combine Wang’s system with Hankinson’s system, with a motivation for the different content can be any content that is otherwise available for distribution to the client device, e.g., based on one or more factors discussed with reference to FIG. 1. In some implementations, no third-party content will be provided for presentation with the service being accessed by the user when the client device does not provide the corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service providers. [Wang, para. 102]
Regarding claim 10, it recites features similar to features within claim 2, therefore, it is rejected in a similar manner.
Regarding claim 11, modified Hankinson teaches the communication system of claim 9, but Hankinson does not teach wherein sending the service request data comprises: sending a link address to a list of available services.
However, Wang does teach wherein sending the service request data comprises: sending a link address to a list of available services. [Wang, para. 89 discloses assume that the user is currently logged in to a service (e.g., a video streaming service) offered by the service apparatus when the tag information is received from the client device (e.g., when the user visits the publisher resource). In this example, the service apparatus can identify the account identifier of the user, and use the account identifier to identify other service identifiers in other services (e.g., in other cookie spaces) that the service apparatus has assigned to the user.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filling date to combine Wang’s system with Hankinson’s system, with a motivation for the different content can be any content that is otherwise available for distribution to the client device, e.g., based on one or more factors discussed with reference to FIG. 1. In some implementations, no third-party content will be provided for presentation with the service being accessed by the user when the client device does not provide the corresponding service identifier that is included in the list of matched service providers. [Wang, para. 102]
As per claim 12, modified Hankinson teaches the communication system of claim 11, comprising: a security module configured to encrypt the link address prior to the routing module sending the service request data to the first entity. [Hankinson, para. 386 discloses Exchange 2720 applies the set of UDF's received from the provider to the client's data to produce the task's requisite results as encrypted results 2822. Client-1 may then acquire the encrypted results from exchange 2720 and use the UDF with the embedded encryption key to further process the result.]
Regarding claims 13 – 16, they recite features similar to features within claims 4 – 7, therefore, they are rejected in a similar manner.
Regarding claim 17, it recites features similar to features within claim 9, therefore, it is rejected in a similar manner.
Regarding claims 18 – 19, they recite features similar to features within claims 18 – 19, therefore, they are rejected in a similar manner.
Regarding claim 20, it recites features similar to features within claim 7, therefore, it is rejected in a similar manner.
Conclusion
Pertinent prior art made of record however not relied upon:
US 20230091160 A1 to Mao et al.
“A method and device for identity verification is provided. The method includes receiving a screen projection operation performed by a user to project a screen of a first electronic device onto a second electronic device, collecting, first identity verification information of the user in response to the screen projection operation, obtaining a first comparison result between the first identity verification information and second identity verification information pre-stored in the first electronic device, and displaying based on the first comparison result being consistent, a screen projection interface of the first electronic device, receiving an unlock operation performed by the user, collecting third identity verification information of the user, obtaining a second comparison result between the third identity verification information and the second identity verification information, and displaying or not displaying content based on the result of the identity verification.”
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 Phuc Pham whose telephone number is (571)272-8893. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:30 AM - 4:30 PM; Friday 8:00 AM - 12:00 PM.
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, Linglan Edwards can be reached on (571) 270-5440. 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.
/P.P./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2408
/LINGLAN EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2408
Prosecution Insights