DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to the request for continued examination filed 09 January 2026.
Claims 21-40 have been amended.
Claims 21-40 are currently pending.
Claims 21-40 are rejected.
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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09 January 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment/Remarks
Regarding 35 USC § 112, the previous rejections have been remedied by amendment and are withdrawn. See the rejections under 35 USC § 112 below for additional rejections that have come about due to the amendments.
Regarding 35 USC § 101, the claims have been amended to include a physical or tangible component. Thus, in the § 101 analysis, the claims now pass Step 1. The additional analysis is presented in the rejection below, because, as indicated in previous rejections, the claims do recite a judicial exception.
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.
Claims 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 21 recites the limitation “the launch platform” in the third to last step. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 22-27 are rejected due to their dependence upon this rejected claim.
Claim 22 recites the limitations “the e-commerce market group digital launch platform,” “the platform application,” and “the network server check.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 24 recites the limitation “the platform application.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitations “the social media websites” and “the similar purchased product.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 26 recites the limitation “the platform application.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 28 recites the limitation “the launch platform” in the third to last step. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 29-34 are rejected due to their dependence upon this rejected claim.
Claim 29 recites the limitation “the network server check.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 32 recites the limitations “the social media websites” and “the similar purchased product.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 35 recites the limitation “the launch platform” in the fourth to last step. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 36-40 are rejected due to their dependence upon this rejected claim.
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 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 21-40 recite a platform comprising a network server, databases, and at least one processor which is considered a machine or manufacture.
Step 2A-Prong One
Claims 21, 28, and 35 recite the concept of providing reviews of a product, procured from social media, to a potential purchaser of the product (see, for example, “at least one user interface coupled to the network server configured to allow a consumer/end user potential buyer for interfacing with consumer/end user previous purchasers of the same product that will communicate about product details and additional product information; a purchase application coupled to the at least one user interface configured to allow a previous purchaser that has purchased a same at least one product to create a review about the same at least one product; wherein the purchase application is further configured to display on a digital device by the consumer/end user previous purchaser the same at least one product to the consumer/end user potential buyer and the review by the consumer/end user previous purchaser of the same at least one product; wherein the purchase application is further configured to allow the consumer/end user potential buyer to comment in a user self-reporting comments section and read reviews of the same at least one product from the previous purchasers; wherein the purchase application is further configured to receive and display user-submitted self-reporting data associated with a previously purchased product and stored by the launch platform; a social media application interface coupled to the purchase application and configured to access social media networks, applications, or plug-ins to retrieve user- generated content relating to products corresponding to the at least one product, and to present the retrieved user-generated content to the buyer user via the purchase application; and wherein the purchase application is further configured, via the social media application interface, to enable user interaction with the user-generated content through the social media networks, applications, or plug-ins” in claim 21). This concept falls into the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping of abstract ideas including commercial interactions and managing interactions between people. Thus, these claims recite an abstract idea.
The dependent claims further limit the abstract idea recited in the independent claims but do not take the claims out of the identified abstract idea grouping. For example, claim 22 recites transmitting information to the purchaser of the product, which is considered commercial activity. Claim 23 recites controlling delivery of a package to a consumer, which is considered commercial activity. Claim 24 recites awarding a discount to a purchaser, which is considered commercial activity. These are examples; all dependent claims have been considered and they all contain commercial activity that falls into the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping of abstract ideas. Thus, claims 21-40 recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A-Prong Two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims recite the additional element of a platform comprising a network server, a plurality of databases, and at least one processor (claims 21-40) and includes no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The platform does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed previously with respect to Step 2A-Prong Two, the additional element in the claim amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The same analysis applies here in Step 2B, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05(f). The claims do not provide an inventive concept (significantly more than the abstract idea). The claims are ineligible.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEREDITH A LONG whose telephone number is (571)272-3196. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 - 6.
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, Ilana Spar can be reached on 571-270-7537. 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.
/MEREDITH A LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3622