DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/12/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-17 and 21-23 are pending. Claims 18-20 are cancelled. Claims 21-23 are added. Claims 1, 8, and 17 are amended.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the value module dynamically generates a range of predetermined values […]” and should now recite “the value module dynamically generates the range of predetermined values […]” as these values are now initial presented in the independent claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
4. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 16, 17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 11151640 in view of Plourde (US 20160335674).
Instant Application 18/384956
US 11151640
Claim 1
A system comprising:
at least one processor;
and one or more storage memory devices storing processor-executable instructions that, responsive to execution by the at least one processor, implement:
Claim 1
A system comprising: at least one processor;
and one or more storage memory devices storing processor-executable instructions that, responsive to execution by the at least one processor, implement:
an access module that accesses item listing data of an item listing and profile data of a user interacting with the item listing;
access module that accesses an item listing stored on a network-based publication system and receives profile data of a user interacting with the item listing stored on the network-based publication system, the profile data comprising a user experience level associated with interacting with the network-based publication system;
a user interface module that dynamically generates a set of user interface elements for display withing the item listing by determining a number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements based, based at least in part on the profile data;
a user interface module that analyzes the profile data and the item listing, and dynamically determines a number of user interface elements included in a set of user interface elements to generate for display within the item listing to provide experience-based assistance for interacting with the network-based publication system by determining the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements based at least on the user experience level;
a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements, the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and
a value module that dynamically determines a set of values to be associated with the set of user interface elements by utilizing a machine learning model that determines relative importance of one or more factors associated with the item listing,
the set of values being based, at least in part, on the item listing, the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, and the user experience level, each respective value of the set of values being associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements;
a presentation module that causes presentation, within the item listing, of the set of user interface elements and the set of values including the range of predetermined values, via a user interface.
and a presentation module that causes presentation of the set of user interface elements and the set of values within the item listing.
Note the user interface is claimed in claim 5 (“screen of a client device associated with the user.”) and the range of predetermined values is in claim 6
Claim 2
The system of claim 1, wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of item interest.
Claim 3
The system of claim 1, wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of a current state of an auction corresponding to the item listing.
Claim 4
The system of claim 1, wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of a competitiveness of an auction corresponding to the item listing.
Claim 5
The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface module generates a display configuration for the set of user interface elements based, at least in part, on a predetermined area of the user interface.
Claim 5
The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface module determines a display configuration for the set of user interface elements based, at least in part, on a predetermined area on a screen of a client device associated with the user.
Claim 6
The system of claim 1, wherein:
the value module dynamically generates a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and
the presentation module causes display of the range of predetermined values using a slider.
Claim 6
The system of claim 1, wherein: the value module dynamically determines a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and the presentation module causes presentation of the range of predetermined values using a slider.
Claim 7
The system of claim 1, wherein the presentation module causes:
display of a first user interface element of the set of user interface elements that corresponds to submitting a bid with a predetermined value to a network-based publication system for the item listing; and
display of a second user interface element that is different from the set of user interface elements and corresponds to submitting a bid value defined by a user to the network-based publication system for the item listing.
Claim 7 The system of claim 1, wherein:
the presentation module causes presentation of a first user interface element of the set of user interface elements that corresponds to submitting a bid with a predetermined value to the network-based publication system for the item listing;
and the presentation module causes presentation of a second user interface element that is different from the set of user interface elements and corresponds to submitting a user-defined bid value to the network-based publication system for the item listing.
Claim 8 method is parallel to claim 1
Claim 8
A method comprising: accessing, using a computing device, an item listing stored on a network-based publication system; accessing, using the computing device, profile data of a user interacting with the item listing stored on the network-based publication system, the profile data comprising a user experience level associated with interacting with the network-based publication system; dynamically determining, using the computing device, a set of user interface elements to display within the item listing to provide experience-based assistance for interacting with the network-based publication system, the dynamically determining the set of user interface elements comprising determining a number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements based, at least in part, on the user experience level; dynamically determining, using the computing device, a set of values to be associated with the set of user interface elements by utilizing a machine learning model that determines relative importance of one or more factors associated with the item listing and by utilizing the profile data, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the item listing, the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, and the user experience level, each respective value of the set of values being associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and causing, using the computing device, presentation of the set of user interface elements and the set of values with the item listing at a client device associated with the user.
Claim 9 is parallel to claim 2
Claim 10
further comprising determining, by the computing device, wherein the one or more factors include profile factors.
Claim 11
wherein the one or more factors include listing factors.
Claim 12
wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of a user's experience in bidding.
Claim 13 is parallel to claim 3
Claim 14 is parallel to claim 5
Claim 15 is parallel to claim 4
Claim 16
further comprising generating, by the computing device, a display configuration for the set of user interface elements based, at least in part, on the number of user interface elements.
Claim 12
The method of claim 8 further comprising dynamically determining a display configuration for the set of user interface elements based, at least in part, on the number of user interface elements.
Claim 17 CRM is parallel to claim 1
Claim 17 CRM is parallel to claim 8
The US PAT US 11151640 of claim 1 does not expressly disclose the elements of “the utilizing a machine learning model that determines one or more weights for one or more factors associated with […] profile data”, as recited in claim 1 of the instant application. However Plourde (US 20160335674) teaches “customer's scores for the subset of attributes' weights corresponding to the mobile phone will be increased, in addition to said customer's scores corresponding to the input value for the color blue. In an embodiment (FIG. 2), upon such an acceptance hit generated by the customer, the Text Analysis (M03) module may be solicited to identify the article attribute weights for the mobile phone having generated said acceptance hit, and provide these to the Client attributes (M13) module”. The reference specifically implements this process through the use of machine learning in [0055].
Therefore it would have be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the machine learning relevance importance determined by the machine learning model in US PAT 11151640 with the “weights” of the Plourde reference in order to construct detailed preferences profile of said clients [0077].
This rejection also applies to claims 8 and 17 of US PAT US 11151640 as they also only recite “relative importance of one or more factors” and do not specifically recite “weights” in the machine learning model. The claims are rejected for the reasons of claim 1.
Claims 1, 8, 10, 11 and 17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 8, 5, 9, and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 10332194 in view of Plourde (US 20160335674).
Instant Application 18/384956
US 10332194
Claim 1
A system comprising:
at least one processor;
and one or more storage memory devices storing processor-executable instructions that, responsive to execution by the at least one processor, implement:
Claim 1
A system comprising:
an access module that accesses item listing data of an item listing and profile data of a user interacting with the item listing;
an access module, configured to use at least one processor of a machine, to access an item listing stored on a network-based publication system and receive profile data of a user interacting with the item listing on the network-based publication system, the profile data comprising a user experience level associated with interacting with the network-based publication system;
a user interface module that dynamically generates a set of user interface elements for display within the item listing by determining a number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements based at least in part on the profile data;
a user interface module, configured to use the at least one processor, to analyze the profile data and the item listing and dynamically determine a number of elements included in a set of user interface elements to generate for display within the item listing to provide experience-based assistance for interacting with the network-based publication system and based, at least in part, on the item listing and the profile data, each respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements configured to perform an action on the item listing by configuring the number of elements included in the set of user interface elements based on the user experience level;
a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements, the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and
a value module, configured to use the at least one processor, to dynamically determine a set of values to be associated with the set of user interface elements by utilizing a machine learning model that determines relative importance of one or more factors associated with the item listing used to determine the set of values, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the item listing, the number of elements included in the set of user interface elements, and the profile data, each respective value of the set of values being associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements;
a presentation module that causes presentation, within the item listing,
of the set of user interface elements and the set of values including the range of predetermined values, via a user interface.
and a presentation module to cause presentation of the set of user interface elements and the set of values within the item listing.
Note the set of values including the range of predetermined values is recited in claim 6
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of item interest.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of a current state of an auction corresponding to the item listing.
4. The system of claim 1, wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of a competitiveness of an auction corresponding to the item listing.
5. The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface module generates a display configuration for the set of user interface elements based, at least in part, on a predetermined area of the user interface.
6. The system of claim 1, wherein:
the value module dynamically generates a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and
the presentation module causes display of the range of predetermined values using a slider.
7. The system of claim 1, wherein the presentation module causes:
display of a first user interface element of the set of user interface elements that corresponds to submitting a bid with a predetermined value to a network-based publication system for the item listing; and
display of a second user interface element that is different from the set of user interface elements and corresponds to submitting a bid value defined by a user to the network-based publication system for the item listing.
Claim 8 method is parallel to claim 1
Claim 8 method is parallel to claim 1
Claim 9 is parallel to claim 2
Claim 10
further comprising determining, by the computing device, wherein the one or more factors include profile factors.
Claim 5 The system of claim 1, wherein the item listing includes a set of listing factors and the profile data includes a set of profile factors, and wherein the system further comprises a ranking module configured to rank the set of listing factors and the set of profile factors and pass the listing factors and profile factors exceeding a predetermined threshold to the value module as the one or more factors used to determine the set of values.
Claim 11
wherein the one or more factors include listing factors.
9. The method of claim 8, wherein the one or more factors comprises at least one factor of a set of listing factors associated with the item listing and a set of profile factors associated with the profile data.
Claim 12
wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of a user's experience in bidding.
Claim 13 is parallel to claim 3
Claim 14 is parallel to claim 5
Claim 15 is parallel to claim 4
Claim 16
further comprising generating, by the computing device, a display configuration for the set of user interface elements based, at least in part, on the number of user interface elements.
Claim 17 CRM is parallel to claim 1
Claim 19 CRM is parallel to claim 1
The US PAT US 10332194 of claim 1 does not expressly disclose the elements of “the utilizing a machine learning model that determines one or more weights for one or more factors associated with […]”, as recited in claim 1 of the instant application. However Plourde (US 20160335674) teaches “customer's scores for the subset of attributes' weights corresponding to the mobile phone will be increased, in addition to said customer's scores corresponding to the input value for the color blue. In an embodiment (FIG. 2), upon such an acceptance hit generated by the customer, the Text Analysis (M03) module may be solicited to identify the article attribute weights for the mobile phone having generated said acceptance hit, and provide these to the Client attributes (M13) module”. The reference specifically implements this process through the use of machine learning in [0055].
Therefore it would have be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the machine learning relevance importance determined by the machine learning model in US PAT 11151640 with the “weights” of the Plourde reference in order to construct detailed preferences profile of said clients [0077].
The US PAT US 10332194 of claim 1 does not expressly disclose the elements of “a and one or more storage memory devices storing processor-executable instructions that, responsive to execution by the at least one processor, implement:” or “via a user interface”. However Plourde (US 20160335674) teaches the various constituent components, including the foregoing modules, may be implemented and deployed on more than one computer [0061] and see web interfaces [0052].
Therefore it would have be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the processor of the system in claim 1 of US PAT 11151640 to explicitly recite “a and one or more storage memory devices storing processor-executable instructions that, responsive to execution by the at least one processor, implement:”. and a user interface, as taught in Plourde, as the addition of a memory device to implement instructions of the processor and presenting on an interface is well-known and would have yield predictable results.
This rejection also applies to claims 8 and 17 of US PAT US 11151640 as they also only recite “relative importance of one or more factors” and do not specifically recite “weights” in the machine learning model. The claims are rejected for the reasons of claim 1.
For these reasons the claims are found to not be patentably distinct and are rejected under non-statutory double patenting.
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 1-17 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: The claims 1-7 are a system, claims 8-16, 22, and 23 are a method, and claims 17 and 21 are a computer readable medium. Thus, claims 1-17 and 21-23 are directed to one of the statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. §101.
Step 2A Prong 1: The independent claims (1, 8 and 17 taking claim 1 as a representative claim) recite:
an access module that accesses item listing data of an item listing and profile data of a user interacting with the item listing;
a user interface module that dynamically generates a set of user interface elements for display within the item listing by determining a number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements based at least in part on the profile data;
a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and
a presentation module that causes presentation, within the item listing, of the set of user interface elements and the set of values including the range of predetermined values, via a user interface.
These limitations, except for the italicized portions, under their broadest reasonable interpretations, recite certain methods of organizing human activity for managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) as well as commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations). The claimed invention recites steps for accessing listing data and user profile data to determine what elements should be displayed on a user interface. The determination being made based on factors including one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, and presenting the elements to the user. The interface elements being related to an item the user is interested via an auction. The steps under its broadest reasonable interpretation specifically fall under sales activities. The Examiner notes that although the claim limitations are summarized, the analysis regarding subject matter eligibility considers the entirety of the claim and all of the claim elements individually, as a whole, and in ordered combination.
Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of
A system comprising: at least one processor; and one or more storage memory devices storing processor-executable instructions that, responsive to execution by the at least one processor, implement: (claim 1)
Access module
User interface module that dynamically generates, user interface
Value module that dynamically generates
Utilizing a machine learning model
A presentation module
A computer device (claim 8)
One or more machine-readable storage devices comprising processor-executable instructions that, responsive to execution by at least one processor, cause the processor to perform operations comprising (claim 17)
The additional elements of A system comprising: at least one processor; and one or more storage memory devices storing processor-executable instructions that, responsive to execution by the at least one processor, implement: (claim 1); Access module; User interface module that dynamically generates, user interface; Value module that dynamically generates; Utilizing a machine learning model; A presentation module; A computer device (claim 8); One or more machine-readable storage devices comprising processor-executable instructions that, responsive to execution by at least one processor, cause the processor to perform operations comprising (claim 17) are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application – MPEP 2106.05(f).
Examiner notes that the recitation of “Utilizing a machine learning model” (claims 1, 8, and 17) provides nothing more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a generic computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and the July 2024 Subject Matter Eligibility Examples and corresponding analysis. MPEP 2106.05(f) provides the following considerations for determining whether a claim simply recites a judicial exception with the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), such as mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer: (1) whether the claim recites only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claim fails to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished; (2) whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process; and (3) the particularity or generality of the application of the judicial exception. That the model is machine learned is used to generally apply the abstract idea without placing any limits on how the machine learned model functions. Rather, these limitations only recite the outcome of “generate a set of values to be associated with the set of user interface elements”, “determines one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements” and “causes presentation of the set of user interface elements and the set of values with the item listing” and do not include any details about how the “generating, determining, and presenting” is accomplished. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and the July 2024 Subject Matter Eligibility Examples and corresponding analysis.
Accordingly, these additional elements when considered individually or as a whole do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The independent claims are directed to an 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 with respect to Step 2A Prong two, the additional elements in the claims amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using a generic computer component.
Dependent claims 2-7, 9-16, and 21-23 when analyzed as a whole, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the additional recited limitations fail to establish that the claims are not directed to the same abstract idea of Independent Claims 1, 8 and 17 without significantly more.
Claim 2 and 9 recite wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of item interest. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 3 and 13, wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of a current state of an auction corresponding to the item listing. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claims 4 and 15 recite, wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of a competitiveness of an auction corresponding to the item listing. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claims 5 and 14 recite, wherein the user interface module generates a display configuration for the set of user interface elements based, at least in part, on a predetermined area of the user interface. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 6 recites the value module dynamically generates a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and the presentation module causes display of the range of predetermined values using a slider. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The slider is merely an output on the display interface.
Claim 7 recites wherein the presentation module causes: display of a first user interface element of the set of user interface elements that corresponds to submitting a bid with a predetermined value to a network-based publication system for the item listing; and display of a second user interface element that is different from the set of user interface elements and corresponds to submitting a bid value defined by a user to the network-based publication system for the item listing. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea. The claim recites the additional element of the network based publication system, but this additional element is recited at a high level of generality does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 10 recites further comprising determining, by the computing device, wherein the one or more factors include profile factors. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 11 recites wherein the one or more factors include listing factors. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 12 recites wherein the generation of the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements is further based on one or more factors indicative of a user's experience in bidding. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 16 recites further comprising generating, by the computing device, a display configuration for the set of user interface elements based, at least in part, on the number of user interface elements. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The configuration of the display of the data does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 21 recites wherein the generating of the set of user interface elements is without the set of user interface elements having been preconfigured prior to loading a presentation of the item listing. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The configuration of the display of the data does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 22 recites wherein the causing of the presentation of the set of user interface elements includes enforcing rendering constraints including limiting a total area occupied by the set of user interface elements to not more than a predetermined portion of the user interface of a client device corresponding to the user interface and arranging the set of user interface elements for the presentation without overlap of each respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements. The claim limitations merely further limits the data of the abstract idea and does not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The configuration of the display of the data does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 23 recites wherein the generating of the set of user interface elements and the causing of the presentation are based at least in part on device characteristics corresponding to a client device associated with the user interface, the device characteristics including at least one of: screen size, screen resolution, user interface type, operating system, bandwidth constraint, or data limit constraint, and further comprises modifying, by the computing device, at least one of the size, shape, spacing, or position of the user interface elements of the set of user interface elements based on the device characteristics.
For these reasons claims 1-17 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 USC 101.
Subject Matter Free of Prior Art
Claims 1, 8 and 17 are determined to have overcome the prior art of rejection and are free of prior art, however the claims remain rejected under 35 USC 101, as set forth above. All dependent claims are also free of prior art by virtue of dependency, but remain rejected under 35 USC 101.
Taking amended claim 1 as a representative claim, the claims as amended are found to overcome the prior art rejection for the reasons set forth below.
Claim 1 now recites the additional claimed features of a user interface module that dynamically generates a set of user interface elements for display within the item listing by determining a number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements based at least in part on the profile data; a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements, the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and a presentation module that causes presentation, within the item listing, of the set of user interface elements and the set of values including the range of predetermined values, via a user interface.
The closest prior art was found to be as follows:
Rackson US6415270 discloses the multi-auction service of the present invention additionally provides comprehensive interactive monitoring tools to track bids in progress across multiple remote auction service. The intelligent identification process used to categorize items by type for sellers may be used by bidders to assist in the identification of items in pending auctions. The system may provide suggestions to the users as the bidding progresses or the system may implement expert-based tactical bidding strategies that allow for unattended bidding. For example, an Internet-based interface 500 may be provided for the bidder 8 such that the bidder (Jon) can view his selected item type 502, and the rules in force 510 and the selected remote auction service items 520 being tracked (see FIG. 14). The content for active auctions 520 may comprise an item description 524 which may provide a link to the description of the displayed object, or alternatively may provide a thumbnail image of the item replicated from the remote auction service. A separate reduced size depiction of all of the items being tracked may also be appended to the bottom of the interface such that the user may review them locally without navigating to the remote auction service 526. The parameters of the auction may include for example, the closing date 530 and time remaining 532, current bid 534 (current bid with total bid costs), and remote seller parameters 538. The remote seller data typically might indicate shipping costs or timeframes and may apply other restrictions on the auction. The current bidder information is additionally displayed and comprises the Bidder ID 540, and any bidder notes 546 that may be determined by the multi-auction server restrictions to assist in defining the manner in which the bidder operates. For example, the win percentage 550 may be calculated based on how often that bidder wins when bidding on similar or other types of items. In another example, the remote bidder 22 may be identified as a low bidder that bids late on items where low bid activity has taken place. The bidder may be able to select a bid button 552 to indicate that they would like to manually execute a bid for an item. The user may modify the rules 556 at any point in the bidding process. Additionally the system may indicate the next bid to be performed 560 as selected according to the strategy 440 and rules 442 as were specified by the bidder (see FIG. 11)", Col. 25 lines 55-Col. 26 lines 29 and user interface elements shown in Figure 14. However, the reference does not disclose the claimed invention, in particular the limitation of a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements, the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements.
Plourde US 20160335674 discloses using machine learning on the inputs of profile data to generate customer scores for a subset of attributes (see [0055, 0059, 0097]. However, the reference does not disclose the claimed invention, in particular the limitation of a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements, the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and a presentation module that causes presentation, within the item listing, of the set of user interface elements and the set of values including the range of predetermined values, via a user interface.
Feldman US 2017/0330219 discloses interface elements to include an interactive element to allow users to select the change in the interface via an interface element (see for example Fig. 9). However, the reference does not disclose the claimed invention, in particular the limitation of a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements, the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and a presentation module that causes presentation, within the item listing, of the set of user interface elements and the set of values including the range of predetermined values, via a user interface.
Sengamedu US 20090265611 discloses [0025] The web page layout module (104) takes the sectioned web page (120), scales the sections based on their importance score, removes irrelevant sections or noise (122), and then identifies the optimal layout (124) based on the display size of the device (126) and spatial relationships among the different sections. The optimized page (124) is then transmitted to the device (126) for presentation. However, the reference does not disclose the claimed invention, in particular the limitation of a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements, the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and a presentation module that causes presentation, within the item listing, of the set of user interface elements and the set of values including the range of predetermined values, via a user interface.
Nassiri US 20160042447discloses in Figure 5 user interface elements of an auction allowing a user to enter values related to the auction. However, the reference does not disclose the claimed invention, in particular the limitation of a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements, the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and a presentation module that causes presentation, within the item listing, of the set of user interface elements and the set of values including the range of predetermined values, via a user interface.
“Developing Online Auction with Behavioral and Intuitive Functions” discloses the techniques and methods in developing a web-based auction site which integrates behavioral targeting into its design. However, the reference does not disclose the claimed invention, in particular the limitation of a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements, the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and a presentation module that causes presentation, within the item listing, of the set of user interface elements and the set of values including the range of predetermined values, via a user interface.
It was found that no references alone or in combination, neither anticipates, reasonable teaches, nor renders obvious the below noted features of Applicant’s invention. The features of claim 1 (and parallel claims 8 and 17) in combination that overcome the prior art are:
a user interface module that dynamically generates a set of user interface elements for display within the item listing by determining a number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements based at least in part on the profile data; a value module that dynamically generates a set of values for display with the set of user interface elements, the set of values including a range of predetermined values for at least one user interface elements of the set of user interface elements, by utilizing a machine learning model that generates one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, in which each respective value of the set of values is associated with a respective user interface element of the set of user interface elements; and a presentation module that causes presentation, within the item listing, of the set of user interface elements and the set of values including the range of predetermined values, via a user interface.
Therefore, none of the cited references disclose or render obvious each and every feature of the claimed invention and the claimed invention is determined to be free of the prior art. Although individually the claimed features could be taught, any combination of references would teach the claimed limitations using a piecemeal analysis, since references would only be combined and deemed obvious based on knowledge gleaned from the applicant's disclosure. Such a reconstruction is improper (i.e., hindsight reasoning). See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). The examiner emphasizes that it is the interrelationship of the limitations that renders these claims free of the prior art/additional art.
Therefore, it is hereby asserted by the Examiner that, in light of the above, that the claims are free of prior art as the references do not anticipate the claims and do not render obvious any further modification of the references to a person of ordinary skill in art.
Relevant Art Not Cited
Rabenold US20130179293 discloses a dashboard that is generated for auctions based on the bidder’s interest and past activity.
“Online Auctioning and Recommendations: The eBidLand Platform” discloses a platform for implementing a plurality of auction types along with a recommendation and reputation system (abstract)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks filed 1/12/2026 have been fully considered.
The prior art rejection has been withdrawn for the reasons set forth under “Subject Matter Free of Prior Art”.
With respect to the rejection for non-statutory double patenting, the examiner acknowledges the request to hold the rejection in abeyance. The rejection has been updated above to address the claim amendments and is maintained. However, applicant is reminded, per MPEP 804(I)(B)(1), such rejection cannot be held in abeyance. The section reads “A complete response to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection is either a reply by applicant showing that the claims subject to the rejection are patentably distinct from the reference claims, or the filing of a terminal disclaimer in accordance with 37 CFR 1.321 in the pending application(s) with a reply to the Office action (see MPEP § 1490 for a discussion of terminal disclaimers). Such a response is required even when the nonstatutory double patenting rejection is provisional.
As filing a terminal disclaimer, or filing a showing that the claims subject to the rejection are patentably distinct from the reference application’s claims, is necessary for further consideration of the rejection of the claims, such a filing should not be held in abeyance. Only compliance with objections or requirements as to form not necessary for further consideration of the claims may be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated.
With respect to the rejection under 35 USC 101, the examiner maintains the claims are rejected under 35 USC 101.
With respect to Step 2A Prong 1, the examiner maintains the claims do recite a method of organizing human activity. As set forth in the rejection the claimed invention recites steps for accessing listing data and user profile data to determine what elements should be displayed on a user interface. The determination being made based on factors including one or more weights for one or more factors associated with the item listing, the set of values being based, at least in part, on the profile data, the item listing data, and the number of user interface elements included in the set of user interface elements, and presenting the elements to the user. The interface elements being related to an item the user is interested via an auction. The steps under its broadest reasonable interpretation specifically fall under sales activities. Further, as set forth in the instant specification, in [0003] the interface is addressing a problem regarding bidding and auction process through the information provided on this user interface. The This is a method of organizing human activity. The presentation of this information on an interface does not preclude the claimed invention from reciting a method of organizing human activity.
With respect to Step 2A Prong 2, the examiner maintains the additional elements recites in the claimed invention are recited at a high level of generality and do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Turning to the portions of the specification [0051-0054] in combination with the claims as written, do not provide an improvement to the GUI technology itself. Rather, as claimed and described in the specification, merely improves the arrangement of the information for the user which is part of the abstract idea. Therein, the improvement lies in the abstract idea itself and not the technology itself (i.e. the operation or technology of the interface versus the arrangement of the information to be displayed to the end user).
For at least these reasons, the rejection under 35 USC 101 is maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA E. FRUNZI whose telephone number is (571)270-1031. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 7-4 (EST).
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 at (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.
VICTORIA E. FRUNZI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit TC 3689
/VICTORIA E. FRUNZI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689 2/19/2026