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 .
Response to Amendment
In light of Applicant's submission filed March 2, 2026, the Examiner has maintained and updated the 35 USC § 101 rejection. The Examiner has updated and maintained the 35 USC 103 rejection.
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.
The claims herein are directed to a method and system which would be classified under one of the listed statutory classifications (i.e., 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (hereinafter “PEG”) “PEG” Step 1=Yes). Claim 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-12, 14-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) the following limitations that are considered to be abstract ideas:
Claims 1, 11, 15
transmit, a request of an advertisement content corresponding to a request of a first image content;
based on obtaining a first advertisement content corresponding to the request of the advertisement content the first image content into which the obtained first advertisement content is inserted;
identify whether the first advertisement content included in the first image content is played by using auto content recognition (ACR) technology;
store the first advertisement content based on identification information corresponding to whether the first advertisement content included in the first image content is played; and
based on obtaining a request for a second image content transmit, , the second image content into which the stored first advertisement content is inserted.
wherein the first advertisement content comprises an expiration tag indicating an advertisement validity period and a reusable tag including information about whether to reuse the first advertisement content, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the advertisement validity period not being elapsed and the first advertisement content being reusable based on the reusable tag of the first advertisement content, provide the first advertisement content stored in the at least one memory in the second image content and the second image content to which the first advertisement content is inserted to the first electronic apparatus through the communicator.
based on obtaining a first private key corresponding to the first user together with a request for the first image content from the first user, allocate the first private key to a first group among a plurality of groups: and
based on identifying that the first advertisement content is not played based on the identification information corresponding to whether the first advertisement content is played, match the first advertisement content with the first group and store the matched first advertisement.
The limitations of independent claim 1, 11, and 15 as detailed above, as drafted, falls within the “Certain Method of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas namely “commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations;) because the claims disclose requesting an advertisement content corresponding to a request of an image, inserting an image into the advertising content, storing advertising content and the image, then placing a second image into the first advertisement and based on a valid tag, reuse the advertisement content. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular the claims recites the additional elements of using a communicator, memory, processor, external server, electronic apparatus, and server apparatus. The aforementioned additional generic computing elements perform the steps of the claims at a high level of generality (i.e. As a generic medium performing generic computer function of transmitting, obtaining(e.g. receiving), storing) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to
amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of a using communicator, memory, processor, external server, electronic apparatus, and server apparatus amounts to no more than mere instruction to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of the computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation.
The dependent claims 2, 4, 6-8, 10, 14, 16 and 18, appear to merely further limit the
abstract and as such, the analysis of dependent claims 2, 4, 6-8, 10, 14, 16 and 18 results in the claims “reciting” an abstract idea. The claims the claims do not recited additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application the additional elements do not amount to an inventive concept (significantly more) other than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Thus, based on the detailed analysis above, claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-12, 14-16 and 18 are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 10, 11, 15, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levinson (US 2016/0132931) in view of Goyal et al. (US 2013/0110643) in view of Agarwal et al. (US 2010/0251289) in view of Bates et al. (US 6, 425, 127) in further view of Liassides et al. (US 2017/0070789) Claim 1, 11, 15: Levinson discloses a server apparatus comprising:
a communicator; (fig. 6)
at least one memory; [0056] and
at least one processor configured to: ([0050] and fig. 6)
transmit, to an external server through the communicator, [0026 and 0051] a request of an advertisement content corresponding to a request of a first image content obtained from a first electronic apparatus;([0052], The image tags comprise terms that describe or characterize the at least one image displayed on the website. The image tags enable the server 610 to select preferred advertisement to be displayed in the advertisement spot. The image tags are associated with at least one image displayed on the website.)
based on obtaining a first advertisement content corresponding to the request of the advertisement content from the external server, transmit, to the first electronic apparatus through the communicator, the first image content into which the obtained first advertisement content is inserted;( [0004], characteristics identifying the image; generating, via the server, one or more image recognition image tags associated with the image, wherein the one or more image tags are generated according to an image recognition [0044] server 110 comprises an advertisement insertion unit 120, which inserts the advertisement obtained by the tag to advertisement matching unit 115 into the website. The advertisement inserting unit 120 may insert the advertisement into an advertisement spot on the website, for example on a right panel of the website. In some cases, the advertisement inserting unit 120 may insert the advertisement as part of the placement of the image on the website, for example as a header of the image. In some exemplary embodiments of the subject matter, the tag generator 112 may generate the image tag from the advertisement that is displayed on the website. For example, the website comprises the advertisement for scuba diving gear; the tag generator 112 may generate the tag comprising the phrase “scuba diving gear)
store the first advertisement content in the at least one memory based on identification information corresponding to whether the first advertisement content included in the first image content is played;([0057], The website data storage 614 stores image, image-related data and image tags associated with images displayed on a website. Image tags identify and characterize an image, objects in the image, or the like. In some cases, the website data storage 614 stores metadata related to the image, for example, the title of the image, the description of the image, or the like. The metadata is used to generate image tags. In some exemplary embodiments of the subject matter, the image tags are stored separately, e.g. storing image tags generated from metadata as metadata image tags and storing image tags generated from image recognition as image-recognition image tags) and
based on obtaining a request for a second image content from the first electronic apparatus, transmit, to the first electronic apparatus through the communicator, the second image content into which the stored first advertisement content is inserted. ([0085]. where a first advertisement is associated with advertisement tags A, B, C, a second advertisement is associated with advertisement tags A, B, D, E and an image is associated with metadata image tags A, B, C. The first advertisement will have a three advertisement tags match with the metadata image tags, while the second advertisement has two advertisement tags match) but does not explicitly disclose wherein the first advertisement content comprises an expiration tag indicating an advertisement validity period and a reusable tag including information about whether to reuse the first advertisement content, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the advertisement validity period not being elapsed and the first advertisement content being reusable based on the reusable tag of the first advertisement content, provide the first advertisement content stored in the at least one memory in the second image content and the second image content to which the first advertisement content is inserted to the first electronic apparatus through the communicator.
However Goyal discloses wherein the first advertisement content comprises an expiration tag indicating an advertisement validity period and a reusable tag including information about whether to reuse the first advertisement content, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the advertisement validity period not being elapsed and the first advertisement content being reusable based on the reusable tag of the first advertisement content, provide the first advertisement content stored in the at least one memory in the second image content and the second image content to which the first advertisement content is inserted to the first electronic apparatus through the communicator. ( see [0024] an ad tag categorizing the advertisement data; a maximum number of impressions of the first advertisement; a constraint on the first advertisement; and an expiration time of the first cache line. And [0040], the same advertisement data may be rendered to display several impressions of the same advertisement. A maximum number of impressions within a cache line is a limit on a number of impressions of an advertisement to be displayed. A number of impressions of an advertisement displayed cannot exceed a maximum number of impressions. Once a maximum number of impressions of an advertisement is reached, a client device, which is described below, ceases to display any more impressions of the advertisement. (e.g. in regards to applicant’s reuse of an ad)
Both Levinson and Goyal teach a system of advertising. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use the insertion method of Goyal before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the insertion method to be used in Levinson in order to insure maximum exposure. (Goyal [0040]) Levinson and Goyal do not disclose based on obtaining a first private key corresponding to the first electronic apparatus together with a request for the first image content from the first electronic apparatus, allocate the first private key to a first group among a plurality of groups: and based on identifying that the first advertisement content is not played based on the identification information corresponding to whether the first advertisement content is played, match the first advertisement content with the first group and store the matched first advertisement in the at least one memory. However Agarwal discloses based on obtaining a first private key corresponding to the first electronic apparatus together with a request for the first image content from the first electronic apparatus, allocate the first private key to a first group among a plurality of groups; (see for example [0020] ad decision includes ad or ad assets(e.g. image), [0021], the ad decision service 108 also creates a group, and maps one or more set top boxes to that group. [0023], User attributes are stored by the ad decision service 108, so that when a new ad campaign is created, a new group and group ID may also be created. User set top boxes are assigned to newly created groups based on a correlation between the user attributes and the target audience for an ad as dictated by the advertiser. Membership in a group is done at the set top box level. [0025], groups will be shared between campaigns and creatives, since many of the same attributes will be targeted by the campaigns. Targeting is achieved in orders of groups, and decisions define mapping of groups to appropriate ad creatives [0056] the ad decision processing engine 132 sends a request to a DVR ad management engine 150 for ad decisions for all ad avails. In making this request, the engine 132 also sends all identifying characteristics of the set top box, including for example the set top box ID, group membership and other parameters of the set top box.)the STB id and group membership is equivalent to the private key corresponding to an electronic device)
match the first advertisement content with the first group and store the matched first advertisement in the at least one memory [0039, the live ad decision matrix sets forth the ads that are to be inserted in an upcoming ad avail based on group membership. In particular, the live ad decision matrix will set out the ad to be inserted for each group that is associated with a selected ad for the avail. Each ad asset has an ad ID. The live ad decision matrix may in general set forth that if an STB belongs to group 1, that STB should insert ad ID 10; if an STB belongs to group 2, that STB should insert ad ID 15; if an STB belongs to group 3, that STB should insert ad ID 18; and so on for all groups then currently representing ads that are relevant for insertion within the avail. [0040] The "Group" represents the group ID and "AdID" represents the ad asset that is to be inserted for that group ID. [0047] If the matched decision satisfies the fatigue condition in step 220, the ad decision processing engine 132 next checks in step 222 whether the ad associated with the matched decision is stored in local memory 124. If not, the ad decision processing engine 132 retrieves the next decision in step 206 and continues. However, if the ad associated with the matched decision is in local memory, that ad asset is set as the ad to insert in step)
Both Levinson and Goyal teach a system of advertising. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use the insertion method of Agarwal before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the insertion method to be used in Levinson and Goyal in order to target advertisements efficiently by providing ads to the particular groups. (Agarwal abstract)
Levinson, Goyal, and Agarwal do not explicitly disclose based on identifying that the first advertisement content is not played based on the identification information corresponding to whether the first advertisement content is played, match the first advertisement content with the first group and store the matched first.
However, Bates discloses based on identifying that the first advertisement content is not played based on the identification information corresponding to whether the first advertisement content is played, (Col. 3 line 5 -15 and claim 1, in accordance with an important feature of the present invention, each commercial advertisement 14 includes a unique advertisement ID 18 which is embedded digitally within the signal. In this manner, each commercial advertisement can be identified uniquely as to its source and content so that a determination can be made, in accordance with the method and system of the present invention, whether or not a particular commercial advertisement was broadcast while the user was viewing video stream 10) Both Levinson and Goyal teach a system of advertising. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use the identification information method of Bates before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the identification information method to be used in Levinson, Goyal, and Agarwal in order to keep an advertisement that wasn’t played so it can be presented subsequently. (Bates, Col 3 lines 58-62)
Levinson, Goyal, Agarwal and Bates do not explicitly disclose identify whether the first advertisement content included in the first image content is played by using auto content recognition (ACR) technology;
Liassides discloses identify whether the first advertisement content included in the first image content is played by using auto content recognition (ACR) technology; (see for example[0021], a system can include an automatic content recognition (ACR) headend to store a first fingerprint of an advertisement (ad) spot and to monitor a video stream ahead in time from when the video stream is delivered to a smart TV. The ACR headend can further detect the ad spot by comparing the first fingerprint with a second fingerprint that is captured of the ad spot during monitoring the video stream. The ACR headend can also monitor a channel being watched on the smart TV, and notify an ad replacer client of the smart TV upon detecting that the ad spot is to arrive within the video stream on the channel. The system can further include an addressable TV (ATV) engine in operative communication with (or operatively coupled to) the ACR headend, where the ATV engine is to determine, from data of an ad campaign, whether a first ad to be delivered to the ad spot is off target for the ad spot. The ATV engine can then notify the ad replacer client to replace the first ad with an addressable ad when the first ad is off target for the ad spot, and provide, to the ad replacer client, criteria with which to constrain an ad request to obtain a second ad that is on target for the ad spot)
Both Levinson and Goyal teach a system of advertising. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use the ACR method of Liassides before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a detection method to be used in Levinson, Goyal, Agarwal and Bates in order to detect timing of an upcoming ad spot to be delivered within the video stream. (Liassides, abstract)
Claim 9: Levinson discloses the server apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first advertisement content comprises an expiration tag indicating an advertisement validity period and a reusable tag indicating whether an advertisement is reusable, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the advertisement validity period not being elapsed and the advertisement being usable based on the expiration tag and the reusable tag of the first advertisement content, provide the first advertisement content stored in the at least one memory in the second image content and the second image content to which the first advertisement content is inserted to the first electronic apparatus through the communicator.[0100-0103]
Claim 10: Levinson discloses the server apparatus of claim 1, wherein the identification information corresponding to whether the first advertisement content is played comprises at least one of information about a play time that the first image content in which the first advertisement content is played in the first electronic apparatus or information generated in the first electronic apparatus based on the first advertisement content being played. [0045]
Claim(s) 4, 6, 7, 18, 1is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levinson (US 2016/0132931) in view of Goyal et al. (US 2013/0110643) in view of Agarwal et al. (US 2010/0251289) in view of Bates et al. (US 6, 425, 127) in further view of Liassides et al. (US 2017/0070789) and in further view of Eldering et al. (US 2002/0072966)
Claim 4, 18: Levinson discloses the server apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: but does not explicitly disclose
based on obtaining the first private key together with a request for the second image content from the first electronic apparatus, transmit the second image content, into which the first advertisement content matched with the first private key and stored is inserted, to the first electronic apparatus through the communicator. However Eldering discloses based on obtaining the first private key together with a request for the second image content from the first electronic apparatus, transmit the second image content, into which the first advertisement content matched with the first private key and stored is inserted, to the first electronic apparatus through the communicator. [0044]
Both Levinson and Eldering teach a system of advertising. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use the private key system of Eldering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention private key system to be used in Levinson, Goyal and Agarwal in order to have verification information to ensure the correct device receives the appropriate advertising.
Claim 6: Levinson discloses the server apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: but does not explicitly disclose based on obtaining a second private key corresponding to a second electronic apparatus from the second electronic apparatus along with a request for a third image content, and based on the obtained second private key being allocated to the first group from among the plurality of groups, transmit the third image content into which the stored first advertisement content is inserted to the second electronic apparatus through the communicator.
However Eldering discloses based on obtaining a second private key corresponding to a second electronic apparatus from the second electronic apparatus along with a request for a third image content, and based on the obtained second private key being allocated to the first group from among the plurality of groups, transmit the third image content into which the stored first advertisement content is inserted to the second electronic apparatus through the communicator. [0041, 0044]
Both Levinson and Eldering teach a system of advertising. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use the private key system of Eldering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention private key system to be used in Levinson, Goyal and Agarwal in order to insure the correct device receives the appropriate advertising.
Claim 7: Levinson discloses the server apparatus of claim 1, wherein the plurality of groups are classified according to at least one criterion among gender, age group, or region,[0126], but does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to allocate the first private key to the first group according to information on an advertisement target group included in the first advertisement content or watching history information obtained from the first electronic apparatus. However Eldering discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to allocate the first private key to the first group according to information on an advertisement target group included in the first advertisement content or watching history information obtained from the first electronic apparatus. [0044] Both Levinson and Eldering teach a system of advertising. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use the private key system of Eldering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention private key system to be used in Levinson, Goyal and Agarwal in order to insure the correct device receives the appropriate advertising.
Claim 18. Levinson discloses the electronic apparatus of claim 15, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: based on obtaining the first private key together with a request for the second image content from the second electronic apparatus, provide the second image content, into which the first advertisement content matched with the first private key and stored is inserted, to the second electronic apparatus. However Eldering discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: based on obtaining the first private key together with a request for the second image content from the second electronic apparatus, provide the second image content, into which the first advertisement content matched with the first private key and stored is inserted, to the second electronic apparatus. [0044, 0047]
Both Levinson and Eldering teach a system of advertising. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use the private key system of Eldering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention private key system to be used in Levinson, Goyal and Agarwal in order to insure the correct device receives the appropriate advertising.
Claim(s) 2, 8, 12 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levinson (US 2016/0132931) in view of Goyal et al. (US 2013/0110643) in view of Agarwal et al. (US 2010/0251289) in view of Bates et al. (US 6, 425, 127) in further view of Liassides et al. (US 2017/0070789) and in further view of Cannelongo et al. (US 2012/0158527)
Claims 2, 12, 16: Levinson discloses the server apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 11 and electronic apparatus of claim 15, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to:
based on a number of items of advertisement content to be inserted into the second image content being greater than the number of items of advertisement content stored in the at least one memory, transmit a request for another advertisement content to the external server through the communicator; and
based on obtaining a second advertisement content from the external server in response to the transmitted request, transmit the obtained second advertisement content and the second image content into which the first advertisement content stored in the at least one memory is inserted to the first electronic apparatus through the communicator.
However Cannelongo discloses based on a number of items of advertisement content to be inserted into the second image content being greater than the number of items of advertisement content stored in the at least one memory, transmit a request for another advertisement content to the external server through the communicator;[0086, 0089] and
based on obtaining a second advertisement content from the external server in response to the transmitted request, transmit the obtained second advertisement content and the second image content into which the first advertisement content stored in the at least one memory is inserted to the first electronic apparatus through the communicator(see for example, [0073, 0080,0081,0086, 0089], also Note the cited paragraphs are being interpreted in view of paragraphs [0150] and [0151] of applicant's specification, wherein the system may request new content based on the monitoring of the content that was viewed by the user in association the user id (which corresponds to the private key of the claims, the limitation is not explicitly defined in the specification, so broadest reasonable interpretation in light of paragraphs [0150] and [0151] of applicant's specification lends itself to the idea that once the allotted advertisements that are associated with a user device has been determined to have been viewed, the server may request new advertisements be sent to the user device ) Both Levinson and Cannelongo teach a system of advertising. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use advertising content system of Cannelongo before the effective filing date of the claimed invention advertising content system to be used in Levinson, Goyal and Agarwal in order to insure the device receives the appropriate advertising. Claim 8: Levinson discloses the server apparatus of claim 7, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: based on an advertisement target included in information about the advertisement target group not having a restriction, or the first private key not being allocated to one of the plurality of groups according to the watching history information, match the first advertisement content with a public group and store in the at least one memory, wherein the public group is a group in which an advertisement content is providable regardless of whether a private key is matched. However Cannelongo discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: based on an advertisement target included in information about the advertisement target group not having a restriction, or the first private key not being allocated to one of the plurality of groups according to the watching history information, match the first advertisement content with a public group and store in the at least one memory, wherein the public group is a group in which an advertisement content is providable regardless of whether a private key is matched.([0124], In embodiments described herein, a national item can be an item submitted by a content provider that services the entire nation (e.g., CNN, ABC, etc.) and thus does not have an associated zip code (in that, although the content may originate from one or more zip codes, it is not intended to be associated with only a limited number of zip codes). Additionally, although referred to as "national," these items are characterized in that they are not intended to be associated with geographic restrictions on where the content should appear, and can in some embodiments relate to other broad (non-nation-specific) geographic areas (e.g., global, continental, etc.). A local item can be an item with a geographic restriction on where the content should appear (e.g., a geographic restriction on areas to which the content should be distributed). In some embodiments, by default, any local affiliate stations can be limited in such a way that their content would only appear for subscribers within a certain radius (e.g., a 75-mile radius, or more or less) of the location of the local affiliate station. For hyperlocal sources serving a community with more limited geographic scope, a smaller radius may be defined for the channel. In other embodiments, a default can be set to include at least a closest affiliate of each of several types (e.g., CBS, ABC, etc.), even if outside of the radius.)
Both Levinson and Cannelongo teach a system of advertising. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use the advertisement information of Cannelongo before the effective filing date of the claimed invention advertisement information to be used in Levinson, Goyal and Agarwal in order to insure the correct device receives the appropriate advertising.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 2, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues the 101 rejection that the claims do not recite an abstract idea, the Examiner respectfully disagrees the claims are directed to obtaining advertising, determining if advertising was consumed, storing unplayed advertising, determining whether the advertising remains eligible for reuse, associating advertising with an electronic apparatus, and providing the advertisement. The aforementioned functions and the applicant’s specification are directed to certain method of organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations)), which is considered an abstract idea.
The applicant further argues the 101 rejection by stating that added limitation recites a practical application that provides a technical improvement. The Examiner respectfully disagrees the added limitation is recited at a high level of generality. Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f) Furthermore per MPEP 2106.05(a) - If it is asserted that the invention improves upon conventional functioning of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes, a technical explanation as to how to implement the invention should be present in the specification. That is, the disclosure must provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. The specification need not explicitly set forth the improvement, but it must describe the invention such that the improvement would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. Conversely, if the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner (i.e., a bare assertion of an improvement without the detail necessary to be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art), the examiner should not determine the claim improves technology. An indication that the claimed invention provides an improvement can include a discussion in the specification that identifies a technical problem and explains the details of an unconventional technical solution expressed in the claim, or identifies technical improvements realized by the claim over the prior art. For example, in McRO, the court relied on the specification’s explanation of how the particular rules recited in the claim enabled the automation of specific animation tasks that previously could only be performed subjectively by humans, when determining that the claims were directed to improvements in computer animation instead of an abstract idea. McRO, 837 F.3d at 1313-14, 120 USPQ2d at 1100-01. In contrast, the court in Affinity Labs of Tex. v. DirecTV, LLC relied on the specification’s failure to provide details regarding the manner in which the invention accomplished the alleged improvement when holding the claimed methods of delivering broadcast content to cellphones ineligible. 838 F.3d 1253, 1263-64, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207-08 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The applicant has made a conclusory statement and has not provided a citation to the specification that provides a technical explanation of the asserted improvement. Merely asserting an improvement without enough technical detail for the improvement to be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art is insufficient. The applicant’s specification at [0073, 0097, and 0182] does not describe a technological improvement to ACR itself, nor improvement to functioning of the computer, to any other technology or technical field. Rather ACR is recited at the apply it level as the technology used to perform the determination of whether the advertisement content was played.
The applicant further argues the 101 rejection, that the claims add a specific limitation other than what is well understood, routine and conventional and is significantly more, when recited in a claim with a judicial exception, the Examiner respectfully disagrees the applicant has not stated what the applicant considers as the additional elements and has not provided any evidence and/or arguments as to why/how the additional elements are not well understood routine and conventional. Thus, this argument is also moot. Furthermore, the Examiner in the 101 rejection identified the additional elements of communicator, memory, processor, external server, electronic apparatus, and server apparatus as generic computer components (see applicant’s specification at [0056], 0088, 0176]) performing generic computer functions. Limitations that are indicative of integration into a practical application:
Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b)
Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo
The applicant has not provided any arguments or limitations that satisfy one of the above indications. Thus, the 35 U.S.C 101 rejection is maintained.
Applicant argues in regards to claims 1, 11, and 15, that the reference of Agarwal do not disclose a first private key, the Examine respectfully disagrees, foremost the applicant’s specification does not define “private key” thus using broadest reasonable interpretation the private key is merely an ID associated with a group and the reference of Agarwal at [0056]discloses transmitting identifying information corresponding to a electronic apparatus that includes a set top box ID together with a request. Agarwal further teaches at [0021-0023] creating groups and mapping individual STBs to the groups. Therefore, the Examiner finds the reference of Agarwal’s STB ID to be equivalent to the applicant’s private key. Also, the applicant argues the claimed advertisement is stored on a group by group basis by linking it with the private key, Agarwal teaches targeting is achieved using groups and that the decision define mappings between groups and advertisement creatives (see [0025]). Agarwal further discloses associating a group with an AD ID where the AD ID represents the advertisement asset to be inserted for said group ([0039 and 0040])
Regarding the applicant’s argument about the limitation, “based on identifying that the first advertisement content is not played based on the identification information corresponding to whether the first advertisement content is played” this argument is moot due to the updated rejection above.
Regarding the applicant’s argument that the reference of Agarwal does not disclose “match the first advertisement content with the first group and store the matched first advertisement in the at least one memory", the Examiner respectfully disagrees Agarwal further discloses at [0047] that the advertisements are stored in local memory and specifically determines whether the advertisements associated with the match decision is stored in local memory [0047].
Thus, based on newly added reference, Bates discloses a combined teaching of storing the group matched advertisement based on determining the advertisement was not played. Therefore the 103 rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DARNELL A POUNCIL whose telephone number is (571)270-3509. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 - 6:00.
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 at (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.
/D.A.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3622
/ILANA L SPAR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3622
Prosecution Insights