DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communication filed on 30 January 2026. Claims 1, 3-10, 13 and 15-20 are amended. No claim has been added or deleted. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application and have been considered below.
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
Based on applicant's amendment, the objection to the specification is withdrawn.
Based on applicant's amendment, the rejection of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that [“With respect to claim 12, paragraph [0100] likewise provides written description support for transmitting prompt response data to one user device while forgoing transmission to another user device. Paragraph [0100] explains that "only users that have previously been connected to (e.g., via a friend request or other means) to the user sharing the prompt response can receive user may also have the option to select which users should receive a given prompt response at the time of sharing the response or by altering configuration settings (e.g., privacy settings) in their account." These passages disclose the concept of transmitting prompt response data to a second user device associated with an authorized account while forgoing transmission of that same data to a third user device associated with a non-authorized account, precisely as recited in claim 12. Moreover, paragraph [0100] further reinforces that selective transmission and nontransmission are intentional and supported system behaviors by explaining that "prompt response data could be shared directly with other user devices 201 and/or via service 206 as an intermediary," and that users can be provided with an option to view other users' responses, such that only authorized responses are surfaced. This disclosure makes clear that the computing system controls which user devices receive prompt response data and which do not, and that non-authorized user devices are affirmatively excluded from receiving such data” (Pages 13-14)].
The argument described above has been considered, and are persuasive. Therefore, rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant further argues that ["Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that the combination of the cited references does not render amended claim 1 obvious, and the §103 rejection should be withdrawn" (Page 16)].
The argument described above has been considered, and are persuasive. Therefore, rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further search and consideration, a new ground of rejection is made, citing the new reference HERMES et al. (US20240169382A1) (see claim 1 rejection below).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5, 8-10, 13-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KISSINGER et al. (US20100296505A1) in view of BAGLY et al. (US20070100938A1) and further view of HERMES et al. (US20240169382A1).
As to claim 1, KISSINGER teaches a computing system comprising: at least one processor; and at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising program instructions that are executable by the at least one processor such that the computing system is configured to: transmit a first set of data to a set of user devices, the first set of data corresponding to a prompt (see figs. 1-10, for example fig. 4, step 414, par. 0005, wherein the content polling module is configured to identify a set of two or more participant mobile devices within a participation region of a wireless network and transmit a content polling request to each participant mobile device of the set of two or more participant mobile devices via the wireless network; see also par. 0065; as taught by KISSINGER)
receive, from at least one first user device in the set of user devices, a second set of data, the second set of data corresponding to a response to the prompt received via the at least one first user device (see fig. 4, step 415, par. 0005, wherein the content polling request is executable by each participant mobile device to return a content polling response to the content polling module; see also par. 0066; as taught by KISSINGER),
wherein the response comprises an indication of at least one media content item (see fig. 4, par. 0006, wherein the content polling module is further configured to receive the content polling response from each participant mobile device via the wireless network. The content polling response received from each participant mobile device indicates an attribute of one or more media content items stored at that participant mobile device or one or more media content items previously accessed via that participant mobile device; see also par. 072; as taught by KISSINGER);
and based on the third set of data, stream at least part of the media content item to the at least one second user device (see fig. 4, step 424, par. 0074, wherein the method may include performing the selected media content, for example, by presenting the presentation media content to the users of the set of two or more participant mobile devices within the participation region; as taught by KISSINGER).
KISSINGER does not expressly teach to be displayed by the set of user devices, wherein the prompt comprises a displayed question or statement configured to solicit a user response that identifies at least one media content item that is responsive to the displayed question or statement; transmit at least part of the second set of data to at least one second user device in the set of user devices to enable display, by the at least one second user device, of the prompt together with a graphical representation of the response to the prompt received via the at least one first user device; receive, from the at least one second user device, a third set of data corresponding to a selection received via the graphical representation.
In similar field of endeavor, BAGLY teaches:
to be displayed by the set of user devices (see fig. 5, step 502, par. 0047, wherein the process begins by polling the participants in the online collaboration (step 502). The participants may be polled using any polling software program that presents questions and other information to the meeting audience. The polling program is used to prompt the participants to generate a response to the questions; as taught by BAGLY),
transmit at least part of the second set of data to at least one second user device in the set of user devices to enable display, by the at least one second user device, to the prompt received via the at least one first user device (see fig. 7, steps 706-708, par. 0054, wherein when a response is received from each participant (step 704), the mechanism of the present invention identifies those participants that have responded as having an understanding of the material (step 706). The mechanism of the present invention then provides the identified participants with alternative material in the presentation (step 708). For example, in addition to the slides that are displayed to all participants, an identified participant may be also shown alternative slides. The identified participant is then polled as to which material presented (e.g., the original or the alternative slide) is better (step 710); as taught by BAGLY);
receive, from the at least one second user device, a third set of data corresponding to a selection received via the graphical representation (see fig. 7, steps 706-708, par. 0054, wherein when poll responses are received from the identified participant (step 712), the mechanism of the present invention aggregates all of the polling results to form a collective participant response (step 714); as taught by BAGLY).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the KISSINGER apparatus to include the teachings of BAGLY to be displayed by the set of user devices, transmit at least part of the second set of data to at least one second user device in the set of user devices to enable display, by the at least one second user device, to the prompt received via the at least one first user device; receive, from the at least one second user device, a third set of data corresponding to a selection received via the graphical representation. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as it is beneficial for the user to be able to have a confirmation of the media that is going to be played back to make sure that it is the one that other users select. It would further be advantageous to have a mechanism for adapting the polling schedule of the participants based on whether the participant is focused on the current presentation material (see also BAGLY, par. 0006).
KISSINGER and BAGLY do not expressly teach wherein the prompt comprises a displayed question or statement configured to solicit a user response that identifies at least one media content item that is responsive to the displayed question or statement; of the prompt together with a graphical representation of the response.
In similar field of endeavor, HERMES teaches wherein the prompt comprises a displayed question or statement configured to solicit a user response that identifies at least one media content item that is responsive to the displayed question or statement (see figs. 1-4B, par. 0030, wherein one or more of the “Required” answer fields 170 is added to the list of answer choices for the poll. In some embodiments, one or more default answers (e.g., “Undecided,” and “I don't care”) are automatically added by the opinion polling system 110. In some embodiments, suggested answer choices may be automatically recommended and/or added based on user preferences and/or by the type of question entered by the user. According to some embodiments, the answers may be displayed as a multiple-choice answer. For example, if the user enters the question: “What is your biggest concern for our country, right now?” the multiple-choice answers may include: “Inflation,” “gas prices,” “grocery bills,” “potential wars,” and the like; see also par. 0031 wherein The user may also add an image, video, and/or audio to the poll. In some embodiments, the user may add a video and/or audio by selecting a media link 175 to select from recorded images, video, and/or audio. In some embodiments, the media link 175 may activate a camera and/or a microphone of the user device 105 to record the desired images, video and/or audio; see also fig. 3, pars. 0045-0067; as taught by HERMES);
of the prompt together with a graphical representation of the response (see figs. 4A-4B, par. 0065, wherein FIG. 4A is similar to FIG. 1 except the user device 105 shows a comments screen 401 of another user responding to a poll according to some embodiments. The comment screen 401 may show the user icon 150 and the user ranking 149, a poll summary section 403, a personal response indicator 404, a personal voting status 405, like, dislike, and comment indicators 407, a comment section 409, a comment field 411, and a total votes indicator 413. According to some embodiments, the poll summary section 403 includes the polling question, radial buttons for marking a desired response to the poll, and response distribution values 415. Once the personal response indicator 404 has been selected by the user from the radial buttons, the personal voting status 405 is updated to reflect the user's status; see also par. 0067, wherein the results screen 451 may show the user icon 150 and the user ranking 149, a final results summary section 453, a final result status 455, like, dislike, and comment indicators 407, a demographic preview section 459, a link to the complete demographic data 461, and a final votes indicator 463. According to some embodiments, the final results summary section 453 includes the polling question, listing of responses to the poll, and final response distribution values 465. In some embodiments, the final response distribution values 465 (e.g., percentage breakdown by response); as taught by HERMES).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the KISSINGER and BAGLY apparatus to include the teachings of HERMES wherein the prompt comprises a displayed question or statement configured to solicit a user response that identifies at least one media content item that is responsive to the displayed question or statement; of the prompt together with a graphical representation of the response. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as it is beneficial for the user to have a reminder of what the polling questions was by displaying it alongside the results (see also HERMES, par. 0002).
As to claim 2, KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES teach the limitations of claim 1. BAGLY further teaches: wherein: the set of user devices are registered with respective computing system accounts (see fig. 3, par. 0037, wherein Collaboration server 302 may access database 310. Database 310 may store information concerning participants, which may be looked up with reference to a login identifier of each participant; as taught by BAGLY);
and the graphical representation of the response to the prompt comprises an indication of a computing system account associated with the at least one first user device (see fig. 8, par. 0056, wherein the process begins with polling the participants in the online collaboration (step 802). When the polling feedback is received from the participants (step 804), the mechanism of the present invention may use the feedback to make predictions regarding presentation pace and content for future presentations (step 806). The mechanism of the present invention may also compare the participant feedback against compliance standards, such as ISO or diversity training, in order to determine whether the presentation meets the compliance criteria (step 808); as taught by BAGLY).
As to claim 3, KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES teach the limitations of claim 1. KISSINGER further teaches wherein: the at least one first user device is registered with a first media streaming service; and the at least one media content item is stored in a storage of the first media streaming service (see figs. 1-3, par. 0027, wherein a unique identifier of each mobile device (e.g., MAC address, device identifier, etc.) may be received by the content polling module via the wireless network. The content polling module may be configured to retrieve the one or more attributes for a particular mobile device from a third party source based upon the unique identifier for that mobile device. As a non-limiting example, a mobile device may register the contents of media library with a web service (e.g., web content 154), whereby the content polling module may retrieve the attributes of the contents of the media library from the web service by transmitting the unique identifier for that mobile device; as taught by KISSINGER).
As to claim 4, KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES teach the limitations of claim 3. KISSINGER further teaches wherein the at least one non- transitory computer-readable medium further comprises program instructions such that the computing system is configured to: before streaming the at least part of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device, determining whether the at least one second user device is registered with the first media streaming service (see par. 0034, wherein content polling engine 122 may be configured to identify participant mobile devices and store a roster of the participant mobile devices in data store 124. The roster may identify participant mobile devices based on a mobile device identifier or an IP address, etc.; as taught by KISSINGER).
As to claim 5, KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES teach the limitations of claim 4. KISSINGER further teaches wherein streaming at least part of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device comprises: based on a determination that the at least one second user device is registered with the first media streaming service (see rejection of claim 4 above; as taught by KISSINGER).
BAGLY further teaches streaming the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device (see fig. 7, steps 706-708, par. 0054, wherein when a response is received from each participant (step 704), the mechanism of the present invention identifies those participants that have responded as having an understanding of the material (step 706). The mechanism of the present invention then provides the identified participants with alternative material in the presentation (step 708). For example, in addition to the slides that are displayed to all participants, an identified participant may be also shown alternative slides. The identified participant is then polled as to which material presented (e.g., the original or the alternative slide) is better (step 710); as taught by BAGLY).
As to claim 8, KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES teach the limitations of claim 1. KISSINGER further teaches:
wherein streaming at least part of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device comprises: obtaining the at least part of the at least one media content item from a media streaming service external to the computing system (see par. 0039, wherein content selection module 112 and media player module 114 may be embodied as one or more programs configured to operate on a common computing device 168, while content polling module 110 may be configured to operate on a separate computing device; see also par. 0073, wherein the content selection module may be configured to retrieve the selected media content from a media library (e.g., media library 128), whereby the content selection module transmits a content selection response indicating or including the selected media content to the content polling module or transmits a content performance request to the media player module that indicates or includes the selected media content. In some embodiments, where the content performance request merely indicates the selected media content, the media player module may be configured to retrieve the selected media content from a media library (e.g., media library 132); as taught by KISSINGER);
and streaming the at least part of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device (see fig. 4, step 424, par. 0074, wherein the method may include performing the selected media content, for example, by presenting the presentation media content to the users of the set of two or more participant mobile devices within the participation region; as taught by KISSINGER).
As to claim 9, KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES teach the limitations of claim 1. KISSINGER further teaches:
wherein streaming at least part of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device comprises: causing a media streaming service external to the computing system (see fig. 1, par. 0031, wherein in embodiments where the content selection response indicates the selected media content, content selection engine 126 may utilize media library 128 to identify selected media content. Furthermore, in some embodiments, content selection module 112 may refer to media library 132 of media player module 114 for selecting media content; as taught by KISSINGER)
to stream the at least part of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device (see fig. 4, step 424, par. 0074, wherein the method may include performing the selected media content, for example, by presenting the presentation media content to the users of the set of two or more participant mobile devices within the participation region; as taught by KISSINGER).
As to claim 10, KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES teach the limitations of claim 1. BAGLY further teaches:
wherein: the at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium further comprises program instructions such that the computing system is configured to communicate with a plurality of user devices registered with respective computing system accounts (see fig. 3, par. 0037, wherein Collaboration server 302 may access database 310. Database 310 may store information concerning participants, which may be looked up with reference to a login identifier of each participant; as taught by BAGLY);
the user devices in the set of user devices are registered with respective computing system accounts that are enabled to share data between them (see figs. 3-4, par. 0039, wherein Collaboration application 410 is an example collaboration software program, such as collaboration applications 304-308 in FIG. 3. Collaboration application 410 allows a participant to login to the online meeting hosted by collaboration server 402. Audio and video of the meeting is then provided to client 404, which is displayed using collaboration application 410; as taught by BAGLY).
KISSINGER further teaches the plurality of user devices registered with respective computing system accounts comprise at least one additional user device is configured to not share data with the set of user devices (see figs. 7-8, par. 0094, wherein At 720, the method may include judging whether to participate in the mobile device polling event. For example, the mobile device may participate if the permissions set by the mobile device user enable the mobile device to return the requested polling data to the content polling module. At 722, if the answer is yes, the mobile device may participate in the mobile device polling event by transmitting the requested polling data to the content polling module. At 722, if the requested polling data is not permitted by the user preference, then the mobile device may not participate and may refrain from transmitting a content polling response that includes the requested polling data; see also par. 0096; as taught by KISSINGER).
Claim 13 amounts to the non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions, which when executed by one or more processing devices, cause the system to perform operations on the system of claim 1. Accordingly, claim 13 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 1 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claim 14 amounts to the non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions, which when executed by one or more processing devices, cause the system to perform operations on the system of claim 2. Accordingly, claim 14 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 2 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claim 15 amounts to the non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions, which when executed by one or more processing devices, cause the system to perform operations on the system of claim 3. Accordingly, claim 15 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 3 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claim 16 amounts to the non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions, which when executed by one or more processing devices, cause the system to perform operations on the system of claim 4. Accordingly, claim 16 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 4 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claim 17 amounts to the non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions, which when executed by one or more processing devices, cause the system to perform operations on the system of claim 5. Accordingly, claim 17 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 5 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claim 20 amounts to the method performed on the system of claim 1. Accordingly, claims 20 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 1 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KISSINGER et al. (US20100296505A1) in view of BAGLY et al. (US20070100938A1) and further view of HERMES et al. (US20240169382A1) and further view of URAMOTO (US20090144282A1).
As to claim 6, KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES teach the limitations of claim 4. KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES do not expressly teach wherein streaming at least part of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device comprises: based on a determination that the at least one second user device is not registered with the first media streaming service, streaming a sample of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device.
In similar field of endeavor, URAMOTO teaches wherein streaming at least part of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device comprises: based on a determination that the at least one second user device is not registered with the first media streaming service, streaming a sample of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device (see fig. 13, par. 0114, wherein the users who have paid to become a member have the access right to read the whole content of each book, while the users who are not members have the access right to read only a part of each book. The amount each user can read may be determined in accordance with the access control value. When the access control value is 0.1, the user can read 10% of the whole book. FIG. 13 is views respectively showing a display for the members of the paid contents and a display for the users other than the members. The upper view in FIG. 13 is a display showing a book for the members, and the lower view in FIG. 13 is a display showing the book for non-members. As shown in the upper view in FIG. 13, members can read the whole book, but non-members can read only the amount determined in accordance with the access control value as described above, and hence cannot read any further than a certain point in the book as in the lower view in FIG. 13. In addition, for books such as photo collection books, it is also possible to perform control to show images made appear blurred to non-members by using the access control value as the clarity; as taught by URAMOTO).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES apparatus to include the teachings of URAMOTO wherein streaming at least part of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device comprises: based on a determination that the at least one second user device is not registered with the first media streaming service, streaming a sample of the at least one media content item to the at least one second user device. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as such access control of showing part of the paid contents by using the above-described functions can be used for content check or the like before purchase. Moreover, the contents creator can cut out the need of creating contents to be provided to the non-member users (see also URAMOTO, par. 0114).
Claim 18 amounts to the non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions, which when executed by one or more processing devices, cause the system to perform operations on the system of claim 6. Accordingly, claim 18 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 6 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claims 7, 11-12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KISSINGER et al. (US20100296505A1) in view of BAGLY et al. (US20070100938A1) and further view of HERMES et al. (US20240169382A1) and further view of HERRMANN et al. (US20110014972A1).
As to claim 7, KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES teach the limitations of claim 1. KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES do not expressly teach wherein: the at least one first user device is registered with a first computing system account which has access to a first media streaming service; the at least one media content item is a media content item provided by the first media streaming service; and the at least one second user device is registered with a second computing system account which does not have access to the first media streaming service.
In similar field of endeavor, HERRMANN teaches wherein: the at least one first user device is registered with a first computing system account which has access to a first media streaming service (see figs. 2-5, par. 0063, wherein during registration the user is prompted to enter external account credentials, for example, a user name and password associated with the cell phone account. The information is stored with the user information so the external associate can be used by the online system; as taught by HERRMANN);
the at least one media content item is a media content item provided by the first media streaming service (see fig. 5, par. 0064, wherein content is provided for delivery to users. The online system can store the content and provide for delivery and/or viewing of the content. However, process 500 includes a step of determining eligibility to receive and/or view the content at 506. The step of determining eligibility can also include determining if any exclusions apply to the content; see also par. 0037, wherein the delivery channel includes at least one of … online advertising, online advertising networks … a FACEBOOK page, a FACEBOOK account, a MYSPACE page, a MYSPACE account, a TWITTER page, a TWITTER account …; as taught by HERRMANN);
and the at least one second user device is registered with a second computing system account which does not have access to the first media streaming service (see par. 0123, wherein a casino may have a list of players that are barred from interacting with the casino (cheaters, problem gamblers, employees, etc.). The online system takes attributes collected during the registration process, such as but not limited to first name, last name, address, zip code, phone number, social security number, credit card number, license number, email address, date of birth and national id and matches those attributes with attributes of records on the exclusion list managed by the online system. If a valid match is confirmed, the registration with the online system is not allowed; as taught by HERRMANN).
36. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES apparatus to include the teachings of HERRMANN wherein: the at least one first user device is registered with a first computing system account which has access to a first media streaming service; the at least one media content item is a media content item provided by the first media streaming service; and the at least one second user device is registered with a second computing system account which does not have access to the first media streaming service. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as any effort to produce the level of sophistication and resource necessary to effectively manage a marketing initiative for an establishment must include a capability to determine the most effective delivery mechanisms to reach their consumers (i.e. through linking to the consumers’ social media accounts), measure engagement across the most effective delivery channels and track subsequent and connected actions taken by the consumer once they have engaged. With this capability, an establishment can then determine the content, applications, channels, networks and tools that most effectively drive revenue and deliver the best return on investment (see also HERRMANN, par. 0008).
As to claim 11, KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES teach the limitations of claim 1. KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES do not expressly teach wherein: the at least one first user device is registered with a first computing system account; the at least one second user device is registered with a second computing system account; and the second computing system account is authorized to receive data from the first computing system account.
In similar field of endeavor, HERRMANN teaches wherein:
the at least one first user device is registered with a first computing system account (see figs. 2-5, par. 0063, wherein during registration the user is prompted to enter external account credentials, for example, a user name and password associated with the cell phone account. The information is stored with the user information so the external associate can be used by the online system; as taught by HERRMANN);
the at least one second user device is registered with a second computing system account (see par. 0123, wherein a casino may have a list of players that are barred from interacting with the casino (cheaters, problem gamblers, employees, etc.). The online system takes attributes collected during the registration process, such as but not limited to first name, last name, address, zip code, phone number, social security number, credit card number, license number, email address, date of birth and national id and matches those attributes with attributes of records on the exclusion list managed by the online system. If a valid match is confirmed, the registration with the online system is not allowed; as taught by HERRMANN);
and the second computing system account is authorized to receive data from the first computing system account (see par. 0118, wherein the online system provides a common interface that enables any external entity, system, network, device or application the ability to either receive data from the online system, or send data to the online system. In the case where the data is transferred between the online system and an external system, unique attributes of the user account, such as a unique id for example, are used to determine which account the data is associated; as taught by HERRMANN).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the KISSINGER, BAGLY and HERMES apparatus to include the teachings of HERRMANN wherein: the at least one first user device is registered with a first computing system account; the at least one second user device is registered with a second computing system account; and the second computing system account is authorized to receive data from the first computing system account. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as any effort to produce the level of sophistication and resource necessary to effectively manage a marketing initiative for an establishment must include a capability to determine the most effective delivery mechanisms to reach their consumers (i.e. through linking to the consumers’ social media accounts), measure engagement across the most effective delivery channels and track subsequent and connected actions taken by the consumer once they have engaged. With this capability, an establishment can then determine the content, applications, channels, networks and tools that most effectively drive revenue and deliver the best return on investment (see also HERRMANN, par. 0008).
As to claim 12, KISSINGER, BAGLY, HERMES and HERRMANN teach the limitations of claim 11. HERRMANN further teaches wherein:
the set of user devices comprises a third user device registered with a third computing system account; the third computing system account is not authorized to receive data from the first computing system account (see par. 0128, wherein a SOAP based interface may exist between the online system and a system sitting in the office of a state regulator or the agency that manages the state's problem gambling hotline. When an individual is added to the exclusion list as managed by the system sitting in the office of the state regulator or the agency that manages the state's problem gambling hotline, that new record is transferred via the interface to the online system. The online system recognizes that real-time transfer and stores the new record in the exclusion list in memory, on disk or in a database; see also pars. 0120-0127; as taught by HERRMANN);
and transmitting at least part of the second set of data comprises transmitting the at least part of the second set of data to the at least one second user device and forgoing transmitting the at least part of the second set of data to the third user device (see par. 0331, wherein a gaming jurisdiction may have regulations related to the type of marketing materials particular individuals can received. Some jurisdictions may impose rules that say marketing materials related to gaming cannot be sent to individuals that have previously be registered on a problem gambling exclusion list; see also par. 0382; as taught by HERRMANN).
Claim 19 amounts to the non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions, which when executed by one or more processing devices, cause the system to perform operations on the system of claim 7. Accordingly, claim 19 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 7 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Publication Number
Filing Date
Title
US10034053B1
2016-01-25
Polls for media program moments
US8601502B2
2007-11-07
Apparatus, system and method for delivering polling and user generated content to disparate communication
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 KOOROSH NEHCHIRI whose telephone number is (408)918-7643. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 11-7 PST.
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, William L. Bashore can be reached at 571-272-4088. 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.
/KOOROSH NEHCHIRI/Examiner, Art Unit 2174
/WILLIAM L BASHORE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2174