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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/29/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-12 and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-9, 12 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 20150161672 A1) in view of Jaini et al. (US 9,674,579 B1) and further in view of Ivanov et al (US 20180240023 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jung teaches a content controller system for an advertiser to target the placement of advertising media content on a target customer user interface (see FIG. 1), the system comprising:
a user interface device (advertisement evaluation system 112) that is configured to:
communicate with a library of advertising media content (communicate with advertiser 110 via network 106 – see 0032);
receive target customer selections associated with placing the advertising media content on the target customer user interface, wherein the target customer selections include one of a target customer distribution range and target customer content blocking or filtering (obtain a collection of a list of advertisements & landing pages and images in association with placing advertisement on client application 104, wherein the collection of the list of advertisements & landing pages and the images include content filtering – see FIG. 3, 0033);
determining whether the target content comprises approved target content or undesired target content by comparing the target content to a content filter (comparing the advertisement to the list of advertisements & landing pages 308 – see 0033, 0067, 0085)
automatically place an approved advertisement of the advertising media content within an area of the target customer user interface if the target content is determined to be approved target content (automatically present advertisement within an area of the application 104 via client user device if an evaluation generated by advertisement evaluation system indicates that the advertisement is appropriate for display - see 0054, 0063); and
automatically block the advertising media content from the area of the target customer interface if the target media content is determined to be undesired media content (automatically block advertisement from the area of the application 104 via client user device if an evaluation generated by advertisement evaluation system indicates that the advertisement is inappropriate for display - see 0053, 0063).
Jung fails to teach reviewing and rating content relative to target content by using artificial intelligence and wherein the content filter comprises a plurality of categories each comprising a range extending along a maturity scale between a mature level and a family-friendly level. Jaini teaches analyzing and rating content using machine learning systems and content filter comprising a various content control settings with respect to level 1 to 10 for each of categories such as violence, profanity, vulgarity – see FIG. 4, col. 3, lines 27-36; col. 12, lines 53-60; col. 15, line 49 to col. 17, line 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jung by reviewing and rating content relative to target content by using artificial intelligence and wherein the content filter comprises a plurality of categories each comprising a range extending along a maturity scale between a mature level and a family-friendly level as taught by suggested by Jaini the purposes of rating content more precisely and controlling various settings regarding tolerances to content ratings.
Jung further fails to teach using artificial intelligence to determine whether the target content comprises the approved/undesired target content, place the approved advertisement of the advertising media content within an area of the target customer user interface, and block the advertising media content from the area of the target customer interface. However, Ivanov teaches that machine learning algorithm determines the targeted content as a positive targeted content or a negative targeted content, rendering a positive targeted content, e.g., an approved advertisement, in a displayable area of a browser application, and blocking the rendering a negative targeted content, e.g., an unappropriated advertisement, in the displayable area of the browser application. See FIG. 3, 0109, 0110, 0117, 0121, 0143, 0175. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jung and Jaini by using artificial intelligence to determine the approved target content or undesired target content, place the approved advertisement of the advertising media content within an area of the target customer user interface, and block the advertising media content from the area of the target customer interface as taught or suggested by Ivanov for the purpose of automating media content management to effectively ensure relevant content is presented within in the user interface.
Regarding claim 2, Jung in combination with Jaini teaches that at least one sliding bar configured to be moved along a maturity scale between a first end associated with a mature level and a second end associated with a family-friendly level (see Jaini: FIG. 4; col. 15, line 49 to col. 17, line 3).
Regarding claim 3, Jung in combination with Jaini teaches that provide a plurality of categories that a target customer can select, including one of a sex category, a language category, a violence category, a drugs category, a nudity category (see Jaini: FIG. 4; col. 15, lines 49 to col. 17, line 3).
Regarding claim 4, Jung teaches displaying predefined campaign options associated with the advertising media content (displaying various features associated with advertisement – see 0025).
Regarding claim 5, Jung teaches providing target customer with at least one of the following selections: a start date selection, an end date selection for the advertising media content to be displayed, a target customer location, a target audience selection, a target distribution channel selection, or a target community selection (e.g., target viewer selection with respect to target age group – see 0018, 0033, 0035, 0036, 0043, 0077).
Regarding claim 6, Jung in combination with Jaini teaches automatically generating positive and negative content placement areas based on the target customer selections; and automatically cause adaptation of the placement of the advertising media content (automatically designating appropriate/inappropriate advertisements according to the generated list of advertisement and landing pages 308 and automatically providing the recommended/appropriated content based on one or more user selections or user profile - see Jung: 0066-0067; Jaini: col. 4, lines 6-14; col. 17, lines 47-59).
Regarding claim 7, Jung in combination with Jaini teaches to provide a target customer rating bar to set a content filter relative to a rating scale (see Jaini: FIG. 4).
Regarding claim 8, Jung in combination with Ivanov teaches that the system further configured to have an artificial intelligence for placing media (e.g., displaying the target content - see Ivanor: 0141, 0175).
Regarding claim 9, Jung in combination with Ivanov teaches that the system further configured to deploy artificial intelligence for detecting offensive content (e.g., detecting negative targeted content – see 0117, 0175).
Regarding claim 12, Jung teaches receiving media content by way of at least one of a community source, an advertiser source, a user source, a customer source, or an artificial intelligence source (receiving advertisements from advertiser - see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 21, see rejection of claim 1.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 20150161672 A1) in view of Jaini et al. (US 9,674,579 B1) and Ivanov et al (US 20180240023 A1) and further in view of Spivack et al. (US 20120272160 A1).
Regarding claims 10-11, the combination of Jung, Jaini and Ivanov lacks to teach the features as claimed. Spivack teaches promoting the posted messages with rewards and identifying the surrounding the content using machine learning. See FIG. 3B, 4C, abstract, 0056, 0057, 0072, 0095, 0163, 0164, 0177, 0230, 0232, 0233, 0255. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jung, Jaini and Ivanov by promoting posts and identifying the surrounding the content using machine learning as taught or suggested by Spivack for the purposes of increase operational efficiency and user engagement.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-19 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: closest prior art, Jung et al. (US 20150161672 A1), discloses or teaches a system and method for preventing display of age-inappropriate advertising included evaluating the advertisement to determine if the advertisement is appropriate for the target age group, and using the results of that determination to either accept the advertisement for displaying or to reject the advertisement. The prior art, either singularly or in combination, explicitly fails to teach the limitations “use artificial intelligence to determine whether a plurality of ad placement areas comprise non-offensive ad placement areas or offensive ad placement areas based on comparing target content associated with the plurality of ad placement areas with the content placement associations; and use artificial intelligence to automatically cause placement of the advertising media content near non-offensive content placement areas and block the advertising media content from offensive content placement areas, the non-offensive content placement areas are disposed on the user interface device” recited in claim 13, and “using artificial intelligence to determine whether a plurality of ad placement areas comprise whitelisted ad placement areas or blacklisted ad placement areas based on comparing target content associated with the plurality of ad placement areas with the content placement associations; and using artificial intelligence to automatically cause placement of the advertising media content near whitelisted content placement areas and away from blacklisted content placement areas” recited in claim 17.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGOC K VU whose telephone number is (571)272-7306. The examiner can normally be reached Monday & Thursday: 10AM-6:30PM EST; Tuesday, Wednesday & Friday: out of office.
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, NATHAN FLYNN can be reached at 571-272-1915. 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.
/NGOC K VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421