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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/20/26 has been entered. Claims 6, 10, 12, 13, 19 are cancelled. Claims 21-25 are new. Claims 1-5,7-9,11 and 14-18, 20-25 are presented for examination.
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 1-4, 9, 14-17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sotelo et al. (US 20170169014 A1), in view of Ghanem et al. (US 20110142335 A1), in further view of FITZPATRICK (US 20190000382 A1).
Re-claim 1, Sotelo et al. teach -- a processor; and a memory storing operations executable by the processor, the operations comprising:
--displaying the determined data on the electronic display screen in a graphical user interface;
(see e.g. [0054] Translation server computer 100 may cause display of a graphical user interface on client computing device 120 with controls for identifying a first listing website. )
--in response to receiving user input confirming the identity of the identified item via the graphical user interface, reformatting the data based on different character limits of one or more text fields required by different listing channels to create multiple versions of the data, each of the multiple versions of the data associated with a different one of the different listing channels for the identified item.
(see e.g. [0128] In an embodiment, translation server computer 100 is programmed or configured to receive requests from client computing device 120 to propagate listings from multiple first listing websites. --- . Client computing device 120 may also authorize translation server computer 100 to access the listings at each of the multiple listing websites that belong to the user of client computing device 120. -- For example, a user may maintain multiple listings for the same items on multiple listing websites in the United States. Additionally, a user may maintain listings for the same items in various regions, such as in the United States and Canada. Translation server computer 100 may be programmed or configured to identify listings from different listing websites that describe the same inventory item. ---Additionally and/or alternatively, client computing device 120 may indicate which of the listings at the first listing website servers describe the same inventory. [0129] In an embodiment, translation server computer 100 executes selection instructions 116 to determine which of the listings describing the same inventory item to translate.
[0103] In response to determining that the number of characters in the title of initial listing 502 exceeds the character limit for limited listing 504, translation server computer 100 may identify words in the title of initial listing 502 that may be removed from the title and placed elsewhere. Translation server computer 100 may identify multiple words or phrases in the title of initial listing 502 that may be removed until the title no longer exceeds the character limit for limited listing 504. Translation server computer 100 may then identify a field in limited listing 504 in which the removed words may be placed. For example, translation server computer 100 may be programmed or configured to identify certain types of descriptors in a title that can be placed in the description section of a listing or in a separate field.
Soleto et al. teach do not teach the following limitations.
However, Ghanem et al. teach an apparatus comprising: an optical sensor; a processor; and a memory storing operations executable by the processor, the operations comprising:
--processing optical data from the optical sensor to identify an item; --crawling one or more third-part servers to locate one or more other listings for the identified item; and downloading descriptive data from the located one or more other listings;
(see e.g. [0036] The data retrieval unit 140 of the present embodiment is a web crawler that scans or browses the Internet to find a plurality of electronic images of advertised items, URL's of the electronic images, and/or any text-based data associated with the electronic images. For purposes of the present embodiment, the advertised items are items of apparel and the text-based data includes a price, a category, and a name of each of the advertised items depicted adjacent the electronic image. The data retrieval unit 140 retrieves an electronic image of the advertised item and sends data representative of the electronic image to the image processing unit 125. The image processing unit 125 may be a microprocessor, a central processing unit ("CPU"), or any other known programmable computing device.
[0037] The image processing unit 125 retrieves and executes programming instructions from the memory unit 115 and/or the processor memory unit 130. The programming instructions enable the image processing unit 125 to determine visual properties or characteristics of electronic images and to compare visual properties representative of different electronic images.
[0012] a method of extracting data representative of the visual characteristics of an image, ).
Ghanem et al. also teach --displaying the determined data on the electronic display screen in a graphical user interface;
(see e.g. [0010] Another example of an image comparison system and method includes a query engine, a computer display device, and a user interface for processing an image query for accessing images in a database. )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sotelo et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Ghanem et al., in order to retrieve data representative of an electronic image depicting an object and any other data associated with the object, and determines data or values representative of the visual characteristics of the object; and also to find a similar item by querying a database through a website. (see e.g. [0038], [0109] ).
Sotelo et al., in view of Ghanem et al., do not teach the following limitations as claimed.
However, FITZPATRICK teaches --in response to failing to receive user input confirming an identity of the identified item via the graphical user interface, reprocessing the optical data to re-identify the item; and
(see e.g. [0171] For example, when system for analyzing items 100 chooses to identify 141 an item using machine learning 145, the identity of that item can be returned back to system for analyzing items 100 for the following step of acquiring data 147 associated with that item, or system for analyzing items 100 can return the identity of that item directly to the user through an interface so that the user can verify that the identity of the item is accurate before system for analyzing items 100 proceeds to acquire item data 147, analyze item data 148, etc.)
Re-claim 23, FITZPATRICK anticipates-- The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise repeating the reprocessing of the optical data in response to repeated failures to receive the user input confirming the identity of the identified item via the graphical user interface.
Note: Repeating the process is considered an obvious variation of FITZPATRICK.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sotelo et al., in view of Ghanem et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by FITZPATRICK, so that the user can verify that the identity of the item is accurate before system for analyzing items 100 proceeds to acquire item data 147, analyze item data Re-claim 2, Sotelo et al. teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise creating a listing for the identified item in each of the different listing channels based on the multiple versions of the data. (see e.g. [0171])
(see e.g. [0128] -- For example, a user may maintain multiple listings for the same items on multiple listing websites in the United States. Additionally, a user may maintain listings for the same items in various regions, such as in the United States and Canada.)
Re-claim 3, Sotelo et al do not teach the following limitations.
However, Ghanem et al. teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: processing additional optical data from the optical sensor to identify one or more additional items; determining data associated with the one or more additional items; and automatically populating a manifest with the item and the one or more additional items.
(see e.g. [0039] The image processing unit 125 also communicates to the memory unit 115 to determine whether there is data representative of the visual characteristics of additional images stored in the database 115A. When it is determined that data representative of additional images is stored in the database 115A, the image processing unit 125 retrieves visual data representative of a different image and determines a value representative of the difference between the visual characteristics of the images in accordance to the process of FIG. 7. Alternatively, the image processing unit 125 determines the difference in accordance to the method of FIG. 15.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Soleto et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Ghanem et al., in order to compute similarity of different images (see e.g. [0009}).
Re-claim 4, Soleto et al. teach the apparatus of claim 3, wherein the operations further comprise generating, using machine learning, a written description based on the item and the one or more additional items and associating the written description with the manifest.
(see e.g. [0096] Translation server computer 100 may add region specific translations using machine learning techniques.
[0078] Rules for post processing may also be created through machine learning from quality assurance.
[0045] In an embodiment, translation instructions 110 dynamically update as translation server computer 100 receives additional information. For example, translation server computer 100 may utilize machine learning techniques to correct translation instructions 110 in response to receiving data from an administrator indicating that one or more translated listings contained incorrect translations.)
Re-claim 9, Soleto et al. teach machine learning, but do not explicitly teach the limitation as claimed.
However, Ghanem et al. teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the optical data comprises image data of the item, and identifying the item comprises machine learning image processing of the optical data to identify the item.
(see e.g. [0053] In another embodiment, the image processing unit 125 further distinguishes a plurality of apparel items depicted in a single foreground mask by identifying edge points at which the brightness of the pixels in the foreground contains discontinuities. In another embodiment, where there is no human or mannequin model depicted in the image, the foreground mask pixels are classified into apparel foreground pixels and background pixels.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Soleto et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Ghanem et al., in order to compute similarity of different images (see e.g. [0009}).
Claim 14 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 15 recites similar limitations as claim 2 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 16 recites similar limitations as claim 3 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 17 recites similar limitations as claim 4 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 20 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Re-claims 21, 22, 25, Soleto et al. do not explicitly teach the limitation as claimed.
However, Ghanem et al. teach 21. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the hardware inventory scanning device comprises a handheld portable device, and the optical sensor is integrated into the handheld portable device.
(see e.g. [0010] Another example of an image comparison system and method includes a query engine, a computer display device, and a user interface for processing an image query for accessing images in a database.
[0011] In another example, a system and method for enabling image searching using manual enrichment, classification, and segmentation includes an image analysis module configured to analyze images in a collection of images and a manual interface enabling human editors to correct errors made by the image analysis module.)
---22. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise transmitting at least one of the downloaded descriptive data and the multiple versions of the data to a remote backend hardware server.
(see e.g. [0062] After the image processing unit 125 determines data representative of the color, inner, and contour characteristics of the foreground, the image processing unit 125 saves this data in the server 120 in step 605A.
[0035] The memory unit 115 and the database unit 115A are in bidirectional communication with the server 120. The image processing unit 125 is in bidirectional communication with the processor memory unit 130, the server 120, and the server 135. The data retrieval unit 140 is in bidirectional communication with the server 135.).
--25. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise communicating with a remote backend hardware server that provides instructions to the processor for accessing the one or more third-party servers during the crawling.
(see e.g. [0035] The data retrieval unit 140 is in bidirectional communication with the server 135.
[0036] The data retrieval unit 140 of the present embodiment is a web crawler that scans or browses the Internet to find a plurality of electronic images of advertised items, URL's of the electronic images, and/or any text-based data associated with the electronic images. )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Soleto et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Ghanem et al., in order to find a similar item by querying a database through a website. (see e.g. [0109] ).
Claims 5, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sotelo et al. (US 20170169014 A1), , in view of Ghanem et al. (US 20110142335 A1), in further view of Brown Reed et al. (WO 2007053797 A2),
Re-claim 5, Sotelo et al. , in view of Ghanem et al., do not teach the limitations as claimed.
However, Brown Reed et al. specifically teach the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the operations further comprise reformatting the written description to create multiple versions of the written description, each of the multiple versions of the written description associated with a different one of the different listing channels.
(see e.g. (see e.g. page 9 The creation module 210 formats the listing 104 according to requirements of the selected publisher 106. For those instances where different formats may be required for different publishing media, the creation module 210 may be configured to format a single listing differently according to the media requirements of each publisher 106. In one embodiment, the creation module 210 displays a preview of the listing 104 formatted according to the requirements of each selected publisher 106. For example, when two publishers 106 with differing formatting requirements are selected, the creation module 210 may display two previews of the listing 104, one for each set of formatting requirements.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sotelo et al. , in view of Ghanem et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Brown Reed et al., as a mechanism to design and create a listing for each set of formatting requirements (see e.g. page 9).
Claim 18 recites similar limitations as claim 5 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claims 7, 8, 11, 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sotelo et al. (US 20170169014 A1), , in view of Ghanem et al. (US 20110142335 A1), in view of FITZPATRICK (US 20190000382 A1), in further view of Adams et al. (US 20040158502 A1).
Re-claim 7, 8, 11 Sotelo et al., in view of Ghanem et al., in view of FITZPATRICK, do not teach the limitations as claimed.
However, Adams et al. teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the optical data comprises a barcode. 8. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the optical data comprises a quick response code.
(see e.g. [0084] At each stage of Selling Service 4000, information is collected and stored in a database by one or more computer programs. The system operators enter information using a variety of means that are well known to those of ordinary skill in the art for performing data-entry. In accordance with one or more embodiments of the present invention, labels with barcodes and human readable alphanumeric codes are used to convey information. The information is gathered using handheld scanners, or by entering the alphanumeric codes on a keyboard.
[0109] All processing applications allow for the scanning of either the item or container barcode to identify the item.)
****The Examiner notes that the Quick response code is a variation of the barcode and is clearly anticipated.
--the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: determining a location for storing the item; and recording the location for storing the item.
(see e.g. Abstract --One embodiment of the present invention is a selling service that includes: (a) accepting items to be sold from sellers; (b) generating data regarding the items; (c) formulating listings for the items; (d) transmitting the listings to a marketplace; and (e) providing items purchased in the marketplace.
[0160] a) the item's location in the storage facility is noted and reported to an operator;
[0073] Although several variations are possible, in a typical scenario, Contained Items 2070 which leave Listing Station 2701 proceed to Storing Area 2900. Storage Area 2900 shown in FIG. 2 is a location at which Contained Items 2070 input from Listing Station 2701 are stored (an appropriate location for Contained Items 2070 is selected using a storing area apparatus), the storage locations are stored in Data Store 3432, and the items are retrieved when requested (located using a pick station apparatus to be described below). In accordance with one or more embodiments of the present invention, the storing area apparatus comprises a Process Station (executing software) that performs the following processes (shown in FIG. 8 and described in detail below).
24. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise, in response to receiving the user input confirming the identity of the identified item, determining a physical storage location for the identified item and recording the physical storage location in association with the identified item.
(see [0073] Although several variations are possible, in a typical scenario, Contained Items 2070 which leave Listing Station 2701 proceed to Storing Area 2900. Storage Area 2900 shown in FIG. 2 is a location at which Contained Items 2070 input from Listing Station 2701 are stored (an appropriate location for Contained Items 2070 is selected using a storing area apparatus), the storage locations are stored in Data Store 3432, and the items are retrieved when requested (located using a pick station apparatus to be described below).
[0074] Pick Station 2951 shown in FIG. 2 is a location at which: (a) a list of all items that are to leave Selling Service Hub 1400 is created (along with their location and a description of the item's container), i.e., a list of items available for shipment or pick up, known as a "pick list"; and (b) an item's retrieval is confirmed when items are retrieved.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sotelo et al., in view of Ghanem et al., in view of FITZPATRICK, and include the steps cited above, as taught by Adams et al., in order to enable sellers to post electronic listings for items by creating a high quality listing for an item (see e.g. [0003].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 103 rejection 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.
With respect to the 101 rejection, the combination of: “the scanning device with the optical sensor, crawling third party servers to download descriptive data of listings; depending on user input, reprocessing the data to re-identify items; or format data for different channels,” as presently written integrates the abstract idea into a practical application.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Masters et al. (US 9665960 B1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUNA CHAMPAGNE whose telephone number is (571)272-7177. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Florian Zeender can be reached at 571 272-6790. 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.
/LUNA CHAMPAGNE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
April 24, 2026
Prosecution Insights