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 .
Prosecution Status
Applicants’ amendments dated 5/26/2026 have been received and reviewed. The status of the claims is as follows:
Claims 1-12, 14, and 15 are pending.
Specification
Amendments to the Title of the Invention are acknowledged. The amended Title is acceptable.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
With regard to the amended Abstract, the phrases “are provided” and “the method” are improper for the reasons indicated above.
Drawings
The replacement drawings received on 5/26/2026 are acceptable.
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.
1. Claims 1-2, 4-7, 11-12, 14, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Yu et al. (US 20220180052 A1, hereinafter Yu).
Regarding Claim 1
Yang discloses a product display method, comprising:
obtaining, in a first application, product information of at least one product
in response to a display policy being satisfied, displaying a second interface in a first interface of the first application, the second interface including information of the live room and the product
in response to detecting a first trigger for the second interface, displaying an interface for presenting detailed information corresponding to the product information, and/or displaying an interface of a live roomresponse to function control being selected to recognize item, second interface displayed to show detailed product information)
Yang does not explicitly disclose, but Yu teaches in a similar environment:
wherein the second interface is superimposed and displayed at an edge position on the first interface, and the first interface is a default home interface of the first application other than a livestreaming viewing interface;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the invention of Yang to have included the features of Yu, since such a modification would solve a technical need for the management of presentation content including technical instances where presentation content interacts with live feeds (Yu: ¶6).
Regarding Claims 14, 15
Claims 14 and 15 are parallel in scope to claim 1 and are rejected on similar grounds.
Regarding Claim 2
Yang further discloses:
wherein the display policy being satisfied comprises at least one of the following: a number associated with the second interface being terminated being less than a first threshold, and a second trigger being received. (Yang: see at least ¶59-65, fig. 4-6: in response to function control being selected to render a menu including an option to recognize item, second interface displayed to show detailed product information)
Regarding Claim 4
Yang further discloses:
wherein the product information satisfies at least one of following: a reference parameter corresponding to the product information being greater than or equal to a first threshold, and the product information being in one of top N3 positions in a product information sequence ranked in a descending order of reference parameters, where N3 is a positive integer. (Yang: at least ¶143: link for product presented if recommendation index above a target)
Regarding Claim 5
Yang further discloses:
if the second interface is displayed in the first interface of the first application, ceasing displaying the second interface in the first interface of the first application in response to a corresponding policy being satisfied. (Yang: see at least ¶151: display of live stream interface closed in response to jumping to the resource exchange interface)
Regarding Claim 6
Yang further discloses:
wherein the corresponding policy being satisfied comprises at least one of the following: receiving a terminating operation on the second interface, and sale of products corresponding to the product information being ended. (Yang: see at least ¶151: display of live stream interface closed in response to jumping to the resource exchange interface)
Regarding Claim 7
Yang further discloses:
wherein the product information in the second interface is displayed in a switching way, product information before switching comprise product information of a product sale of which is ended, and product information after switching comprise product information of a product sale of which is not ended. (Yang: see at least ¶145, 151: historical and active item information may be displayed)
Regarding Claim 11
Yang further discloses:
wherein the product information further indicates a recommendation reason or information of a host corresponding to the product information, and the recommendation reason comprises following the target host, the target host being a host to which a product corresponding to the product information belongs. (Yang: see at least ¶33, 49, 50: viewer follows host by logging into live stream; host recommends items captured by camera in livestream)
Regarding Claim 12
Yang further discloses:
wherein the product information comprises an image and a text, the text being superimposed on the image. (Yang: see at least fig. 6)
2. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Yu, as applied above, and further in view of Jabara et al. (US 20170064349 A1, hereinafter Jabara).
Yang in view of Yu discloses the claimed invention except for the following, which Jabara teaches in a similar environment:
wherein the at least one live room satisfies at least one of following: a number of followers of a host of the at least one live room being greater than or equal to a second threshold, the host of the at least one live room being in one of top N1 positions in a host sequence ranked in a descending order of numbers of followers, where N1 is a positive integer, a historical sale parameter of the host of the at least one live room being greater than or equal to a third threshold, and the host of the at least one live room being in one of top N2 positions in a host sequence ranked in a descending order of historical sale parameters, where N2 is a positive integer. (Jabara: see at least ¶29: minimum number of followers to start broadcast stream)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the invention of Yang in view of Yu to have included the features of Jabara, since such a modification would enabled sending live streaming videos to a fan base (Jabara: see at least ¶7).
3. Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Yu, as applied above, and further in view of Liu et al. (US 20220277384 A1, hereinafter Liu).
Regarding Claim 8
Yang in view of Yu discloses the claimed invention except for the following, which Liu teaches in a similar environment:
displaying a third interface in the first interface of the first application, the third interface being a sub-interface of the first interface, and the third interface comprising first information of at least one discounted product and second information at least one other product, wherein the first information, and the second information are alternately arranged in the third interface. (Liu: see at least ¶134, 135: welfare products displayed in interface at discounted price less than a first price)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the invention of Yang in view of Yu to have included the features of Liu, since such a modification would have inspired audience users to take corresponding actions to meet the allowable transaction condition of the target item (Liu: see at least ¶168).
Regarding Claim 9
Yang in view of Yu discloses the claimed invention except for the following, which Liu teaches in a similar environment:
wherein the product information further comprises discount information of a product. (Liu: see at least fig. 22, ¶168: discounted price of welfare purchase displayed based on eligibility)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the invention of Yang in view of Yu to have included the features of Liu, since such a modification would have inspired audience users to take corresponding actions to meet the allowable transaction condition of the target item (Liu: see at least ¶168).
Regarding Claim 10
Yang in view of Yu discloses the claimed invention except for the following, which Liu teaches in a similar environment:
wherein the product information further indicates a sale progress of a product, when a sold parameter of a product is greater than or equal to a fourth threshold and less than the fifth threshold, the sale progress is corresponding to the sold parameter; and when the sold parameter of the product is greater than or equal to a fifth threshold, the sale progress is corresponding to an unsold parameter (Liu: see at least fig. 18: sales progress)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the invention of Yang in view of Yu to have included the features of Liu, since such a modification would have inspired audience users to take corresponding actions to meet the allowable transaction condition of the target item (Liu: see at least ¶168).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 USC 112 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the present amendments. Accordingly, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 USC 101 rejection have been fully considered, and are persuasive in light of the present amendments. Accordingly, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejections 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.
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 MICHAEL A MISIASZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-6961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday. 8:00 AM - 5:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Marissa Thein can be reached at 571-272-6764. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL MISIASZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3688
Prosecution Insights