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 .
This action is in response to the filing of 2/27/2024. Claims 1-18 are pending and have been considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1,3,4,6,7,9,10,12,13,15,16,18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Marsden et al. (US 2023/0334725).
Regarding claim 1:
Marsden discloses a system and method (abstract; see figures) comprising:
authenticating, over a set of user interfaces, a user for an app executing on a device (fig 1; para 21, partially reproduced herein with emphasis {starting with launch at 151 (i.e., smartphone operating system responds to user tap on touch-screen-displayed icon ... the beacon app may prompt for and/or automatically acquire information needed to authenticate/validate the smartphone user as part of the application launch phase (e.g., prompting user to supply login credentials …}; para 28 {… app acquires login data from the user at 353—prompting, for example, username/password..});
at a first user interface of the app, presenting, by a processor, a first selection output comprising a first visual output, a second visual output, and a third visual output (para 15 {…beacon app (i.e., processor-executed instance thereof) filters the beacon bundle according to (i) user-specified and/or system-learned selection criteria}; para 22 {receiving an initial beacon bundle … selection criteria} [beacon bundle is equivalent to presenting of outputs]; figure 2 [three outputs, launch, orient, explore]; para 23; figs 3-4);
at the first user interface, receiving, by the processor, a first selection of the presented first visual output, second visual output, or third visual output (figure 2 [user’s tap as selection of Moscone]; para 22 {app identifies a subset of the beacons within the geo bundle that (i) fall within the field of view and (ii) meet specified filter/selection criteria} [subset is identified based on selection]; further in para 22 {…user screen-tap by presenting additional information regarding the beacon-marked place/object, including hyperlinks and/or other pathways to additional relevant content. In the FIG. 2 example, for instance, a user-tap on the “Moscone” headline brings up additional information regarding the Moscone center…});
determining, by the processor, a location parameter of the device (para 14 {geo-location information received from a mobile computing device...}; para 21 {smartphone's GPS coordinates—for example, orientation-assist images obtained from a cloud compute engine in response to submission of smartphone geo-location}; para 22-28);
at a second user interface of the app, presenting, by the processor, an animated visual output, wherein the animated visual output includes a plurality segments, wherein each of the plurality of segments is dynamically generated from results of a search (para 22 {rendering those selected beacons in real time as an augmented-reality/mixed-reality overlay on the objective scene shown on the smartphone display…}; see figure 3 [171 and 173]; para 23 {categorical filtering feature at 171 (i.e., beacon app responds to user-tap on miniature-map/filter icon 173 by presenting a dialog box that prompts the user to select one or more categories of interest…}; para 24 {beacon to appear within a user search), adding additional beacon style touches (“flair”), including enhanced visual effects (brightness, animations…}; para 29 {various other features of the beacon (headline, color, logo, icon, animations}; para 97-98,201);
at the second user interface, receiving, by the processor, a second selection of the presented animated visual output, or an associated action widget (see figure 3; para 23 {affirmatively search (181) the title/headline/description of beacons within the bundle to isolate one or more beacons that meet the user's search criteria—the beacon app rendering only those search-match beacons or, depending on user specifications, those search-match beacons together with other user-selected categories…});
based on the selection of the second selection, causing, the processor, a search of a database of businesses based on at least the first selection as a first criterion for the search and the location parameter as a second criterion for the search in proximity to the user to create a set of results (para 23 {those search-match beacons together with other user-selected categories of beacons (e.g., as shown by the checked “Food” and “Events” categories within the dialog box at 183)}; see figure 3);
receiving, by the processor, the set of results (para 23 {..app responds to user-tap} [essentially the app receives the input and processing]; figures 2-3); and
presenting, by the processor, the set of results (figure 3 [171, 181 showing the presentation of results based on user tap/selection and search]; figs 4-10; para 23 [map/filter icon 173 by presenting a dialog box, map-view display]; and see throughout the disclosure).
Regarding claim 7:
Marsden discloses all of the subject matter as described above for claim 1, and discloses a system comprising a processor (figure 7 [processor 321]; para 15; para 27); and a memory (fig 7 [memory 323]; para 27) having instructions stored thereon, wherein execution of the instructions by the processor causes the processor to perform the functions as described for claim 1 above (see throughout the disclosure).
Regarding claim 13:
Marsden discloses all of the subject matter as described above for claim 1, and discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions stored thereon, wherein execution of the instructions by a processor (figures; para 15 [processor-executed]; para 27 {through program code execution within processing unit…}; fig 7; and throughout) causes the processor to perform the steps, functions as described for claim 1 above (see throughout the disclosure).
Regarding claims 3, 9,15:
Marsden discloses all of the subject matter as described above wherein the search is performed at the device (para 185 {..user searches in their map software}; and throughout).
Regarding claims 4,10, 16:
Marsden discloses all of the subject matter as described above wherein the search is performed on a back-end server (para 27 {user smartphone 301 as the client-side mobile computing device having a display … and its wireless and/or wired interconnection to a cloud compute engine 305 (e.g., one or more co-located or distributed server}; para 15,22,28,66; and throughout).
Regarding claim 6,12,18:
Marsden discloses all of the subject matter as described above and providing two-way communication channel comprising at least one of [Note: optional language require only one element] (i) text-based communication, (ii) voice communication, and (iii) video communication with an app executing on a second device associated with a business owner (para 252 {…receive a beacon app notification to indicate a beacon app Sign was left for them. This notification could be delivered in a myriad of ways, including a text message}; and throughout).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2,8,14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marsden et al. (US 2023/0334725) in view of Musk et al. (US 2021/0374885).
Regarding claims 2,8,14:
Marsden discloses all of the subject matter as described above, except for specifically teaching that wherein the animated visual output comprises a spinning wheel.
However, Musk in the same field of endeavor discloses a system and method for on-demand location management wherein the animated visual output comprises a spinning wheel (para 12-14; para 31 {a roulette type wheel may be shown on the display, and land on the selected group member}; figures; and throughout).
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 use teachings of Musk in Marsden in order to provide facilitation of selection as required by using a roulette type spinning wheel (KSR: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods to Yield Predictable Results).
Claim(s) 5,11,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marsden et al. (US 2023/0334725) in view of Rizzolo (US 12,260,447).
Regarding claims 5,11,17:
Marsden discloses all of the subject matter as described above and tickets (para 160, [ticket opportunities]; para 274), except for specifically teaching that providing a virtual ticket generation form.
However, Rizzolo in the same field of endeavor discloses a system and method for network of dining entities wherein providing a virtual ticket generation form (figure 4 [complaint/ticket form]; column 26, lines 40-45; column 27, lines 8-20 [item 22, for complaint]; and throughout).
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 use teachings of Rizzolo in Marsden in order to provide with user feedback and complaint or reviews (KSR: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods to Yield Predictable Results).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mimassi (US 20220230122) discloses a system and method for matching patrons, servers, and restaurants within the food service industry.
Rathod (US 20180350144) discloses generating, recording, simulating, displaying and sharing user related real world activities in virtual world.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HIRDEPAL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-1688. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F.
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, Hannah S Wang can be reached on (571) 272-9018. 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.
/HIRDEPAL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631