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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, “The claimed invention trains a model using metadata of the content item and the engagement score by updating one or more parameters of the model, and using the trained model to obtain a predicted engagement score for a further content item. Applicant submits that the claims do not recite an abstract idea and thus are subject matter eligible. See example vii discussed in 2106.04(a)(1), "a method of training a neural network for facial detection". The Examiner disagrees. Applicant argues that the claims are similar to Example 7, but provides no discussion as to why this is the case. Applicant’s claims to not follow the same fact pattern of Example 7.
Applicant further argues that the claim recites a practical application. The Examiner disagrees. Applicant appears to have mischaracterized the premise of a practical application. The determination is based on, “… (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s); and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they integrate the exception into a practical application... “(see 2106.04(d)(1)).
In other words, it is not an exercise in determining what industries could use the recited invention, as Applicant attempts above.
Applicant further argues that the claimed invention improves the functioning of a computer. The Examiner disagrees. The improvement Applicant suggests comes from the use of the computer, not the claimed invention itself. The examples that Applicant
describes are business improvements and not improvements to the actual technology. Accordingly, Applicants arguments are not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
MPEP 2106 Step 2A-Prong 1
The claims recite:
extracting a first user trajectory from offline data comprising a first sequence of user interactions with content items on a platform associated with a first user over a period of time;
extracting a second user trajectory from offline data comprising a second sequence of user interactions with content items on the platform associated with a second user over the period of time;
computing a first reward for a first user interaction with a first content item in the first sequence based on a window of user interactions with content items that follow the first user interaction in the first sequence;
computing a second reward for a second user interaction with the first content item in the second sequence based on the window of user interactions with content items that follow the second user interaction in the second sequence;
aggregating rewards computed for the first content item, the rewards having the first reward and the second reward; and
training by inputting data of the first content item, receiving a predicted engagement score, comparing the predicted engagement score with the first engagement score, and updating one or more parameters based on the comparing; and
inputting further data of a further content item to the model to obtain a further predicted engagement score.
The claims falls into the abstract idea groupings of (a) mathematical concepts-**mathematical relationships mathematical formulas or equations mathematical calculations** (b) Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity ** fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk) commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations) managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)**
The limitations under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of mathematical calculations and business relations) managing personal behavior, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than recited, “platform, content items, non-transitory computer-readable media, metadata, model, processors”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being certain methods of organizing human activity and mathematical concepts. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
MPEP 2106 Step 2A-Prong 2
The recited limitations are not indicative of integration into a practical application. In particular, the claims only recite the following additional elements, platform, model, metadata, content items, non-transitory computer-readable media, processors. These additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that in conjunction with the abstract limitations, they amount to no more than:
Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f);
- (platform, non-transitory computer-readable media, model, processors)
iv. Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, -(content items, metadata)
The claims do not include additional elements individually or in an ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Integration into a practical application requires the additional element(s) to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. This is not the case in the instant application. Further, as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than: mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
MPEP 2106 Step 2B
Eligibility requires that the claim recites additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (aka “significantly more”) than the recited judicial exception. As discussed above, this is where the instant application falls short. The claims do not include additional elements individually or in an ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
Dependent Claims Step 2A:
The limitations of the dependent claims but for those addressed below merely set forth further refinements of the abstract idea without changing the analysis already
presented (that is, they further limit the organizing of human activities at step 2A —
Prong One without adding any new additional elements other than those already
analyzed above with respect to the independent claims at 2A — Prong Two; moreover claims 2 and 17 recite a platform, 11 describes a model and metadata, but these additional elements do no remedy the deficiencies.
Dependent Claims Step 2B:
The dependent claims merely use the same general technological environment
and instructions to implement the abstract idea as the independent claims without
adding any new additional elements. Accordingly, they are not directed to significantly
more than the exception itself, and are not eligible subject matter under § 101.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TONYA S JOSEPH whose telephone number is (571)270-1361. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-2:30, First Fridays Off.
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, Shannon Campbell can be reached at (571) 272-5587. 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.
/TONYA JOSEPH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628