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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract is a repeat of claim 1. Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The sheet or sheets presenting the abstract may not include other parts of the application or other material. 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. Applicant is reminded that the purpose of the abstract is to enable the Office and the public generally to determine quickly from a cursory inspection the nature and gist of the technical disclosure. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “at any time,” in line 9. The term “at any time” encompasses time before the content was written and before the images were inserted. How can the written content and images be deleted before they were written? How can they be deleted before computers were invented, for that matter? The term “at any time” also encompasses an undefined amount of time in the future, respectfully, including after the end of the universe. How can the action of deletion be performed after the end of the universe? It is unclear to the Examiner how these can be deleted “at any time.” Examiner recommends specifying at which time, or on which screens, the content and images can be edited or deleted, with support from the specification. Claim 18 recites similar limitations.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “professional-quality.” The term “professional-quality” is a relative term. For example, a book may look professional-quality to one reader, however the same book may lack professional-quality to another reader. Neither does the specification quantitatively define what “professional-quality” means. It is unclear to the Examiner what “professional-quality” entails.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “professional-looking.” The term “professional- looking” is a relative term. For example, a book may look professional-looking to one reader, however the same book may not be professional-looking to another reader. Neither does the specification quantitatively define what “professional-looking” means. It is unclear to the Examiner what “professional-looking” entails.
Claims 2-17, and 19-20 are dependent claims, and inherit the 35 U.S.C. §112(b) rejections from their parent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-10, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campagna et al., Patent Application Publication number US 20090254802 A1, (hereinafter “Campagna”), in view of Letourneur et al., Patent Number US 10007843 B1 (hereinafter “Letourneur”), in view of Tran et al., Patent Application Publication number US 20010049707 A1 (hereinafter “Tran”).
Claim 1: Campagna teaches “A method for publishing content, comprising:
providing a series of writing prompts and sub-writing prompts (i.e. section/subsection selector 225 generates a display screen that illustrates the types of sections and subsections that can be chosen for use within the structural framework for the book. The types of sections and subsections that may be selections that include, for example, a title page, copyright page, a page illustrating a chapter format, a dedication page, table of contents page, and many other section and subsection page types [Campagna 0070, Fig. 1]… in FIG. 9. The representative page 702 is shown with thumbnails for each of the sections and subsections 706. The types of sections and subsections that may be selections include, for example, a title page 726, copyright page 727, at least one page illustrating a chapter format 728, a dedication page, table of contents page, an epilogue 729, an afterward 730, an author's brief biography 731 and many other section and subsection page types [Campagna 0085, Fig. 9]… The project text is entered (Box 409) is entered to the template sections [Campagna 0086]… allow the user to organize and edit specific sub-sections (i.e. chapters, sub-chapters…) [Campagna 0020] note: a prompt is displayed that allows a user to fill out the template sections with project text) to guide an author through a writing process (the Examiner interprets this as intended use);…
providing a free-form text field (i.e. manuscript editor 750 of FIG. 10 permits the entry of the text 752 in either as a manual entry or as cut-and-paste from another external word processor [Campagna 0086, Fig. 10]) for the author to write content responsive to the writing and sub-writing prompts (the Examiner interprets this as intended use);
enabling the author to insert images into the content (i.e. Images are inserted (Box 410) to the template sections… the graphic is imported from the graphic content library database 360 to be inserted [Campagna 0087, Fig. 11-12]);
automatically saving the content and inserted images (i.e. Once the initial entry of the manuscript of the project with the appropriate graphic images are entered, the project is stored (Box 411) in the manuscript data base [Campagna 0088] note: saving does not require user intervention);
allowing the author to edit or delete the written content (i.e. manuscript editor 750 of FIG. 10 permits the entry of the text 752 in either as a manual entry or as cut-and-paste from another external word processor [Campagna 0086, Fig. 10]) and images (i.e. A section or sub-section 726, 727, 728, 729, 730, and 731 of the project having graphic images is selected for editing or modification. The non-text content is then edited or modified (Box 428) by deleting the image and re-entering the image [Campagna 0089, Fig. 9]) at any time (see section 112);…
printing a book (i.e. The book is then forwarded to a printer for printing of the book [Campagna 0064]).”
Campagna is silent regarding “providing pre-populated chapter titles and headings based on the writing prompts;”
Letourneur teaches “providing pre-populated chapter titles and headings based on the writing prompts (i.e. techniques may create new chapters or segments within existing chapters. The techniques may also create titles for the new chapters or existing chapters, possibly by leveraging text within the new chapter or segment [Letourneur Col 2 lines 11-15, Fig. 1] note: fig. 1 shows element 136 as a chapter heading);”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna to include the feature of having the ability to provide the information as disclosed by Letourneur.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit to save the user from manually inputting the information, which saves manual input and saves the user time.
Campagna teaches chapters in claim 1 (see 0020, 0070, 0085, above). Campagna and Letourneur are silent regarding “enabling the author to reorder the chapters by dragging and dropping them;
automatically renumbering the chapters based on the reorder;”
Tran teaches “enabling the author to reorder… by dragging and dropping them;
automatically renumbering… based on the reorder (i.e. An exemplary graphical user interface for the claim tree is shown in FIG. 3B. To move claims, the user can drag/drop claims and the claims will automatically be renumbered to show their new relationship. The user can also select a claim and add new claims or delete an existing claim. All other claims will be automatically be adjusted and renumbered accordingly [Tran 0061, Fig. 3B] note: Tran teaches the concept of a list of numbered text, that can be reordered via drag and drop. Then the rest of the list is automatically reordered);”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna and Letourneur to include the feature of having the ability to automatically reorder a list as disclosed by Tran.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit to save the user from manually inputting the information, which saves manual input and saves the user time.
Claim 2: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna teaches “further comprising providing pre-formatted print specifications and templates (i.e. the publisher and the author will… select a template for the layout of the book… the content of the book is inserted into the template. The publisher, author, and editor are then editing the content of the book… Upon completion of the content and the layout of the book within the template, a cover is designed… The book is then forwarded to a printer for printing of the book [Campagna 0064]) to facilitate creation of a printed book (the Examiner interprets this as intended use).”
Claim 4: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna teaches “further comprising printing and shipping the book to the author or end-user (i.e. the single book or books are printed, bound and shipped [Campagna 0008]).”
Claim 6: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna teaches “wherein the writing and sub-writing prompts are designed (i.e. sections and subsections that can be chosen for use within the structural framework for the book. The types of sections and subsections that may be selections that include, for example, a title page, copyright page, a page illustrating a chapter format, a dedication page, table of contents page, and many other section and subsection page types [Campagna 0070, Fig. 1]… in FIG. 9. The representative page 702 is shown with thumbnails for each of the sections and subsections 706. The types of sections and subsections that may be selections include, for example, a title page 726, copyright page 727, at least one page illustrating a chapter format 728, a dedication page, table of contents page, an epilogue 729, an afterward 730, an author's brief biography 731 and many other section and subsection page types [Campagna 0085, Fig. 9]… allow the user to organize and edit specific sub-sections (i.e. chapters, sub-chapters…) [Campagna 0020]) to help the author generate ideas and organize thoughts (the Examiner interprets this as intended use).”
Claim 7: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Letourneur teaches “wherein the pre-populated chapter titles and headings follow established publishing conventions (i.e. techniques may create new chapters or segments within existing chapters. The techniques may also create titles for the new chapters or existing chapters, possibly by leveraging text within the new chapter or segment [Letourneur Col 2 lines 11-15, Fig. 1] note: fig. 1 shows element 136 as a chapter heading. Note2: follows the publishing convention established in Letourneur) to ensure a professional-looking book (the Examiner interprets this as intended use).”
One would have been motivated to combine Campagna and Letourneur and Tran, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit to reuse printing standards to quick and efficiently print books.
Claim 8: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna teaches “comprising printing a book based on a predetermined format (i.e. the publisher and the author will… select a template for the layout of the book… the content of the book is inserted into the template. The publisher, author, and editor are then editing the content of the book… Upon completion of the content and the layout of the book within the template, a cover is designed… The book is then forwarded to a printer for printing of the book [Campagna 0064]).”
Claim 9: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna teaches “comprising providing one or more services including writing, design, printing, and shipping (i.e. the single book or books are printed, bound and shipped [Campagna 0008]).”
Claim 10: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna teaches “comprising using pre-formatted templates (i.e. the publisher and the author will… select a template for the layout of the book… the content of the book is inserted into the template. The publisher, author, and editor are then editing the content of the book… Upon completion of the content and the layout of the book within the template, a cover is designed… The book is then forwarded to a printer for printing of the book [Campagna 0064]) to ensure consistency and quality across all publications (the Examiner interprets this as intended use).”
Claim 17: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna teaches “further comprising automatically populating each chapter title and chapter text with different typography (i.e. template sections/subsections are then chosen (Box 408)… sections and subsections that may be selections include… a chapter format 728 [Campagna 0085, Fig. 9]… Templates are inclusive of… fonts [Campagna 0084] note: chapter format 728 in Fig. 9 includes “Chapter Title” (partially blocked). This chapter text is part of a template, which automatically selects a font).”
Claim 18: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach a system, comprising codes (i.e. a computer-accessible data storage medium having instruction data code, which, when executed on a computer, perform a book creation and publishing method [Campagna 0027]) to perform operations corresponding to the method of claim 1; therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 19: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna teaches “comprising codes (i.e. a computer-accessible data storage medium having instruction data code, which, when executed on a computer, perform a book creation and publishing method [Campagna 0027]) for the series of writing and sub-writing prompts, pre-populated chapter headings and titles, free-form text field, image insertion, automatic saving, editing capabilities, and chapter reordering (see claim 1).”
Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campagna, in view of Letourneur, in view of Tran, in view of Kumar, Patent Application Publication number US 20100131867 A1 (hereinafter “Kumar”).
Claim 3: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna teaches “further comprising providing… graphic design services (i.e. a screen display of the graphic page template page 755 as shown on FIG. 11 [Campagna 0087, Fig. 11] note: offering image templates as a graphic design service) to assist the author in creating a professional-quality book (the Examiner interprets this as intended use).”
Campagna and Letourneur and Tran are silent regarding “one-on-one ghostwriting” services.
Kumar teaches “further comprising providing one-on-one ghostwriting and graphic design services (i.e. a system and methods for managing, supporting and empowering independent Agents to offer a unique platform around a standard apparatus for enabling expert Service Providers to deliver, and charge for, advice to consumers, by connecting two parties in real time in an online chat [Kumar 0041] note: Kumar discloses services for one-on-one advice, which can be used for ghostwriting and graphic design. It is understood that ghostwriting services include interviews to better understand the author) to assist the author in creating a professional-quality book (the Examiner interprets this as intended use).”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna and Letourneur and Tran to include the feature of having the ability to provide one-on-one interview services as disclosed by Kumar.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit to provide services that the user is unable to complete themselves, which provides extra features and increases revenue.
Claim 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campagna, in view of Letourneur, in view of Tran, in view of Talley, Patent Application Publication number US 20150020170 A1 (hereinafter “Talley”).
Claim 5: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna and Letourneur and Tran are silent regarding “further comprising selling gift cards that can be used towards a purchase of any products or services.”
Talley teaches “further comprising selling gift cards (i.e. a method for creating an e-book [Talley Abstract]... users will have the opportunity to purchase a gift card [Talley 0177]) that can be used towards a purchase of any products or services (the Examiner interprets this as intended use).”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna and Letourneur and Tran to include the feature of having the ability to sell gift cards as disclosed by Talley.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit of providing additional features, providing additional payment methods (which increases user flexibility) and increasing revenue.
Claims 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campagna, in view of Letourneur, in view of Tran, in view of Ashland et al., Patent Application Publication number US 20120131041 A1 (hereinafter “Ashland”).
Claim 11: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above.
Campagna and Letourneur and Tran are silent regarding “further comprising automatically pre-populating a book title and author name using information from a sign-up page.”
Ashland teaches “further comprising automatically pre-populating a book title and author name using information from a sign-up page (i.e. interactive story compiler 100 may receive login information, such as for an author [Ashland 0046, Fig. 4]… At operation 420, the interactive story compiler 100 may display available books to a user. FIG. 5 illustrates one example of an interface 500 for displaying available books [Ashland 0047, Fig. 4-5] note: fig. 5 shows book titles and author names).”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna and Letourneur and Tran to include the feature of having the ability to provide information as disclosed by Ashland.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit to display the books the user has access to, so the user can quickly choose which book to read or to continue writing, which saves the user time.
Claim 12: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran and Ashland teach all the limitations of claim 11, above. Campagna teaches “further comprising allowing the author to insert an image between the book title and author name on a title page (i.e. text 856 and any images 857 for the cover are placed, sized and edited (Box 444). The layer editing controls 860 provide the controls for entry and editing of the text 856 and the entry of the image content 857 [Campagna 0094, Fig. 17] note: Campagna Fig. 17 shows an image inserted on a title page. Campagna teaches that the title and author text are “placed,” which indicates their locations can be moved. Campagna teaches that the cover image can also be “placed,” which indicates that these elements can be rearranged to allow the image to be placed between the title and author. Additionally, Campagna discloses editing controls for both the text and image).”
Claim 13: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna teaches “wherein the writing and sub-writing prompts are provided in a pre-set order initially (i.e. In selecting the genre, a user determines the genre to which the book will be assigned and a template of a plurality of templates describing a format for the genre [Campagna 0023]).”
Campagna and Letourneur and Tran are silent regarding “followed by a randomized selection based on one or more topic selections.”
Ashland teaches “wherein the writing and sub-writing prompts are provided in a pre-set order initially, followed by a randomized selection (i.e. in FIG. 13, in various embodiments, the interactive story compiler 100 may present an element showing the selected question, such as question element 1310. In various embodiments, the question element 1310 may be presented prominently in the interface 1300 in order to focus the author's response to the call of the selected question. The interface 1300 may also contain a skip element 1315 which, when selected, may cause the interactive story compiler 100 to display an editing interface for another question, such as a randomly-chosen question [Ashland 0064]) based on one or more topic selections (i.e. a random question out of those stored in the question storage 110 [Ashland 0063]… selectable elements with subject headings under which questions are stored… FIG. 11 shows examples of such stored questions, such as questions "What were you proudest of in your childhood?" (1110), "Write about your family vacations." (1120), and "Write about your experience playing sports." (1130) [Ashland 0060, Fig. 9-11] note: selectable subject headings in Fig. 11 middle section as topic selections. The randomly chosen questions of question storage 110 are organized by subject, thus the randomly chosen questions are based on selectable subjects, or topic selections).”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna and Letourneur and Tran to include the feature of having the ability to provide prompts as disclosed by Ashland.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit to organize the users thoughts and give the users writing ideas.
Claim 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campagna, in view of Letourneur, in view of Tran, in view of O’Brien, Patent Application Publication number US 20100120011 A1 (hereinafter “O’Brien”).
Claim 14: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna and Letourneur and Tran are silent regarding “wherein for authors writing a business book, the writing and sub-writing prompts are provided in a pre-determined order designed to assist the author in generating a logical manuscript flow.”
O’Brien teaches “wherein for authors writing a business book, the writing and sub-writing prompts are provided in a pre-determined order (i.e. mentoring curriculum including an ordered sequence of the writing prompts [O’Brien claim 5]) designed to assist the author in generating a logical manuscript flow (the Examiner interprets this as intended use).”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna and Letourneur and Tran to include the feature of having the ability to sequence prompts as disclosed by O’Brien.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit to organize the users thoughts and give the users writing ideas.
Claim 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campagna, in view of Letourneur, in view of Tran, in view of Perkins et al., Patent Application Publication number US 20160035055 A1 (hereinafter “Perkins”).
Claim 15: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna and Letourneur and Tran are silent regarding “further comprising providing a preview function with a watermark, and removing the watermark upon purchase and printing of the book.”
Perkins teaches “further comprising providing a preview function with a watermark, and removing the watermark upon purchase and printing of the book (i.e. Prior to purchasing… a watermarked version 212 of the one or more than one design element into the design. Then, the user can send the previews 216 of the design for review containing the one or more than one watermarked design element. Next, when the design is approved or the user is satisfied with the design, the user can publish the design 218. Then, a payment screen is displayed 220 comprising a total amount for the one or more than one design elements used in the design. Next, the watermarks on the one or more than one design element is removed [Perkins 0054]).”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna and Letourneur and Tran to include the feature of having the ability to add and remove watermarks as disclosed by Perkins.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit to allow a user to see a preview of the finished product before payment.
Claim 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campagna, in view of Letourneur, in view of Tran, in view of No Surname, Patent Application Publication number US 20200372104 A1 (hereinafter “No Surname”).
Claim 16: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 1, above. Campagna and Letourneur and Tran are silent regarding “further comprising automatically generating a table of contents using the chapter titles and order designated by the author.”
No Surname teaches “further comprising automatically generating a table of contents using the chapter titles and order designated by the author (i.e. Table Of Contents… generate after the entire book has been inputted into the software and a final (but still editable) version of the book is generated. This is to ensure that the chapter heading titles and page numbers match up [No Surname 0456]).”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna and Letourneur and Tran to include the feature of having the ability to automatically generate a table of contents as disclosed by No Surname.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit to save the user from manually inputting the information, which saves manual input and saves the user time.
Claim 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campagna, in view of Letourneur, in view of Tran, in view of Kumar, in view of Talley.
Claim 20: Campagna and Letourneur and Tran teach all the limitations of claim 18, above. Campagna teaches “comprising codes (i.e. a computer-accessible data storage medium having instruction data code, which, when executed on a computer, perform a book creation and publishing method [Campagna 0027]) for pre-formatted print specifications and templates (i.e. the publisher and the author will… select a template for the layout of the book… the content of the book is inserted into the template. The publisher, author, and editor are then editing the content of the book… Upon completion of the content and the layout of the book within the template, a cover is designed… The book is then forwarded to a printer for printing of the book [Campagna 0064]),… and graphic design services (i.e. a screen display of the graphic page template page 755 as shown on FIG. 11 [Campagna 0087, Fig. 11] note: offering image templates as a graphic design service)… printing and shipping (i.e. the single book or books are printed, bound and shipped [Campagna 0008]),”
Campagna and Letourneur and Tran are silent regarding “one-on-one ghostwriting.”
Kumar teaches “one-on-one ghostwriting (i.e. a system and methods for managing, supporting and empowering independent Agents to offer a unique platform around a standard apparatus for enabling expert Service Providers to deliver, and charge for, advice to consumers, by connecting two parties in real time in an online chat [Kumar 0041] note: Kumar discloses services for one-on-one advice, which can be used for ghostwriting and graphic design).”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna and Letourneur and Tran to include the feature of having the ability to provide one-on-one interview services as disclosed by Kumar.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit to provide services that the user is unable to complete themselves, which provides extra features and increases revenue.
Campagna and Letourneur and Tran and Kumar are silent regarding “gift card generation.”
Talley teaches “gift card generation (i.e. a method for creating an e-book [Talley Abstract]... users will have the opportunity to purchase a gift card [Talley 0177]).”
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 the invention/combination of Campagna and Letourneur and Tran and Kumar to include the feature of having the ability to sell gift cards as disclosed by Talley.
One would have been motivated to do so, before the effective filing date of the invention because it provides the benefit of providing additional features, providing additional payment methods (which increases user flexibility) and increasing revenue.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sato (US 20040139389 A1) listed on 892 is related to renumbering chapters, specifically with a drag and drop operation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL SHEN whose telephone number is (469)295-9169 and email address is samuel.shen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7:00 am - 5:00 pm CT.
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, Fred Ehichioya can be reached on (571) 272-4034. 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.
/S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2179
/TUYETLIEN T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2179