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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the communication filed on 01/26/2026.
Claims 1-6, 8-13 and 15-20 have been amended.
Claims 7 and 14 have been previously cancelled.
5. Claims 1-6, 8-13 and 15-20 are currently pending and are considered below.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
6. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 on 10/06/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-6, 8-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 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. Representative claim 1, recites a method, which is a statutory class, the method, executed by a processor and a memory: the method, comprising:
displaying, on a client device, a graphical user interface configured to enable a user to
navigate through a presentation order of a plurality of content elements and a plurality of advertising elements, including by selectively skipping at least some portion of display time for at least the plurality of advertising elements;
displaying, on the graphical user interface, a first subset of the plurality of content elements;
displaying, on the graphical user interface, a first subset of the plurality of advertising elements;
automatically determining to display a second subset of the plurality of content elements, based on a target ratio of advertising display time to content display time being met using respective display times for the first subset of the plurality of advertising elements and the first subset of the plurality of content elements; and
displaying, on the graphical user interface and, based on the automatically
determining, the second subset of the plurality of content elements following display of the first subset of the plurality of advertising elements.
The steps of
displaying, on a client device, a graphical user interface configured to enable a user to
navigate through a presentation order of a plurality of content elements and a plurality of advertising elements, including by selectively skipping at least some portion of display time for at least the plurality of advertising elements;
displaying, on the graphical user interface, a first subset of the plurality of content elements;
displaying, on the graphical user interface, a first subset of the plurality of advertising elements;
automatically determining to display a second subset of the plurality of content elements, based on a target ratio of advertising display time to content display time being met using respective display times for the first subset of the plurality of advertising elements and the first subset of the plurality of content elements; and
displaying, on the graphical user interface and, based on the automatically
determining, the second subset of the plurality of content elements following display of the first subset of the plurality of advertising elements,
as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers a method of organizing human activity. Given the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim recites a method content generation and presentation. The above identified method steps recite commercial interactions such as sales activities and/or tailored personalized marketing relating to providing data associated with the person.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers commercial interaction such as tailored personalized marketing, then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of a processors and a memory. The processor is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer functions of displaying graphical user interface to enable a user to navigate, displaying of a first set of content elements; displaying on a graphical user interface of a first subset of advertising elements; automatically determining to display a second subset content elements and causing display of the second subset of content elements) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a first device, second device, camera device one or more processors and one or more memory amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The additional elements are similar to the additional elements found by courts to be mere instructions to apply an exception because they do no more than merely invoke computers or machinery to perform an existing process such as: a common business method or mathematical algorithm being applied on a general purpose computer (Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. V. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 US 208, 223; Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334); providing a user with tailored information like advertisements based on information known about the user such as a location, address, or personal characteristics and a time of day is a fundamental practice long prevalent in our system); In re Morsa, 809 F. App’x 913, 917 (Fed. Cir. 2020). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Thus, considered as an ordered combination, the additional elements add nothing that is not already present when the steps are considered separately. That is, a first device, second device, camera device one or more processors and one or more memory, performing commercial interactions including: displaying graphical user interface to enable a user to navigate, displaying of a first set of content elements; displaying on a graphical user interface of a first subset of advertising elements; automatically determining to display a second subset content elements and causing display of the second subset of content elements, amount to mere instructions to apply the steps to a computer comprising of a processor.
Thus, claims 1, 8 and 15 are not eligible.
As for dependent claims 2-3, 6-7, 9-10, 13-14, 16-17 and 20, these claims recite limitations that further define the same abstract idea noted in claims 1, 8 and 15. Therefore, they are considered patent ineligible for the reason given above.
As for dependent claims 4-5, 11-12 and 18-19, these claims recite limitations that further define the same abstract idea noted in claims 1, 8 and 15. In addition, they recite the additional elements of causing a second set of advertising element to be displayed, determining a target ratio is met, causing a second set of advertising element to be displayed and selecting a first and second content element. These elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer component. Even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The claim is ineligible.
Claims 1-6, 8-13 and 15-20 are therefore not drawn to eligible subject matter as they are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant's arguments filed on 101/26/2026 with respect to the rejection of claims 1-6, 8-13 and 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
10. Applicant argued that “…Referring to the Subject Matter Eligibility Examples provided in conjunction with the 2019 PEG, Application directs attention to Example 37: Relocation of Icons on a Graphical User Interface. In the analysis of the second prong of Step 2A in Example 37, the analysis states: "The claim recites the combination of additional elements of receiving, via a GUI, a user selection to organize each icon based on the amount of use of each icon, a processor for performing the determining step, and automatically moving the most used icons to a position on the GUI closest to the start icon of the computer system based on the determined amount of use. The claim as a whole integrates the mental process into a practical application. Specifically, the additional elements recite a specific manner of automatically displaying icons to the user based on usage which provides a specific improvement over prior systems, resulting in an improved user interface for electronic devices. Thus, the claim is eligible because it is not directed to the recited judicial exception."
Similar to Example 37 in the 2019 PEG, each of claims 1, 8 and 15 recites a combination of additional elements, including "displaying, on a client device, a graphical user interface configured to enable a user to navigate through a presentation order of a plurality of content elements and a plurality of advertising elements, including by selectively skipping at least some portion of display time for at least the plurality of advertising elements." Each of claims 1, 8 and 15 as a whole provides a specific improvement for a user interface. For example, the subject application at
paragraph [0030] describes an improved user interface to "quickly curate such a high volume of content messages into media collections for immediate, ongoing, or periodic posting, as well as for integrating advertising with such media collections," and paragraph [0140] further describes "embodiments described herein, where content elements received from client devices are used to generate media collections with advertising elements in a display order customized for individual users provides benefits for efficiency, user feedback, and an enhanced user experience customized by automatic feedback from user selections" (emphasis added). Applicant submits that, similar to Example 37, the claims have integrated the exception into a practical application to satisfy the second prong of Step 2A….” Remarks pages 9-11
11. Examiner notes that Example 37 was found eligible, under step 2 A prong2, because the claimed additional element of GUI is integrated into a practical application. The claim as a whole integrates the mental process into a practical application. Specifically, the additional elements recite a specific manner of automatically displaying icons to the user based on usage which provides a specific improvement over prior system, resulting in an improved user interface for electronic devices. Thus the claim is eligible because it is not directed to the recited judicial exception. As such Applicant's claimed solution is NOT technological and does not addresses a technological problem. Therefore, the claim rejection of claim 1-6, 8-13 and 15-20 is maintained.
11. Applicant further argued that “…Moreover, with further respect to improvements to computer functionality, MPEP 2106.05(a)(I) indicates Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L., V. LG Electronics, Inc., 880 F.3d 1356, 1362-63, 125 USPQ2d 1436, 1440-41, Fed. Cir. 2018 (hereinafter "Core Wireless") as an instance in which the courts identified an improvement in computer-functionality. Specifically, the identified improvement in Core Wireless relates to "an improved user interface for electronic devices that
displays an application summary of unlaunched applications, where the particular data in the summary is selectable by a user to launch the respective application" (see MPEP 2106.05(a)(I))…” Remarks pages 11-12
12. Examiner notes that, unlike the situation in Core Wireless, Applicant's do not
identify any problem particular to computer or graphical user interface that the claims
overcome. As such, the examiner asserts the present invention is directed towards a
judicial exception without significantly more and the rejection has been maintained.
Conclusion
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
14. Cudak et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0135089) discloses adjusting user interface elements based on user accuracy and content consumption are disclosed. According to an aspect, a method includes receiving user input for interacting with one or more elements presented by a user interface. The method also includes determining an estimate of user accuracy for correctly selecting the one or more elements. Further, the method includes determining a rate of consumption of content presented by the user interface. The method also includes adjusting one of a position and size of at least one of the elements based on the estimate of user accuracy and the rate of consumption of content (see at least the Abstract).
15. upon further search prior art found are:
16. Dow et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0221311 (discloses providing enhanced navigation of stored digital video content based upon a content-based index. Includes generation and storage of an index, as well as navigation based on the segments defined by the index. An example system is embodied in a digital video recorder that generates an index for locating commercial groups interleaved with program content in a video presentation recorded from a television broadcast. The commercial groups may be viewed without the intervening program content or otherwise navigated based upon information in the index and one or navigation functions. Example user interfaces and several navigation functions are also provided (see at least the Abstract).
17. 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.
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARILYN G MACASIANO whose telephone number is (571)270-5205. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 12:00-9:00 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, llana Spar can be reached on 571)270-7537. 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.
/MARILYN G MACASIANO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3688 05/27/2026
Prosecution Insights