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 .
1. Applicant’s preliminary amendment filed 08/09/2024 is entered. Claims 1-20 filed 05/24/2024 are canceled and new claims 21-40 are added. Claims 21-40 are pending for examination.
2. Continuity: This application filed 05/24/2024 is a Continuation of 17888593 , filed 08/16/2022 ,now U.S. Patent # 11995709, 17888593 is a Continuation of 16596645 , filed 10/08/2019 ,now U.S. Patent # 11430052, 16596645 Claims Priority from Provisional Application 62743846 , filed 10/10/2018, and from Provisional Application 62860494 , filed 06/12/201916596645, and is a Continuation in Part of 15949914 , filed 04/10/2018 ,now U.S. Patent # 11544757, 15949914 Claims Priority from Provisional Application 62484120 , filed 04/11/2017, and from Provisional Application 62559219 , filed 09/15/2017.
Priority
3. Since application no. 15949914 , filed 04/10/2018 ,now U.S. Patent # 11544757 , and provisional applications Application 62484120 , filed 04/11/2017 and 62559219 , filed 09/15/2017 do not provide support to the claims 21-4- of the instant application , earliest priority will be limited to the parent application 16596645 filed 10/08/2019 ,now U.S. Patent # 11430052, claiming priority from Provisional Application 62743846 , filed 10/10/2018 and from Provisional Application 62860494 , filed 06/12/2019.
Double Patenting
4. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-26, 31-33, 35, 36, 39-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over (i) claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent # 11995709, hereinafter Patent’ 709, and (ii) claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. U.S. Patent # 11430052, hereinafter patent’ 052. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of both the instant application and that of the patent’ 052 are directed to the same concept of automatically determining search parameters for a diamond/jewelry such as a ring selection system having an interactive search interface. On comparison of the claims, all the limitations of claim 21 of the instant application are covered by the highlighted limitations of claim 1 of US Patent ‘709 and claims 1-2 of the patent’052, see below.
Claim 1 of US Patent’ 709
1. A computer-implemented method for automatically determining search parameters for a jewelry selection system having an interactive search interface, the computer-implemented method performed using one or more processors of a computer system, the computer-implemented method comprising:
causing display of, on a personal mobile device, a user interface for selecting a jewelry product;
receiving, via the user interface, a username for an account of a user of a social media network, the account associated with an image set accessible using the username;
in response to authenticating the account using the username, performing computer vision object recognition to determine a set of user classification labels associated with the image set; determining a set of predicted jewelry attributes by providing the set of user classification labels to a predictive model;
determining search parameters for the interactive search interface based on the set of predicted jewelry attributes; and
causing display of a jewelry listing based on the search parameters.
Claim 1 of Patent ‘ 052
1. A computer-implemented method for automatically determining search parameters for a diamond selection system having an interactive search interface, comprising:
displaying, on a personal mobile device, a user interface for selecting a diamond;
receiving, via the user interface, a username for an account of a user of a social media network, the account associated with an image set accessible using the username;
determining a set of user classification labels by analyzing images in the image set;
determining a set of predicted ring attributes for the user using a predictive model, the predictive model trained by analyzing training data from one or more social media accounts to determine one or more training profiles that associate classification labels with ring attributes;
determining search parameters for the interactive search interface based on the set of predicted ring attributes; and
displaying a diamond listing based on the search parameters.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein: determining the set of user classification labels comprises performing computer vision object recognition to recognize objects in the images in the image set; and the user classification labels correspond to the recognized objects.
Claim 21 of the instant application:
21. A computer-implemented method for automatically determining search parameters for a product selection system having an interactive search interface, the computer- implemented method performed using one or more processors of a computer system, the computer-implemented method comprising:
causing display of, on a personal mobile device, a user interface for selecting a product; receiving, via the user interface, a username for an account of a user of a social media network, the account associated with an image set accessible using the username;
in response to authenticating the account using the username, performing computer vision object recognition to determine a set of user classification labels associated with the image set;
determining a set of predicted product attributes by providing the set of user classification labels to a predictive model;
determining search parameters for the interactive search interface based on the set of predicted product attributes; and
causing display of a product listing based on the search parameters.
The only difference between the claim 21 of the instant application and claim 1of the Patent’ 709 is that the claim 21 of the instant application recites the term “product” instead of Jewelry. Since , under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the product can include jewelry, the limitations of claim 21 of the instant application are disclosed by the limitations of claim1 of the patent’ 709.
The only difference between the claim 21 of the instant application and claim 1 of the Patent’ 052 is that the claim 21 of the instant application recites the term “product” instead of diamond or ring. Since , under the broadest reasonable interpretation, product can include diamond or ring, the limitations of claim 1 of the instant application are disclosed by the limitations of claim1 of the patent’ 052. Regarding the limitations, in the preamble that the \steps are executed by one or more processors, it is covered by the claim 1of the patent’052, since it recites that the steps are computer implemented method which would include one or more processors implementing the computer implemented method. Since the limitations of claims 31 and 36 of the instant application are similar to the limitations of claim 21 of the instant application, they are rejected on the same basis as claim 21 above.
Limitations of dependent claims 22—25, 32-33, 35, 39-40 of the instant application are covered and disclosed by the limitations of the dependent claims 2--6 of the patent’709.
Limitations of dependent claims 22—25, 26, 32-33, 35, 39 are covered and disclosed by the limitations of the dependent claims 3-4, 6-7, of the patent’709.
5. Subject Matter Eligibility:
Step 1 analysis:
Claims 21-30 are to a process comprising a series of steps, clams 31-35 to a system /apparatus, and claims 36-40 to manufacture, which are statutory (Step 1: Yes).
Step 2A Analysis:
Claim 21 recites:
21. A computer-implemented method for automatically determining search parameters for a product selection system having an interactive search interface, the computer- implemented method performed using one or more processors of a computer system, the computer-implemented method comprising:
causing display of, on a personal mobile device, a user interface for selecting a product;
receiving, via the user interface, a username for an account of a user of a social media network, the account associated with an image set accessible using the username;
in response to authenticating the account using the username, performing computer vision object recognition to determine a set of user classification labels associated with the image set;
determining a set of predicted product attributes by providing the set of user classification labels to a predictive model;
determining search parameters for the interactive search interface based on the set of predicted product attributes; and
causing display of a product listing based on the search parameters.
Step 2A Prong 1 analysis: Claims 21-40 recite abstract idea.
The highlighted limitations in claim 21 comprising “causing display for selecting a product; receiving a username for an account of a user, the account associated with an image set accessible using the username; determine a set of user classification labels associated with the image set; determining a set of predicted product attributes by providing the set of user classification labels to a predictive model; determining search parameters based on the set of predicted product attributes; and display of a product listing based on the search parameters.”, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, relate to predicting a product such as jewelry, a ring or diamond, attributes based on a customer’s history/preferences for facilitating the customer in the purchasing process, see Specification para 0002 “ Field” and para 0003 “Background”, which fall under “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” abstract idea. The limitations comprising “ determine a set of user classification labels associated with the image set; determining a set of predicted product attributes by providing the set of user classification labels to a predictive model; determining search parameters based on the set of predicted product attributes”, as drafted, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind For example, these limitations encompass a person looking at data collected related to images related to the customer’s account and forming a simple judgement about classification labels from the images, and further using a mathematical model to ascertain attributes for the required jewelry for providing searching of the jewelry. The mere nominal recitation of by a processor does not take the claim limitations out of the mental process grouping. Thus, the claim 21 recites a mental process along with “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” groupings of abstract ideas.
Since the other two independent claims 31 and 36 recite similar limitations as claim 21, they are analyzed on the same basis as reciting a mental process along with “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” groupings of abstract ideas.
Accordingly, claim 21 with its dependent claims 22-30, claim 31 with its dependent claims 32-35, and claim 36 with its dependent claims 37-4- recite abstract ideas.
Since each of the claims 21, 31, and 36 recite limitations falling under two separate groupings of abstract ideas, the Supreme Court (discussing Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010)) has treated such claims in the same manner as claims reciting a single judicial exception. Accordingly, limitations considered under Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” and “Mental Processes” are considered together as a single abstract idea for further analysis. (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Thus, all pending claims 21-40 recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2 analysis:
Claims 21-40: The judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
Although independent claims 21, 31, and 36 recite an abstract idea, they are not directed to an abstract idea because the abstract idea is integrated into a practical application. The additional elements recited in claims apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements in the independent claim 21 include one or more processors executing the steps of “receiving, via the user interface, a username for an account of a user of a social media network, the account associated with an image set accessible using the username, in response to authenticating the account using the username, performing computer vision object recognition to determine a set of user classification labels associated with the image set, determining a set of predicted product attributes by providing the set of user classification labels to a predictive model, and determining search parameters for the interactive search interface based on the set of predicted product attributes”, integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Specifically, the combination of additional elements recites a specific improvement over prior art systems including the steps of in response to authenticating the account of a user of a social media network using the username, where the account is associated with an image set, performing computer vision object recognition to determine a set of user classification labels associated with the image set and determining a set of predicted product attributes by providing the set of user classification labels to a predictive model, and determining search parameters for the interactive search interface based on the set of predicted product attributes.
Thus, each of the claims 21, 31, and 36, as a whole, integrates the certain methods of organizing human activity and mental process into a practical application. Claim 21 with its dependent claims 22-30, claim 31 with its dependent claims 32-35 and claim 36 with its dependent claims 37-40 are patent eligible.
6. Prior art discussion:
With reference independent claims 21, 31, and 36, the prior art of record, alone or combined, neither teaches nor renders obvious at least the limitations comprising, as a whole, steps of receiving, via the user interface, a username for an account of a user of a social media network, the account associated with an image set accessible using the username, in response to authenticating the account using the username, performing computer vision object recognition to determine a set of user classification labels associated with the image set, determining a set of predicted product attributes by providing the set of user classification labels to a predictive model, and determining search parameters for the interactive search interface based on the set of predicted product attributes. Claims 22-30 depend from claim 21, claims 32-35 depend from claim 31, and claims 36-40 depend from claim 36.
7. Note: If a proper Terminal Disclaimer is filed to overcome rejection on the grounds of non-statutory double patenting the application can be placed in condition for allowance. However, any amendments to claims would be subject to reconsideration and search.
8. Best cited prior art references:
(i) Dunn et al. [US Patent# 7428750 B1; see col.10, lines 7-17 and col.12, lines 34-36] describes using a username and password for authentication linked to an account and then providing a set of options for the linked account to select a set of images.
(ii) Rice [US 20160191434 A1; see claim 18] describes receiving an image and cell phone number of a prospective User and determining whether the image and cell phone number received correspond to an established User account and User profile.
(iii) Moon et al. [US 20150142782 A1; see Abstract] describes a method for obtaining a taxonomy with initial attributes associated with a subject and based on the received data forming an image set and accessing accounts on a social media platform to identify and store, in the image set, one or more related images from each account that also show the subject.
(iv) Niemi et al. [US 2014/0032756 A1; see para 0079] describes recording an identity code from a captured QR code and associates the recorded identity code with a set of images in the Facebook account accessible by the at communications device 100.
(v) Watkins et al. [US Pub:20130218714. This references is similar and from the same family of to Foreign reference WO2014124083 and US Pub: 20140052563 to Watkins cited in the IDS filed 08/27/2024 and cited in the parent application 16596645 , filed 10/08/2019 ,now U.S. Patent # 11430052. ] teaches a computer-implemented method for automatically determining search parameters for a diamond selection system having an interactive search interface [See Figs 3a, 3b ] , comprising displaying, on a personal mobile device, a user interface for selecting a diamond, determining search parameters for the interactive search interface; and displaying a diamond listing based on the search parameters [[see Figs 3a, 3b, 4a, 4b, 4c, and 4d and the associated text in paras 0039—0069, which disclose providing search parameters related to various diamond attributes such as clarity, cut, shape, weight in carats, price, etc. to a user to search a diamond listing for selecting, and the user interface is displayed on a mobile device [see para 0210, “ interactive design tool 800 has a corresponding mobile application (app) that may be downloaded onto the customer's workstation. Through this app, customers may utilize the functionalities of interactive design tool 800 on her mobile device.’]. Watkins fails to disclose that based on determined an image set from an identified account of a user of a social media determining a set of user classification labels by analyzing images in the image set, determining a set of predicted jewelry product attributes for the user using a predictive model, the predictive model trained by analyzing training data from one or more social media accounts to determine one or more training profiles that associate classification labels with jewelry product attributes and use the jewelry product attributes and the parameter search is based on the set of predicted jewelry product attributes.
(vi) Arhin et al. [US 20150154167 A1 cited in the cited in the IDS filed 08/27/2024 and in the parent application 16596645 , filed 10/08/2019 ,now U.S. Patent # 11430052,: see paras 0163-0164 and 0235] discloses receiving, via the user interface, a username for an account of a user of social media network, the account associated with an image set accessible using the username [see Arhin paras 0130, 0190, 0224—Arhin deals with images associated with social user having social network, social user identification is considered to correspond to a user name] Arhin teaches determining a set of user classification labels by analyzing images in the image set [see Arhin paras 0101—0102---annotation utility enables automatic or manual labelling/annotating of images] , determining search parameters for the interactive search interface based on the set of predicted attributes [see Arhin paras 0163—0164, 0235]), but. fails to teach specifically that the predicted attributes are for a jewelry product and the predicted attributes are determined using a predictive model, the predictive model trained by analyzing training data from one or more social media accounts to determine one or more training profiles that associate classification labels with jewelry product attributes.
and use the jewelry product attributes and the parameter search is based on the set of predicted jewelry product attributes.
(vii) Kataria [US 20180025069 A1 cited in the IDS filed 08/27/2024 and cited in the parent application 16596645 , filed 10/08/2019 ,now U.S. Patent # 11430052.; see paras 0031 and 0088] discloses “One or more classifiers” such as Logistic Regression, a Random Forest (RF) model, a Gaussian Naive Bayes (Gaussian NB), and/or a Bernauli Naive Bayes (Bernauli NB), which refer to one or more statistical and/or mathematical models that may be an be configured to classify a set of social media data into one or more pre-defined categories, and the classification may be utilized to detect personal life events of one or more users. The one or more classifiers may be trained based on a set of features associated with a known set of social media data. The system can be configured to render the recommendation, based on the detected one or more personal life events of the one or more users., of the one or more products or services on the user interface displayed on the display screen of the user-computing device 102 associated with each of the one or more users. Kataria fails to disclose specifically that based on determined an image set from an identified account of a user of a social media determining a set of user classification labels by analyzing images in the image set, determining a set of predicted jewelry product attributes for the user using a predictive model, the predictive model trained by analyzing training data from one or more social media accounts to determine one or more training profiles that associate classification labels with jewelry product attributes and use the jewelry product attributes and the parameter search is based on the set of predicted jewelry product attributes.
Foreign reference:
(viii) EP 1795888 A1 [See Abstract cited in the parent Application 17888593 , filed 08/16/2022 ,now U.S. Patent # 11995709 and in the IDS filed 08/27/2024] discloses an apparatus for generating image data for use in determining a visual property of a gemstone perceptible to the human eye, such as a cut diamond.
NPL reference:
(ix) Mamonov, Stanislav; Triantoro, Tamilla., “ Subjectivity of Diamond Prices in Online Retail: Insights from a Data Mining Study”; publication Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research13.2: 15-28. MDPI AG. (May 2018); retrieved from Dialog 07/28/2023 and cited in the parent Application 17888593 , filed 08/16/2022 ,now U.S. Patent # 11995709 discloses that physical properties of a diamond can be used to predict the diamond price by performing data mining on a large dataset of loose diamonds scraped from an online diamond retailer, because diamond weight, color and clarity are the key characteristics that influence diamond prices.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOGESH C GARG whose telephone number is (571)272-6756. The examiner can normally be reached Max-Flex.
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, Jeffrey A. Smith can be reached at 571-272-6763. 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.
YOGESH C. GARG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3688
/YOGESH C GARG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3688