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 action is in response to amendment filed on 12 February 2026. Claims 1, 10, and 19 have been amended. Claims 2, 7, 8, 11, 16, 17 and 20 have been cancelled. . Claims 1, 3-6, 9, 10, 12-15, 18, 19 and 21-23 are currently pending and have been examined.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12 February 2026 has been entered.
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.
Step 1: The claims 1-9 are a system, claims 10-18 are a method and claim 19-20 are a media. Thus, each independent claim, on its face, is directed to one of the statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. §101. However, the claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 2A-Prong 1: detecting, at least one first message; detect, in the message queue, at least one first message wherein the at least one first message is an advertising or promotional message stored in the message queue with an associated first time period during which the at least one first message is to be transmitted; retrieve user satisfaction data corresponding to one or more users of the at least one first electronic device; calculate a first user satisfaction score by: retrieving, from a product/service support database, product/service support data associated with the at least one first electronic device and generated by an issue tracking system operating within a customer support center; retrieving, from a product/service feedback database, product/service feedback data associated with the at least one first electronic device; retrieving, from a social media feedback database, social media feedback data associated with the at least one first e and obtained by screening of social media posts or obtained from a centralized social media feedback database accessible to the messaging computer system; and calculating the first user satisfaction score based on retrieved ones of the product/service support data, the product/service feedback data, and the social media feedback data; determine if the first user satisfaction score is less than a first user satisfaction score threshold; in response to determining that the first user satisfaction score is less than the first user satisfaction score threshold: withhold transmission of the at least one first message to the at least one first electronic device; and in response to determining that the first user satisfaction score is not less than the first user satisfaction score threshold, transmit, the at least one first message to the at least one first electronic device, wherein the transmission occurs as part of the broadcast of the at least one first message when the at least first message is queued to be sent to multiple different user devices; and in response to determining that the first time period for transmitting the at least one first message to the at least one first electronic device has expired, remove the at least one first message from the message queue. These limitation as drafted, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers using user satisfaction scores to manage message delivery is likely to be categorized as an abstract idea, such as a method of organizing human behavior or a business practice. These limitations fall within “Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity” for commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations).
The claims focus on calculating a score based on data, comparing it to a threshold, and deciding whether to send a message. This is mental, business-oriented activity that can be done by a human, even if performed faster by a computer. Simply put, these limitation merely describes using the satisfaction scores to manage message delivery, which is clearly a business arrangement in its purest form.
Claims 3-10, 12-13, 15-18, and 21- 23 merely provide additional abstract concepts and narrow the abstract idea of claims 1, 14 and 19. Further, claims 1, 3-10, 12-19 and 2123 are recited at such a high level that the claimed steps amount to no more than a mental processes, such as concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) because the claims encompasses the user manually calculating user satisfaction score to manage the message delivery.
Step 2A-Prong 2: the claims recite additional elements: a computing system are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as generic commucation system, computing device generic memory that stores instructions/data and processor the performs the generic computer functions of detecting, retrieving and determining steps) such that it amounts no more adding the work “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).
Furthermore, The steps involve standard database queries ("retrieving... support data," "retrieving... social media") and basic computer functions ("detect, in the message queue," "broadcast"). Using generic computer components to implement an abstract idea does not transform it into a patentable invention.
Step 2B:
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 element of using the claimed
computer systems amount to no more than “apply” a selection of content on the systems.
Further, the courts have consistently recognized that merely presenting the results of
abstract processes of collecting and analyzing information, without more (such as identifying a
particular tool for presentation), is abstract as an ancillary part of such collection and analysis.
See, e.g., Content Extraction, 776 F.3d at 1347; Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772 F.3d 709,
715 (Fed. Cir. 2014). Examiner asserts that “transmitting message to electronic device ” is not
particular tool, thus it offers no more than presenting anything that includes the content that
resulted from the determined satisfaction score.
In sum, the combination of steps that stores data, retrieve data request, transmit message and stores a record are at best is doing no more than generally linking the claims to network
environment that sends and receives communications– see MPEP 2106.05(h). See also, OIP
Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir.
2015) (sending messages over a network).
TLI Communications provides an example of a claim invoking computers and other
machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. The court stated that the claims
describe steps of recording, administration and archiving of digital images, and found them to be
directed to the abstract idea of classifying and storing digital images in an organized manner. 823
F.3d at 612, 118 USPQ2d at 1747. The court then turned to the additional elements of
performing these functions using a telephone unit and a server and noted that these elements
we’re being used in their ordinary capacity (i.e., the telephone unit is used to make calls and
operate as a digital camera including compressing images and transmitting those images, and the
server simply receives data, extracts classification information from the received data, and stores
the digital images based on the extracted information). 823 F.3d at 612-13, 118 USPQ2d at
1747-48.
Similarly, these claims store data, retrieve data determining satisfaction score and transmit message content and present content by invoking computer systems as tools being used in an ordinary capacity to execute the abstract idea. Thus, these additional elements do not add significantly more to the abstract idea because they were simply applying the abstract idea on a computer system without sufficient recitation of details of how to carry out the abstract idea. The claims merely offer conventional computer systems to organizing Human Activity.
Dependent claims 2-9, 11-18 and 20, these claims recite limitation that further defines the same abstract idea noted in claims 1, 10 and 19. These claims do not contain any futher additional elements per step 2A prong 2. Therefore, they are considered patent ineligible for the same reason above.
The Closest Prior arts:
Zhange et al (US Pub., No., 2027/0295121 A1) focused on various embodiments are generally directed to techniques for device configuration using commerce messaging history information. In one embodiment, an apparatus may comprise a messaging component operative to receive a bot subscription command for a user account with a messaging system from a client device, the bot subscription command specifying a messaging bot; a bot framework component operative to determine a messaging bot channel for the messaging bot (abstract), a communication system configurable for broadcasting of messages to multiple electronic devices(Fig. 2, Fig. 6, 610 discloses broadcast message paragraph [0049]-[0050], discloses social graph 200 may include multiple user nodes .., connecting the nodes and paragraphs [0122]-[0123], discloses a broadcast message in customer to-business messaging system ..) ; a memory having stored thereon a message queue comprising messages waiting to be transmitted to electronic devices and a messaging module for delivering at least one message to at least one first electronic device (Fig. 6, 580 discloses message queue.., Fig. 1050 memory/storage and paragraph [0140], discloses the broadcast message to a message queue for the user account ..) ; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the communication system and the memory, the at least one processor executing program code of the messaging module, the at least one processor configuring the computing system (Fig. 10, 1004, discloses processing unit.., and paragraph [0150],)to: detect, in the message queue(Fig. 5, discloses message queue monitoring components 540, Fig. 6, 580 discloses message queue, paragraph [0110], discloses detected in the message queue) , at least one first message for transmission via a network to the at least one first electronic device, (paragraph [0109], discloses transmit message to the subscribed message thread) wherein the at least one first message is an advertising or promotional message stored in the message queue with an associated first time period during which the at least one first message is to be transmitted(paragraph [109], discloses message that may be sent within a given time period .., and paragraph [0115], discloses webpage display in associated with the messaging by virtue of comprising content that may abos be delivered the messaging bot ) ,messaging interest model may predict user satisfaction from requesting the service via the messaging interaction with the business, such may be determined based on user feedback (paragraph [0090]) and the predicted business messaging interest model predicts one or more of user interest is beginning a message intersection with a business user interest (paragraph [0187])
Glass et al (US Patent No., 10,599,659 B2) focused on methods, systems and programming for evaluating user satisfaction with respect to a user session are presented. In one example, one or more queries in a use session are received from a user. Information about one or more user activities is obtained. Each user activity is related to manipulation of a content item associated with one of the one or more queries(abstract), retrieve user satisfaction data corresponding to one or more users of the at least one first electronic device (Fig. 10, and Col. 10, lines 13-23, discloses the user satisfaction score determiner may the retrieve user session information for the user session …); calculate a first user satisfaction score(Fig. 3, 350, discloses user satisfaction score determinator) by: retrieving, from a product/service support database, product/service support data associated with the at least one first electronic device (Figs. 11-13, discloses user session 1, Col. 1, lines 65-66, discloses each user activity is related to manipulation of content item assocted within one or more queries) and generated by an issue tracking system operating within a customer support center(Fig. 3, 320, discloses user activity detection unit); retrieving, from a product/service feedback database, product/service feedback data associated with the at least one first electronic device (Figs. 11-13, discloses user session 1, Col. 1, lines 65-66, discloses each user activity is related to manipulation of content item assocted within one or more queries); retrieving, from a social media feedback database, social media feedback data associated with the at least one first electronic device and obtained by screening of social media posts or obtained from a centralized social media feedback database accessible to the messaging computer system (Figs. 11-13, discloses user session 1, Col. 1, lines 65-66, discloses each user activity is related to manipulation of content item assocted within one or more queries); and determine if the first user satisfaction score is less than a first user satisfaction score threshold(Col. 4, lines 6-8, discloses determine whether the user is satisfied with respect to the entire user session or how satisfied the user is and Col. 14, line 55, discloses a user satisfaction score generator, and Col. 15, lines 4-5, dislcies user satisfaction score generator for generating a user satisfactions score );
Burbank et al (US Pub., 2021/0241134 A1) discloses a communications system may utilize the machine learning model in association with the finite state machine to determine whether a new message (e.g., email) corresponds to a state transition for the message thread. As such, the model may be trained on a corpus of message thread data, and may be configured to identify one of a plurality of message thread states of the finite state machine in accordance with the training.
Sabharwal et al (US Pub., No., 2020/0336547 A1) discloses in some implementations, formation of loops between nodes in an RPL network may be avoided. A node that receives a neighbor-discovery message may determine, based on a parent-child status, whether the neighbor-discovery message was received from a parent of the node.
Hickson et al (US., Pub., No., 2006/0106960 A1) discloses a method for deleting expired items in a queue data structure, the queue data structure comprising a sequential list of ordered data items including a queue head at one end of the sequential list and a queue tail at another end of the sequential list, wherein each data item includes an expiry time, the method comprising: generating a maximum interval value corresponding to a maximum time interval between an expiry time of a first item in the queue and an expiry time of a second item in the queue, wherein the second item is nearer the queue head than the first item.
Haydar et all (US Pub., No., 2019/0385731 A1) discloses a system including a mobile application and methods of interacting with application users to transmit targeted, individually- curated information based on a user's needs and a calculated experience value index score. The mobile application provides a transparent and secure platform through which authorized users can receive relevant information and provide feedback regarding satisfaction levels
None of the above reference either alone or in combination teaches or suggests calculating the first user satisfaction score based on retrieved ones of the product/service support data, the product/service feedback data, and the social media feedback data; in response to determining that the first user satisfaction score is less than the first user satisfaction score threshold: withhold transmission of the at least one first message to the at least one first electronic device; and broadcast the at least one first message to other electronic devices that do not have associated user satisfaction scores less than the first user satisfaction score threshold when the at least first message is queued to be sent to multiple different user devices; and in response to determining that the first user satisfaction score is not less than the first user satisfaction score threshold, transmit, via the communication system and the network, the at least one first message to the at least one first electronic device, wherein the transmission occurs as part of the broadcast of the at least one first message to the other electronic devices when the at least first message is queued to be sent to multiple different user devices; and in response to determining that the first time period for transmitting the at least one first message to the at least one first electronic device has expired, remove the at least one first message from the message queue.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments of 35 U.S.C 101 rejection with respect to claims 1, 3-6, 9-10, 12-15, 18-19 and 21-23 filed on 12 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants’ arguments of claim 1 recites “ a message queue comprising messages waiting to be transmitted to electronic device” and an advertising or promotional message stored in the message queue and an assocted first time period during which the one at least one first message to be transmitted. This claim elements specifies a particular data structure with temporal constraints that govern message transmission, which is a technical implementation detail that goes beyond merely organizing human activity is not persuasive.
The claimed limitation of message queue system that stores and transmits advertising or promotional messages with specific time constraints is generally based on the determining that is directed to an abstract idea and implemented using conventional computer components
Futher, "managing a message queue," "storing promotional messages," and "timing transmission" as methods of organizing human activity, fundamental economic practices, or simply gathering and transmitting information. Simply put, these limitation merely describes gathering and transmitting information, is clearly a mere data gathering which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity.
As updated above, the calculating limitation as drafted is a process, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance (i.e., satisfaction score) of the limitation in the mind or using mathematical formula but for the recitation of generic computer components., the claims are ineligible.
Furthermore, While the claim uses technical terms ("message queue," "network," "computer system"), the core of the invention is the business logic of withholding an ad based on low satisfaction. The technical components are used merely for their "well-understood, routine, conventional" functions to perform the abstract idea.
The claims are directed to an abstract idea without "significantly more" additional elements that amount to a practical application or improvement in computer functionality. The claimed element recites a method of managing message delivery based on user satisfaction, which is characterize as a human activity, a method of organizing human activity, or a form of data processing that lacks a sufficient "technical" or "computer" improvement. Thus, the claims are ineligible and the 35 U.S.C 101 rejections is maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SABA DAGNEW whose telephone number is (571)270-3271. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6:45.
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, Waseem Ashraf can be reached on (571) 270 -3948. 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.
/SABA DAGNEW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621
Prosecution Insights