DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite collecting information and determining terminal ratio.
The limitations of collecting information and determining terminal ratio, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, the limitation of collecting information, as drafted, is a well-understood, routine, conventional data collection in the field; the limitation of determining terminal ratio is observation. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, claims 1- 18 recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claims 1-18 recites two additional elements terminal devices and live room; independent claim 15 recites one additional element an apparatus; independent claim 16 recites a computing device, comprising a memory, a processor; these elements are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of collecting information and determining terminal ratio) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claims 2, 6-7 and 11 add the mathematical calculation. Adding one abstract idea to another abstract idea does not render the claim non-abstract. MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 17 is directed to a computer-readable storage medium storing computer instructions. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media.
A claim drawn to such a computer readable medium that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 by adding the limitation ‘non-transitory’ to the claim. (1351 OG 212).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 18 is drawn to a computer program. Claims that are not directed to any of the statutory categories include products that do not have a physical or tangible form, such as information (often referred to as “data per se”) or a computer program per se (often referred to as “software per se”) when claimed as a product without any structural recitations (MPEP 2106).
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.
Claim 15 is 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.
The following is a list of non-structural generic placeholders that may invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f): “mechanism for,” “module for,” “device for,” “unit for,” “component for,” “element for,” “member for,” “apparatus for,” “machine for,” or “system for.” (MPEP 2181).
Claim 15 includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are “An apparatus for determining…”, “a statistics collection means, configured to collect…”, a collection means, configured to collect…”, “a determining means, configured to determine …” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN104778591A in view of Wang (WO2019165697A1).
Regarding claim 1, CN104778591A discloses a method, comprising ([Abstract] shows a method for identifying abnormal behaviors from collected event data):
collecting statistics on historical information about terminal devices ([page 5 line 26; page 8 lines 51-52] shows many platforms include clients of the Android system and the IOS system, and the probability of an event occurring based on the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2; [page 14 lines 10-12] shows to count the events (historical events) that occurred in a certain period of time. The probability of event occurrence is a random variable, denoted as Xi, and the statistical probability threshold Xt is determined. When the value of the random variable is large enough, reject events larger than the statistical probability threshold, that is, reject events where Xi>Xt), and
determining a historical terminal ratio ([page 14 lines 10-12] shows to count the events (historical events) that occurred in a certain period of time; [page 8 lines 63-64] shows the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2);
collecting current information about terminal devices accessing a target, and determining a current terminal ratio based on the current information; and determining whether abnormal behavior exists in the target based on the historical terminal ratio and the current terminal ratio ([Abstract] shows identifying abnormal behavior; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows based on the fact that the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio), events less than 1/1000 will be rejected. Assuming that a certain event occurs 10 times in a row based on the Android system, the continuation probability of the 10th consecutive event is 1/1024 (e.g., current terminal ratio) and it will be rejected by the server (e.g., the probability of an Android based event occurring 10 times in a row is very small and calculated to be 1/1024. Therefore an arbitrary threshold is chosen to reject rare (abnormal) events that occurs with probability less than 1/1000).)
CN104778591A discloses a method for identifying abnormal behaviors ([Abstract]) but fails to teach a method for determining click-farming in a live room; and
collecting information about terminal devices which accessed a livestreaming platform;
collecting current information about terminal devices which accessed a target live room; and
determining whether click-farming exists in the target live room.
However, Wang discloses a method for determining click-farming in a live room ([Abstract] and [page 4 lines 54-55] show identifying click farming in a plurality of live broadcast rooms in the live broadcast platform); and
collecting information about terminal devices which accessed a livestreaming platform ([page 6 line 5] shows each user has a unique IP or a fixed device address when logging in to the website or live broadcast platform);
collecting current information about terminal devices which accessed a target live room ([page 4 lines 62-63] shows user A watching the start time M1 of the live room X, the end time M2 and the viewing time M3); and
determining whether click-farming exists in the target live room ([Abstract] and [page 4 lines 54-55] show identifying click farming in a plurality of live broadcast rooms in the live broadcast platform.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method in CN104778591A with the teaching of Wang in order to improve the accuracy of identifying a user as a click farming user (Wang; [Abstract]).
Regarding claim 2, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to claim 1 discloses the collecting statistics on historical information about terminal devices which accessed a livestreaming platform, and determining a historical terminal ratio comprises (CN104778591A; [page 14 lines 10-12] shows to count the events (historical events) that occurred in a certain period of time; [page 8 lines 63-64] shows the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2):
collecting statistics on information about terminal devices which accessed the livestreaming platform at each statistical time point in a preset time duration (Wang; [Abstract] and [page 4 lines 54-55] show identifying click farming in a plurality of live broadcast rooms in the live broadcast platform. CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows based on the fact that the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio), events less than 1/1000 will be rejected. Assuming that a certain event occurs 10 times in a row based on the Android system, the continuation probability of the 10th consecutive event is 1/1024); and
calculating a historical terminal ratio in each statistical period according to the information at each statistical time point, wherein the preset time duration comprises at least one statistical period, and each statistical period comprises at least one statistical time point (Wang; [Abstract] and [page 4 lines 54-55] show identifying click farming in a plurality of live broadcast rooms in the live broadcast platform. CN104778591A; ([page 14 lines 10-12] shows to count the events (historical events) that occurred in a certain period of time; [page 8 lines 63-64] shows the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2).
Regarding claim 3, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to claim 2 discloses the collecting current information about terminal devices accessing a target live room, and determining a current terminal ratio based on the current information comprises (Wang; [Abstract] and [page 4 lines 54-55] show identifying click farming in a plurality of live broadcast rooms in the live broadcast platform. CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows based on the fact that the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio), events less than 1/1000 will be rejected. Assuming that a certain event occurs 10 times in a row based on the Android system, the continuation probability of the 10th consecutive event is 1/1024):
collecting current terminal information of the target live room at a current time point; and determining the current terminal ratio at the current time point based on the current terminal information (CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows based on the fact that the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio), events less than 1/1000 will be rejected. Assuming that a certain event occurs 10 times in a row based on the Android system, the continuation probability of the 10th consecutive event is 1/1024).
Regarding claim 4, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to claim 3 discloses the determining whether click-farming exists in the target live room based on the historical terminal ratio and the current terminal ratio comprises: determining a target statistical time point in the preset time duration based on the current time point; obtaining a target historical terminal ratio in a target statistical period corresponding to the target statistical time point; and determining that click-farming does not exist in the target live room when the current terminal ratio meets the target historical terminal ratio; determining that click-farming exists in the target live room when the current terminal ratio does not meet the target historical terminal ratio (Wang; [Abstract] and [page 4 lines 54-55] show identifying click farming in a plurality of live broadcast rooms in the live broadcast platform. CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows based on the fact that the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio), events less than 1/1000 will be rejected. Assuming that a certain event occurs 10 times in a row based on the Android system, the continuation probability of the 10th consecutive event is 1/1024 (e.g., current terminal ratio) and it will be rejected by the server (e.g., the probability of an Android based event occurring 10 times in a row is very small or calculated to be 1/1024. Therefore an arbitrary threshold is chosen to reject rare (abnormal) events that occurs with probability less than 1/1000).)
Regarding claim 5, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to any one of claims 2 to 4 discloses the collecting statistics on information about terminal devices which accessed the livestreaming platform at each statistical time point in a preset time duration comprises: obtaining information associated with a set of users of the livestreaming platform at each statistical time point in the preset time duration; and determining information of terminal devices used by users in each set of users (Wang; [col 3 line 11] shows acquiring user characteristics of all users; CN104778591A; [Abstract] shows identifying abnormal behavior; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows based on the fact that the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio), events less than 1/1000 will be rejected. Assuming that a certain event occurs 10 times in a row based on the Android system, the continuation probability of the 10th consecutive event is 1/1024 (e.g., current terminal ratio) and it will be rejected by the server (e.g., the probability of an Android based event occurring 10 times in a row is very small or calculated to be 1/1024. Therefore an arbitrary threshold is chosen to reject rare (abnormal) events that occurs with probability less than 1/1000).)
Regarding claim 6, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein the collecting statistics on historical information about terminal devices which accessed a livestreaming platform, and determining a historical terminal ratio comprises (CN104778591A; [page 14 lines 10-12] shows to count the events (historical events) that occurred in a certain period of time; [page 8 lines 63-64] shows the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2):
determining types of live rooms on the livestreaming platform (Wang; [page 4 line 55] shows a plurality of live broadcast rooms);
collecting statistics on historical information about terminal devices which accessed each type of live room; and calculating a historical terminal ratio corresponding to each type of live room based on the historical information corresponding to each type of live room (CN104778591A; [page 14 lines 10-12] shows to count the events (historical events) that occurred in a certain period of time; [page 8 lines 63-64] shows the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2).
Regarding claim 7, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to claim 6 discloses the collecting current information about terminal devices accessing a target live room, and determining a current terminal ratio based on the current information comprises: determining a target type of the target live room and the current information corresponding to the target live room; and calculating a current terminal percentage of the target live room based on the current information about the terminal devices accessing a target live room (Wang; [page 4 line 55] shows a plurality of live broadcast rooms. CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows based on the fact that the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio), events less than 1/1000 will be rejected. Assuming that a certain event occurs 10 times in a row based on the Android system, the continuation probability of the 10th consecutive event is 1/1024.)
Regarding claim 8, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to claim 7 discloses the determining whether click-farming exists in the target live room based on the historical terminal ratio and the current terminal ratio comprises: determining a target historical terminal ratio according to the target type; determining that click-farming does not exist in the target live room when the current terminal percentage meets the target historical terminal ratio; determining that click-farming exists in the target live room when the current terminal percentage does not meet the target historical terminal ratio (Wang; [Abstract] and [page 4 lines 54-55] show identifying click farming in a plurality of live broadcast rooms in the live broadcast platform. CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows based on the fact that the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio), events less than 1/1000 will be rejected. Assuming that a certain event occurs 10 times in a row based on the Android system, the continuation probability of the 10th consecutive event is 1/1024 (e.g., current terminal ratio) and it will be rejected by the server (e.g., the probability of an Android based event occurring 10 times in a row is very small or calculated to be 1/1024. Therefore an arbitrary threshold is chosen to reject rare (abnormal) events that occurs with probability less than 1/1000).)
Regarding claim 9, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to any one of claims 6 to 8 discloses the collecting statistics on historical information about terminal devices which accessed each type of live room comprises: obtaining information about a set of users associated with each type of live room; and determining information of terminal devices used by users in each set of users (Wang; [page 4 line 55] shows a plurality of live broadcast rooms. CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio).)
Regarding claim 10, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to any one of claims 1 to 9 discloses the collecting statistics on historical information about terminal devices which accessed a livestreaming platform, and determining a historical terminal ratio comprises: collecting statistics on information about terminal devices participating in livestreaming on the livestreaming platform, and determining the historical terminal ratio based on the information about terminal devices; and collecting statistics on attribute information of each type of terminal device, and determining a historical attribute ratio corresponding to each type of terminal device based on the attribute information of each type of terminal device (Wang; [page 4 line 55] shows a plurality of live broadcast rooms. CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio).)
Regarding claim 11, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to claim 10 discloses the collecting current information about terminal devices accessing a target live room, and determining a current terminal ratio based on the current terminal information comprises: collecting the current information about terminal devices accessing the target live room at the current time point; and calculating the current terminal ratio associated with the target live room and a current attribute ratio corresponding to each type of terminal device based on the current information (Wang; [page 4 line 55] shows a plurality of live broadcast rooms. CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows based on the fact that the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio), events less than 1/1000 will be rejected. Assuming that a certain event occurs 10 times in a row based on the Android system, the continuation probability of the 10th consecutive event is 1/1024.)
Regarding claim 12, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to claim 11 discloses the determining whether click-farming exists in the target live room based on the historical terminal ratio and the current terminal ratio comprises: determining whether the current terminal ratio and the historical terminal ratio meet a system click-farming determination rule; determining that click-farming exists in the target live room in response to determining that the current terminal ratio and the historical terminal ratio meet the system click-farming determination rule; in response to determining that the current terminal ratio and the historical terminal ratio do not meet the system click-farming determination rule, determining a target type of terminal device, and determining whether a current attribute ratio corresponding to the target type of terminal device and a historical terminal attribute ratio corresponding to the target type of terminal device meet an attribute click-farming determination rule; and determining that click-farming exists in the target live room in response to determining that the current attribute ratio corresponding to the target type of terminal device and the historical attribute ratio corresponding to the target type of terminal device meet the attribute click-farming determination rule; determining that click-farming does not exist in the target live room in response to determining that the current attribute ratio corresponding to the target type of terminal device and the historical attribute ratio corresponding to the target type of terminal device do not meet the attribute click-farming determining rule (Wang; [Abstract] and [page 4 lines 54-55] show identifying click farming in a plurality of live broadcast rooms in the live broadcast platform. CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows based on the fact that the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2 (e.g., historical terminal ratio), events less than 1/1000 will be rejected. Assuming that a certain event occurs 10 times in a row based on the Android system, the continuation probability of the 10th consecutive event is 1/1024 (e.g., current terminal ratio) and it will be rejected by the server (e.g., the probability of an Android based event occurring 10 times in a row is very small or calculated to be 1/1024. Therefore an arbitrary threshold is chosen to reject rare (abnormal) events that occurs with probability less than 1/1000).)
Regarding claim 13, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to any one of claims 10 to 12 discloses the collecting statistics on information about terminal devices participating in livestreaming on the livestreaming platform comprises: determining a set of users participating in livestreaming on the livestreaming platform; and determining information of terminal devices used by the set of users (Wang; [page 4 lines 72-77] shows each user who views the live broadcast room during the preset acquisition time has watched all the viewed live broadcast rooms including the live broadcast room during the entire viewing process, that is, every preset time period can be obtained. CN104778591A; [page 8 lines 63-66] shows the probability of an event occurring in the Android system and the IOS system is 1/2.)
Regarding claim 14, CN104778591A-Wang as applied to any one of claims 1 to 13 discloses before the collecting current information about terminal devices accessing a target live room, the method further comprises: determining an initial live room on the livestreaming platform, and obtaining a quantity of users in the initial live room; and identifying the initial live room as the target live room in response to determining that the quantity of users exceeds a preset threshold ((Wang; [page 5 lines 9-10] shows it is judged to be not less than, it means that the popularity of the live broadcast room is relatively high, and the number of viewing users in the live broadcast room is also sufficient.)
Independent claims 15, 16, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN104778591A in view of Wang under the same rationale as given above regarding independent claim 1.
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yu et al. (US20230289828A1) discloses in para [0030] malicious click farming to initiate malicious service request.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAN DOAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
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, Oscar Louie, can be reached at (571) 270-1684. 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.
/TAN DOAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445