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 .
Applicant's Response
In Applicant's Response dated 4/14/2026, Applicant amended the Claims and argued against all objections and rejections set forth in the previous Office Action.
All objections and rejections not reproduced below are withdrawn.
The rejection of the Claims under 35 U.S.C. 101 previously set forth are withdrawn.
The prior art rejections of the Claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 previously set forth are withdrawn.
The examiner appreciates the applicant noting where the support for the amendments are described in the specification.
The Application was filed on 06/27/2024, which is a 371 of PCT/CN2023/074915 Filing Date 02/08/2023 with priority to CN 202210125592.4 Filing Date 02/10/2022.
Claim(s) 1, 3-9, 12, 14, 16-22 are pending for examination. Claim(s) 1, 12, 14 is/are independent claim(s).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-9, 12, 14, 16-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuno; Hiroshi et al. US Pub. No. 2014/0101136 (Mizuno) in view of Zhang; Guannan et al. US Pub. No. 2016/0110082 (Zhang).
Claim 1:
Mizuno teaches:
A method for improving efficiency of landing page generation [¶ 0042, 86] (permit important content of resources to be identified more accurately and consistently), comprising:
obtaining a uniform resource locator (URL) … [¶ 0018, 24, 26, 43-50, 71, 74] (obtaining content of a resource that is associated with a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) and a domain);
obtaining page content of a page corresponding to the URL based on determining semantics of structured information of the page, wherein the semantics comprise at least one of a type of the page, a title of the page, a brand associated with the page, or an image on the page with an importance level exceeding a predetermined threshold [¶ 0042, 86] (permit important content of resources to be identified more accurately and consistently) [¶ 0054] (identify where the most important content of resources is generally located) [¶ 0055] (a high similarity with other resources can be indicative of boilerplate content, while a low similarity can be indicative of unique or important content that should be included in transcoded resources) [¶ 0101, 122, 159] (optimization module embeds the image within the transcoded resource, or landing page)
See also: [¶ 0065-72] (Fig. 2D, scores may be determined based on one or more criteria, such as an amount of area that responds to user interaction, differences in text formatting, similarity to content of other resources, and/or other factors, similarity exceeds a threshold level, similarity exceeds a threshold level), the region may be designated as boilerplate content that should be omitted during transcoding, the region is significantly different from corresponding regions of other resources in the subset 116, the region may be selected for inclusion during transcoding) [¶ 0042, 54-55, 86] (analysis module 140 may assign scores to different regions of the resources in the sample subset 116. Based on these scores, the analysis module may determine which portions of the resources most commonly satisfy one or more criteria. When multiple resources in the sample subset 116 each have corresponding portions that satisfy the one or more criteria, for example, by having scores that exceed a threshold, the portion can be determined to include important content that should be included in transcoded resources) [¶ 0020, 27, 47, 54, 60-64, 83-95, 98-101, 121-122] (threshold level of similarity, determining that the size of the image satisfies a size threshold; determining an update frequency for the image; determining that the update frequency satisfies an update frequency threshold, interactivity score satisfies a threshold) [¶ 0087, 103, 110] (layout analysis) [¶ 0147] (title);
automatically generating a landing page based on the page content of the page corresponding to the URL [¶ 0175-178] (Figs. 9; Mizuno does not use the term “automatically”, however the process is performed by the system in response to a user query without any interaction by another user, this could be considered “automatically”) [¶ 0048] (URLs match) [¶ 0020, 47-50, 55, 66-67, 81, 84, 100, 121] (determining that the inline style attributes for a plurality of the elements have at least a threshold level of similarity; and including, in the transcoded resource, the plurality of the elements and a single style definition for the plurality of the elements) [¶ 0013-14, 17, 133-135, 139-149, 153-155] (generate landing page, a search results page, that includes content of one or more landing pages corresponding to search results. The content of a landing page that is included in the search results page can be content that was designated as ATF (above the fold) content); and
outputting the landing page [¶ 0011, 13-14, 135, 141-143, 148-150] (display a search result having an associated landing page).
Mizuno disclose, but Zhang also teaches:
automatically generating a landing page … [¶ 0041, 45, 46, 81] (automatically generate content items for a third-party content provider using a landing page uniform resource locator (URL))
… an importance level exceeding a predetermined threshold… [¶ 0052, 95, 120, 134] (removing the element with the greatest priority value indicative of the element being lower in importance to the content item template)
Mizuno does not appear to explicitly disclose a URL “input by a user”.
However, the disclosure of Zhang teaches:
{obtaining a uniform resource locator (URL)} input by a user in response to a landing page generation operation triggered by the user [¶ 0042, 138] (landing page URL, first dimensional value, and/or second dimensional value may be received from a client device) [¶ 061] (receiving input of a uniform resource locator (URL), such as a web address, from an input device).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of generating landing pages in Mizuno and the method of generating landing pages in Zhang, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The know technique of URL input in Zhang could be applied to the landing page templates in Mizuno. Zhang and Mizuno are similar devices because each generate landing pages. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, to allow for more flexible landing pages with different layout variations [Zhang: ¶ 0003].
Claim 2:
Mizuno teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein generating the target landing page that matches the page content of the page corresponding to the target URL comprises:
obtaining the page content of the page corresponding to the target URL [¶ 0048] (URLs match) [¶ 0020, 47-50, 55, 66-67, 81, 84, 100, 121] (determining that the inline style attributes for a plurality of the elements have at least a threshold level of similarity; and including, in the transcoded resource, the plurality of the elements and a single style definition for the plurality of the elements) [¶ 0013-14, 17, 133-135, 139-149, 153-155] (generate landing page, a search results page, that includes content of one or more landing pages corresponding to search results. The content of a landing page that is included in the search results page can be content that was designated as ATF (above the fold) content); and
generating the target landing page based on the page content [¶ 0048] (URLs match) [¶ 0020, 47-50, 55, 66-67, 81, 84, 100, 121] (determining that the inline style attributes for a plurality of the elements have at least a threshold level of similarity; and including, in the transcoded resource, the plurality of the elements and a single style definition for the plurality of the elements) [¶ 0013-14, 17, 133-135, 139-149, 153-155] (generate landing page, a search results page, that includes content of one or more landing pages corresponding to search results. The content of a landing page that is included in the search results page can be content that was designated as ATF (above the fold) content).
Claim 3:
Mizuno teaches: [¶ 0065-72] (Fig. 2D, scores may be determined based on one or more criteria, such as an amount of area that responds to user interaction, differences in text formatting, similarity to content of other resources, and/or other factors, similarity exceeds a threshold level, similarity exceeds a threshold level), the region may be designated as boilerplate content that should be omitted during transcoding, the region is significantly different from corresponding regions of other resources in the subset 116, the region may be selected for inclusion during transcoding) [¶ 0042] (54-55, 86) [¶ 0020, 27, 47, 54, 60-64, 83-95, 98-101, 121-122] (threshold level of similarity, determining that the size of the image satisfies a size threshold; determining an update frequency for the image; determining that the update frequency satisfies an update frequency threshold, interactivity score satisfies a threshold).
Mizuno does not appear to explicitly disclose “determining, from a plurality of landing page templates, a target template that matches the page”.
However, the disclosure of Zhang teaches:
The method of claim 2, wherein generating the target landing page based on the page content comprises:
determining, from a plurality of landing page templates, a target template that matches the page [¶ 0087-89] (filter templates, content item templates may be filtered based on the content item data in addition to or in lieu of the dimensional value filtering); and
filling the page content into a component corresponding to the target template so as to generate the target landing page [¶ 0079] (filter and rank images) [¶ 0054, 70, 107] (content item slot, space manager 226 may increase the space allocation of an element and/or rendering box to fit the maximum width and/or height possible of a placeholder for the element and/or rendering box based on the weight attribute and any available space for the element and/or rendering box given the first and second dimensional values for the content item slot).
Zhang also discloses [¶ 0052, 95, 120, 134] (removing the element with the greatest priority value indicative of the element being lower in importance to the content item template)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of generating landing pages in Mizuno and the method of generating landing pages in Zhang, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The know technique of template matching in Zhang could be applied to the landing page templates in Mizuno. Zhang and Mizuno are similar devices because each generate landing pages. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, to allow for more flexible landing pages with different layout variations [Zhang: ¶ 0003].
Claim 4:
Mizuno teaches:
The method of claim 3, wherein determining, from a plurality of landing page templates, the target template that matches the page content comprises:
determining the target template from at least one landing page template of the plurality of landing page templates that matches a type of the page [¶ 0024, 26-27, 41-43, 69-73, 82-83, 96-97, 118-119] (Figs. 1, 3, generating a transcoding template based on the scores; and designating the transcoding template for use when transcoding a resource in the set of resources, transcoding template based on identifying the commonalities among the selected content).
Claim 5:
Mizuno teaches:
The method of claim 4, wherein determining the target template from at least one landing page template of the plurality of landing page templates that matches the type of the page comprises:
determining a template in the at least one landing page template that accommodates a content matching the page content as the target template [¶ 0020, 101, 106, 109, 122] (determining a size of the image; determining that the size of the image satisfies a size threshold) [¶ 0098] (elements that have a width that exceeds a threshold can be resized to fit within the threshold).
Claim 6:
Mizuno teaches:
The method of claim 3, wherein the target template comprises one or more of following components:
an image, a video, a text, and a link [¶ 0101, 116, 122, 159] (image) [¶ 0008, 166-168] (video, resource that includes one or more of, blog content, news content, social media data, map content, video or other media content, electronic book content, electronic mail messages, electronic coupons, shopping information) [¶ 0014, 27, 52, 62-65, 78] (text content) [¶ 0008, 59, 138, 140, 164-168] (link or hyperlink).
Claim 7:
Mizuno teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein outputting the target landing page comprises:
displaying the target landing page [¶ 0011, 13-14, 135, 141-143, 148-150] (display a search result having an associated landing page), or
displaying a download access corresponding to the target landing page.
Claim 8:
Mizuno teaches:
The method of claim 2, wherein obtaining the page content of the page corresponding to the target URL comprises:
obtaining structured information of the page corresponding to the target URL [¶ 0018, 24, 26, 43-50, 71, 74] (obtaining content of a resource that is associated with a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) and a domain); and
performing semantic analysis on the structured information to obtain semantics of the structured information [¶ 0065-72] (Fig. 2D, scores may be determined based on one or more criteria, such as an amount of area that responds to user interaction, differences in text formatting, similarity to content of other resources, and/or other factors, similarity exceeds a threshold level, similarity exceeds a threshold level), the region may be designated as boilerplate content that should be omitted during transcoding, the region is significantly different from corresponding regions of other resources in the subset 116, the region may be selected for inclusion during transcoding) [¶ 0042] (54-55, 86) [¶ 0020, 27, 47, 54, 60-64, 83-95, 98-101, 121-122] (threshold level of similarity, determining that the size of the image satisfies a size threshold; determining an update frequency for the image; determining that the update frequency satisfies an update frequency threshold, interactivity score satisfies a threshold).
Claim 9:
Mizuno teaches:
The method of claim 8, wherein the structured information comprises one or more of following types of element:
an image, a video, a text, and a link [¶ 0101, 116, 122, 159] (image) [¶ 0008, 166-168] (video, resource that includes one or more of, blog content, news content, social media data, map content, video or other media content, electronic book content, electronic mail messages, electronic coupons, shopping information) [¶ 0014, 27, 52, 62-65, 78] (text content) [¶ 0008, 59, 138, 140, 164-168] (link or hyperlink).
Claim 10:
Mizuno teaches:
The method of claim 8, wherein the semantics of the structured information comprise one or more of following:
a page type, a page layout, a page title, an involved product brand, and an image with an importance level exceeding a certain threshold on a page [¶ 0065-72] (Fig. 2D, scores may be determined based on one or more criteria, such as an amount of area that responds to user interaction, differences in text formatting, similarity to content of other resources, and/or other factors, similarity exceeds a threshold level, similarity exceeds a threshold level), the region may be designated as boilerplate content that should be omitted during transcoding, the region is significantly different from corresponding regions of other resources in the subset 116, the region may be selected for inclusion during transcoding) [¶ 0042] (54-55, 86) [¶ 0020, 27, 47, 54, 60-64, 83-95, 98-101, 121-122] (threshold level of similarity, determining that the size of the image satisfies a size threshold; determining an update frequency for the image; determining that the update frequency satisfies an update frequency threshold, interactivity score satisfies a threshold) [¶ 0087, 103, 110] (layout analysis) [¶ 0147] (title).
ALTERNATE REJECTION:
Claim(s) 1, 12, 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuno; Hiroshi et al. US Pub. No. 2014/0101136 (Mizuno) in view of Hopfe, Gunnar et al. WIPO Pub. No. WO 2016150959 (Hopfe).
Claim 1:
Mizuno teaches:
A method for improving efficiency of landing page generation [¶ 0042, 86] (permit important content of resources to be identified more accurately and consistently), comprising:
obtaining a uniform resource locator (URL) … [¶ 0018, 24, 26, 43-50, 71, 74] (obtaining content of a resource that is associated with a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) and a domain);
obtaining page content of a page corresponding to the URL based on determining semantics of structured information of the page, wherein the semantics comprise at least one of a type of the page, a title of the page, a brand associated with the page, or an image on the page with an importance level exceeding a predetermined threshold [¶ 0042, 86] (permit important content of resources to be identified more accurately and consistently) [¶ 0054] (identify where the most important content of resources is generally located) [¶ 0055] (a high similarity with other resources can be indicative of boilerplate content, while a low similarity can be indicative of unique or important content that should be included in transcoded resources) [¶ 0101, 122, 159] (optimization module embeds the image within the transcoded resource, or landing page)
automatically generating a landing page based on the page content of the page corresponding to the URL [¶ 0175-178] (Figs. 9; Mizuno does not use the term “automatically”, however the process is performed by the system in response to a user query without any interaction by another user, this could be considered “automatically”) [¶ 0048] (URLs match) [¶ 0020, 47-50, 55, 66-67, 81, 84, 100, 121] (determining that the inline style attributes for a plurality of the elements have at least a threshold level of similarity; and including, in the transcoded resource, the plurality of the elements and a single style definition for the plurality of the elements) [¶ 0013-14, 17, 133-135, 139-149, 153-155] (generate landing page, a search results page, that includes content of one or more landing pages corresponding to search results. The content of a landing page that is included in the search results page can be content that was designated as ATF (above the fold) content); and
outputting the landing page [¶ 0011, 13-14, 135, 141-143, 148-150] (display a search result having an associated landing page).
Mizuno disclose, but Hopfe also teaches:
automatically generating a landing page … [¶ 0004] (page itself is automatically generated)
… an importance level exceeding a predetermined threshold… [¶ 0036] (relevance matching criteria)
Mizuno does not appear to explicitly disclose a URL “input by a user”.
However, the disclosure of Hopfe teaches:
{obtaining a uniform resource locator (URL)} input by a user in response to a landing page generation operation triggered by the user [¶ 0015-16, 25] (generating dynamic landing pages comprising the method steps of receiving from an internet user a landing page address comprising a search string with at least one keyword).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of generating landing pages in Mizuno and the method of generating landing pages in Hopfe, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The know technique of URL input in Hopfe could be applied to the landing page templates in Mizuno. Hopfe and Mizuno are similar devices because each generate landing pages. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, to “improve the selection and appearance of items” [Hopfe: ¶ 0037].
ALTERNATE REJECTION:
Claim(s) 1, 12, 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuno; Hiroshi et al. US Pub. No. 2014/0101136 (Mizuno) in view of in view of Liu; Yi et al. US Pat. No. 11,282,107 (Liu).
Claim 1:
Mizuno teaches:
A method for improving efficiency of landing page generation [¶ 0042, 86] (permit important content of resources to be identified more accurately and consistently), comprising:
obtaining a uniform resource locator (URL) … [¶ 0018, 24, 26, 43-50, 71, 74] (obtaining content of a resource that is associated with a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) and a domain);
obtaining page content of a page corresponding to the URL based on determining semantics of structured information of the page, wherein the semantics comprise at least one of a type of the page, a title of the page, a brand associated with the page, or an image on the page with an importance level exceeding a predetermined threshold [¶ 0042, 86] (permit important content of resources to be identified more accurately and consistently) [¶ 0054] (identify where the most important content of resources is generally located) [¶ 0055] (a high similarity with other resources can be indicative of boilerplate content, while a low similarity can be indicative of unique or important content that should be included in transcoded resources) [¶ 0101, 122, 159] (optimization module embeds the image within the transcoded resource, or landing page)
automatically generating a landing page based on the page content of the page corresponding to the URL [¶ 0175-178] (Figs. 9; Mizuno does not use the term “automatically”, however the process is performed by the system in response to a user query without any interaction by another user, this could be considered “automatically”) [¶ 0048] (URLs match) [¶ 0020, 47-50, 55, 66-67, 81, 84, 100, 121] (determining that the inline style attributes for a plurality of the elements have at least a threshold level of similarity; and including, in the transcoded resource, the plurality of the elements and a single style definition for the plurality of the elements) [¶ 0013-14, 17, 133-135, 139-149, 153-155] (generate landing page, a search results page, that includes content of one or more landing pages corresponding to search results. The content of a landing page that is included in the search results page can be content that was designated as ATF (above the fold) content); and
outputting the landing page [¶ 0011, 13-14, 135, 141-143, 148-150] (display a search result having an associated landing page).
Mizuno does not appear to explicitly disclose a URL “input by a user”.
However, the disclosure of Liu teaches:
{obtaining a uniform resource locator (URL)} input by a user in response to a landing page generation operation triggered by the user [Col. 6, Ln13-31, Col. Col. 13, Ln. 31-35 ] (Landing page content, which is generated in response to a URL call from client-computing devices).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of generating landing pages in Mizuno and the method of generating landing pages in Liu, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The know technique of URL input in Liu could be applied to the landing page templates in Mizuno. Liu and Mizuno are similar devices because each generate landing pages. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, to “maximize the user's experience with content” [Liu: Col. 3, Ln. 50-61].
Claims 12, 14, 16-22:
Claim(s) 12, 14 is/are substantially similar to claim 1 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim 1 is a “method” claim, claim 12 is a “system” claim and claim 14 is a “computer readable medium” claim, but the steps or elements of each claim are essentially the same.
Claim(s) 15 is/are substantially similar to claim 2 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 16 is/are substantially similar to claim 3 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 17 is/are substantially similar to claim 4 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 18 is/are substantially similar to claim 5 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 19 is/are substantially similar to claim 6 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 20 is/are substantially similar to claim 7 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 21 is/are substantially similar to claim 8 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 22 is/are substantially similar to claim 9 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Please See PTO-892: Notice of References Cited.
Evidence of the level skill of an ordinary person in the art for Claim 1:
Kotas; Paul US 20160180389 landing page requests that are generated when users select or otherwise access navigational elements such as sponsored links and advertisements presented in electronic interfaces such as web sites,
Gupta; Mohit et al. US 11100554
Chan; Kevin C. et al. US 10534851 (115) user request web page, user clicks on link, dynamic landing page is created.
Zhang; Guannan et al. US 20150227504 landing page URL, first dimensional value, and second dimensional value may be received from a client device
Eidelson; Benjamin David et al. US 9542697 a request for a landing page in response to a selection of a link to a search result displayed on a search results page at the user device
Evidence of the level skill of an ordinary person in the art for Claim 5:
Kothari; Rakesh et al. US 8725559 selecting an advertisement template having a media type that matches a media type preferred by the user.
Evidence of the level skill of an ordinary person in the art for Claim 1:
Lei; Ping US 20140195893 automatically organize the content of the landing page, the computer extracts from a link address of the current product information content an HTML text. The computer then adds the product information detail associated with the current product information content to the HTML text, and includes the resultant HTML text in the landing page.
Yan; Zuo et al. US 20150012514 generating, for a given landing page of a content item, a landing page image that visually depicts the given landing page based at least in part on markup language defining the given landing page.
Gupta; Mohit et al. US 11100554 template landing page, thematic landing page is generated for the theme based on the relevant products.
Choi; Jin Young et al. US 20220327179 match, PC, mobile, app, Fig. 4, 6; landing page, template; app, PC web, Mobile web; acquiring first information on a user terminal and second information on a landing page.
Mengle; Advay et al. US Pub. No. 2018/0060921 (Mengle) [¶ 0011, 15, 23, 36, 42-49] (selecting the one or more templates from a plurality of templates based on one or more signals associated with the ad creative) [¶ 0083-84] (selecting the one or more templates from a plurality of templates based on one or more signals associated with the ad creative)
Dzumla; Andreas et al. US 20190286682 SEM keyword-level landing page; keyword landing page template; Creating a landing page template that matches, or at least partially or closely matches, the existing client web pages in terms of header, footer, menus and design/CSS; testing for relevancy and quality thresholds; keyword-to-content match score with a defined threshold.
Jacobsson; Henrik US 9501530 landing page, matching content, semantic, content candidate; match and the confidence score satisfying a threshold.; semantic relevancy of the entity to the search query threshold.
Boyns; Mark et al. US 20120158893 landing page, template, different layout characteristics to match each of the device-specific layout parameters in the device database; content does not match the template within a threshold value,
Allouche; Gil David US 20190251593 landing pages, comparing attributes of leads from various data sources to a given Ideal Customer Profile (ICP), and selecting those leads that match the ICP with a high match rate
Jacobsson; Henrik US 9501530 landing page, matching content, semantic, content candidate; match and the confidence score satisfying a threshold.; semantic relevancy of the entity to the search query threshold;
Kothari; Rakesh et al. US 8725559 advertising content is selected that has attributes that match as many of the user's preferences as possible. The landing page of the advertisement
Preetham; Arcot J. et al. US 20150161120 [0047] For each set of similar images, a selected web page that includes the selected image is identified as a landing page for an image search result that depicts an image from the set of similar images (412).
Citations to Prior Art
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for all that it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed were instead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968". In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323,75 USPQ2d 1213,1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264,23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807,10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385,1390,163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Response to Arguments
Concerning the alternate rejections above in view of Hopfe and Liu, Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-9, 12, 14, 16-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
35 USC 103 Rejection:
The applicant argues that: “Mizuno does not disclose determining semantics of structured information of the content or resource. And Mizuno especially does not disclose determining a type of the page, a title of the page, a brand associated with the page, or an image on the page with an importance level exceeding a predetermined threshold of the content or resource. While Mizuno talks about scores and thresholds, such scores and thresholds simply refer to how clickable a region is, how similar it looks to other pages, how big an image is, or how often an image changes. See Mizuno, at [0020], [0024], [0027]. In Mizuno, such scores and thresholds are not used to decide what type of page it is, what the page title is, a brand, or which image is important.” (response page ).
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
The entire purpose of Mizuno determining a score for content is to determine the importance of that content. Mizuno teaches that purpose of the invention is to “permit important content of resources to be identified more accurately and consistently, see [¶ 0042, 86]. Mizuno discloses that the goal is to “identify where the most important content of resources is generally located” see [¶ 0054] and that the way this is done is by computing a score such that “a high similarity with other resources can be indicative of boilerplate content, while a low similarity can be indicative of unique or important content that should be included in transcoded resources” see [¶ 0055].
Mizuno discloses that these important element of a page can be text or images but has specific disclosure for including an image in the transcoded resource, or landing page, see [¶ 0101, 159].
Mizuno does not use the phrase “determining semantics of structured information of the page” however Mizuno discloses the scoring of content which the applicant claims as one type of “semantics”.
Mizuno discloses the “semantic” analysis to determine important score for content on a page and that content includes images, therefor Mizuno discloses the claimed “an image on the page with an importance level exceeding a predetermined threshold”.
See also, the alternate rejections above in view of Hopfe and Liu.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN J SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-3825. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11:00 - 7:30 EST.
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, ADAM QUELER can be reached at (571) 272-4140. 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.
/Benjamin Smith/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172 Direct Phone: 571-270-3825
Direct Fax: 571-270-4825
Email: benjamin.smith@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights