Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/734,921

APPARATUS, SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CREATING, ACTIVATING, DISPLAYING IN A COMPUTER DISPLAY, AND INTERACTING WITH, A VIRTUAL THREE-DIMENSIONAL DIGITAL ANALOG TO TRADITIONAL PHYSICAL SHOPPING IN A PHYSICAL MARKETPLACE

Non-Final OA §101§102§103
Filed
Jun 05, 2024
Examiner
SEIBERT, CHRISTOPHER B
Art Unit
3688
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
57%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 57% of resolved cases
57%
Career Allow Rate
233 granted / 412 resolved
+4.6% vs TC avg
Strong +44% interview lift
Without
With
+43.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
435
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§103
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§102
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 412 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-9 are pending in this application. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Election/Restrictions Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/10/2025. 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. Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Regarding claims 1-9, under Step 1, the claims recite a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. Under Step 2A claims 1-9 recite a judicial exception (abstract idea) that is not integrated into a practical application and does not provide significantly more. Under Step 2A (prong 1), and taking claim 1 as representative, claim 1 recites: a computer system programmed to: generate an online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session distributable to a plurality of player computer devices and displayable on a plurality of computer displays, wherein each computer display of said plurality of computer displays is associated with a particular player computer device of said plurality of player computer devices; generate an interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object in said online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session, said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object corresponding in virtual three-dimensional relationship characteristics to a physical item of merchandise for sale; and digitally link said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object to a set of data specific for said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object, said set of data stored in a database, said database accessible by said computer system, said set of data comprising specifications about said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object, said set of data comprising a price to purchase said physical item of merchandise corresponding to said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object. The above limitations set forth a procedure for organizing human activity, such as by performing commercial interactions including marketing activity and business relations. This is because the claim recites the steps performed in order to shop and purchase an item (Specification p. 1 lns. 27-31). Accordingly, under step 2A (prong 1) the claim recites an abstract idea because the claim recites limitations that fall within the “Certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. MPEP 2106.04. Under Step 2A (prong 2), the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. Claim 1 recites additional elements, including a plurality of player computer devices, a plurality of computer displays, and a database. These additional elements are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. This is because the additional elements of claim 1 are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as generic computing hardware) such that they amount to nothing more than the mere instructions to implement or apply the abstract idea on generic computing hardware (or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea). Further, the additional elements do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (such as computers or computing networks). Secondly, the additional elements are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the claim fails to (i) reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, (ii) implement the judicial exception with, or use the judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, (iii) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or (iv) apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. In view of the above, under Step 2A (prong 2), claim 1 does not integrate the recited exception into a practical application. Under Step 2B, examiners should evaluate additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they provide an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself). In this case, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Taken individually or as a whole the additional elements of claim 1 do not provide an inventive concept (i.e. they do not amount to “significantly more” than the exception itself). As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements used to perform the claimed process amount to no more than the mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer and/or no more than a general link to a technological environment. MPEP 2106.05. In view of the above, representative claim 1 does not provide an inventive concept (“significantly more”) under Step 2B, and is therefore ineligible for patenting. Dependent claims 2-9 recite limitations which are similarly directed to and elaborate on the judicial exception (abstract idea) of claim 1. Thus, each of claims 2-9 are held to recite a judicial exception under Step 2A (prong 1) for at least similar reasons as discussed above. Furthermore, claims 2-9 do not set forth further additional elements. Considered both individually and as a whole, claims 2-9 do not integrate the recited exception into a practical application for at least similar reasons as discussed above. Lastly, under step 2B, dependent claims 2-9 do not provide an inventive concept (i.e. they do not amount to “significantly more” than the exception itself). This is again because the claims merely apply the exception on generic computing hardware, generally link the exception to a technological environment, and specified at a high level of generality. In view of the above, claims 1-9 do not provide an inventive concept (“significantly more”) under Step 2B, and are therefore ineligible for patenting. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Clark, US PG Pub 2019/0325498 A1 (hereafter “Clark”). Regarding claim 1, Clark discloses a computer system programmed to: Generate an online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session distributable to a plurality of player computer devices and displayable on a plurality of computer displays, wherein each computer display of said plurality of computer displays is associated with a particular player computer device of said plurality of player computer devices (¶¶0012-0014, 0044, 0067, and 0089-0091); Generate an interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object in said online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session, said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object corresponding in virtual three-dimensional relationship characteristics to a physical item of merchandise for sale (¶¶0014, 0045, 0103, 0107, 0111, 0134, 0145, 0152, 0168, 0213, and 0241); and Digitally link said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object to a set of data specific for said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object, said set of data stored in a database, said database accessible by said computer system, said set of data comprising specifications about said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object, said set of data comprising a price to purchase said physical item of merchandise corresponding to said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object (¶¶0060, 0068, 0070, 0076-0086, 0089-0097, 0101, 0111, 0211, and 0222-0224). Regarding claim 2, Clark discloses the computer system of Claim 1, said computer system further programmed to: Detect an interactive touch selection by a particular player of said online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session of said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object, wherein said interactive touch selection comprises a request for information about said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object received by said computer system from a particular player computer device used by said particular player to interact with said online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session (¶¶0044, 0062, 0082, 0093, 0106, 0116, 0122, 0129, 0155-0156, 0203, and 0228); Respond to said interactive touch selection by said particular player of said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object by interactively accessing said set of data stored in said database, said set of data comprising a price associated with said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object (¶¶0042-0044, 0069-0070, 0082-0085, 0093-0095, and 0105-0106); and Display said price to a computer display associated with the particular player computer device used by said particular player to interact with said online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session, said display said price displayed interactively in association with said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object (¶¶0011, 0074-0082, and 0222-0224). Regarding claim 3, Clark discloses the computer system of Claim 1, said computer system further programmed to: Detect an interactive virtual manipulation selection by a particular player of said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object, wherein said interactive virtual manipulation selection comprises a manipulation selection instruction to manipulate said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object, said instruction received by said computer system from a particular player computer device used by said particular player to interact with said online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session (¶¶0086, 0091, 0105-0108, 0156, 0173, and 0234); Respond to said interactive virtual manipulation selection with a corresponding display of a virtual presentation of said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object (¶¶0069-0088, 0106, 0142, and 0173-0176); and Respond to interactive virtual manipulation instructions by said particular player of said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object by displaying virtual rotation of said interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game object according to said interactive virtual manipulation instruction (¶¶0059 and 0173-0176). Regarding claim 4, Clark discloses the computer system of Claim 3, said computer system further programmed to: Respond to an interactive keep selection by said particular player of said virtual, interactive, three-dimensional merchandise item game object with a virtual placement in an interactive, virtual, three-dimensional cart game object (¶¶0086, 0091, 0105-0108, 0156, 0173, and 0234); and Respond to an interactive pay selection by said particular player of said virtual, interactive, three-dimensional merchandise item game object with a charge to an account associated with said particular player (¶¶0060, 0068, 0070, 0076-0086, 0089-0097, 0101, 0111, 0211, and 0222-0224). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark in view of Cullather, US PG Pub 2021/0366032 A1 (hereafter “Cullather”). Regarding claim 5, Clark teaches the computer system of Claim 1, but does not teach said computer system further programmed to: Distribute a virtual three-dimensional view of said online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session to a plurality of player computer devices associated with a plurality of players as a massively multi-player online shopping game, said massively multi-player online shopping game interactive with said plurality of players, said massively multi-player online shopping game comprising an interactive persistent display of a plurality of virtual three-dimensional game objects. Cullather teaches a virtual shopping gaming experience including the known techniques to distribute a virtual three-dimensional view of said online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session to a plurality of player computer devices associated with a plurality of players as a massively multi-player online shopping game, said massively multi-player online shopping game interactive with said plurality of players, said massively multi-player online shopping game comprising an interactive persistent display of a plurality of virtual three-dimensional game objects (¶¶0003, 0006-0007, and 0055-0057). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Clark, to include a multiplayer shopping game with an interactive persistent display as taught by Cullather, in order to “provide an online shopping experience that combines with an online gaming experience,” as suggested by Cullather (¶0005). Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Cullather, the results of the combination were predictable. Regarding claim 6, Clark in view of Cullather teaches the computer system of Claim 1, wherein said online interactive, virtual, three-dimensional session comprises a persistent, interactive, visually traversable, visually rotatable, virtual three-dimensional online space, said computer system further programmed to: Generate a persistent, interactive, visually traversable, visually rotatable, virtual three-dimensional representation of a plurality of interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game objects presented in a persistent, interactive, visually traversable, virtual three-dimensional representation of a virtual store interior (Cullather Figures 3 and 13 and ¶¶0044-0055). The combination would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the reasons stated above with respect to claim 5. Regarding claim 7, Clark in view of Cullather teaches the computer system of Claim 6, said computer system further programmed to: Receive on a continuous basis from each player computer device of said plurality of player computer devices an indication of a player-specific virtual location within said store interior, said player-specific virtual location corresponding to a virtual location of a particular player associated with a particular player computer device of said plurality of player computer devices within said virtual store interior (Cullather ¶¶0044 and 0055-0057); Track for each particular player, an indication of player store traversal activity by each said particular player from a particular player computer device associated with a particular computer display associated with each said particular player (Cullather ¶¶0042-0047); and Interact with said indication of player store traversal activity by displaying visual traversal of said store interior to said particular computer display (Cullather ¶¶0035 and 0044); and streaming sound to an audio speaker in communication with said particular player computer device according to said indication of player store traversal activity with respect to said player-specific virtual location within said store interior (Cullather ¶¶0040, 0044-0047, and 0053-0059). The combination would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the reasons stated above with respect to claim 5. Regarding claim 8, Clark in view of Cullather teaches the computer system of Claim 6, said computer system further programmed to: Generate for each said particular player of said plurality of players, a player game object representation (Cullather ¶¶0047-0050); Receive from each player computer device of said plurality of player computer devices an indication of a player-specific virtual location of said player game object within said virtual store interior, said player-specific virtual location corresponding to a virtual location of a particular player associated with a particular player computer device of said plurality of player computer devices within said virtual store interior (Cullather ¶¶0044 and 0055-0057); Continuously track for each particular player, a streaming indication of player store traversal activity by each player game object for each particular player from a particular player computer device associated with a particular computer display associated with said each particular player (Cullather ¶¶0042-0047); Continuously display to each computer display associated with each player computer device of said plurality of player computer devices a visual location within said virtual store interior of said player game object (Cullather ¶¶0055-0058); Continuously stream to an audio device in communication with each player computer device of said plurality of player computer devices, sound corresponding to said virtual location within said virtual store interior according to said player-specific virtual location of said player game object (Cullather ¶¶0040, 0044-0045, and 0053-0059); and Continuously display to each computer display associated with each player computer device of said plurality of player computer devices, each player game object associated with each particular player of said plurality of players, as tracked according to said streaming indication of player store traversal activity by each said particular player game object (Cullather ¶¶0044-0047 and 0055-0058). The combination would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the reasons stated above with respect to claim 5. Regarding claim 9, Clark in view of Cullather teaches the computer system of Claim 6, said computer system further programmed to: Display a plurality of interactive, virtual, three-dimensional merchandise item game objects on a visually traversable, visually rotatable, virtual three-dimensional representation of a display structure (Cullather ¶¶0035 and 0044-0050); Receive an indication of player display structure traversal activity from a particular player computer device associated with a particular computer display (Cullather ¶0044); and Interact with said indication of player display structure traversal activity by displaying visual traversal of said virtual display structure to said particular computer display (Cullather ¶¶0047 and 0053-0059). The combination would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the reasons stated above with respect to claim 5. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Schrager, US PG Pub 2019/0184285 A1, teaches game systems and methods. Bererton et al., US PG Pub 2021/0008455 A1, teaches an open game engine and marketplace with associated game editing and creation tools. Non-patent literature Zackariasson, Peter, Nils Wåhlin, and Timothy L. Wilson teaches virtual identities and market segmentation in marketing in and through massively multiplayer online games. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER B SEIBERT whose telephone number is (571)272-5549. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeff 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. /CHRISTOPHER B SEIBERT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3688
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 05, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602720
NETWORK SITE CART USER INTERFACE HAVING MULTIPLE USER-SPECIFIED CURRENCY FORMATS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12586120
LOCATION-BASED SYSTEM FOR CHARITABLE DONATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586121
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS FOR ORDERING VEHICLE PARTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12555118
AGE VERIFICATION SYSTEM, METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12555156
Shopping Cart For Items Selected By An Account Holder Incented By A Donation To Conduct A Transaction
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
57%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+43.7%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 412 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month