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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This Office Action is in response to the Amendment filed on February 2, 2026, which paper has been placed of record in the file.
2. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claim invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea) without significantly more.
Regarding independent claim 15, which is analyzing as the following:
Step 1: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim falls within any statutory category. See MPEP 2106.03. The claim recites a system related to social media postings. Thus, the claim is to a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A, Prong One: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04, subsection II, a claim “recites” a judicial exception when the judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claim.
The claim recites a system related to social media postings. The claim recites the steps: determining that a channel calendar is associated with a group-based communication channel of a group-based communication system…, receiving, from a member of the members of the group-based communication channel, a first request to view the channel calendar…, in response to receiving the first request, rendering the channel calendar, receiving, from the member and via the channel calendar, a second request to view information associated with an event of the events, and in response to receiving the second request, rendering the information associated with the event, under its broadest reasonable interpretation when read in light of the Specification, falls within “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas as they cover performance of managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions.
The claim recites the steps of: determining that a channel calendar is associated with a group-based communication channel of a group-based communication system…, receiving, from a member of the members of the group-based communication channel, a first request to view the channel calendar…, receiving, from the member and via the channel calendar, a second request to view information associated with an event of the events, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation when read in light of the Specification, covers performance of the limitations in the mind, can be practically performed by human in their mind or with pen/paper, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “a computer/processor/automatically”, nothing in the claim elements preclude the steps from practically being performed in the mind. The mere nominal recitation of generic computing devices does not take the claim limitation out of the Mental Processes grouping of abstract ideas. Thus, if a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas (concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III.
Therefore, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Step 2A, Prong Two: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception or whether the claim is “directed to” the judicial exception. This evaluation is performed by (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d).
The claim recites the additional elements of “wherein the group-based communication system facilitates an exchange of messages and an initiation of at least one of video calls or audio calls within the group-based communication channel by the members of the group-based communication channel; wherein the first request is a selection of an object representing the channel calendar that is displayed in association with the group-based communication channel and the channel calendar; automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel” and “automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client.” The claim also recites that the steps of determining that a channel calendar is associated with a group-based communication channel of a group-based communication system…, receiving, from a member of the members of the group-based communication channel, a first request to view the channel calendar…, in response to receiving the first request, automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel, the channel calendar, receiving, from the member and via the channel calendar, a second request to view information associated with an event of the events, and in response to receiving the second request, automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client, the information associated with the event” are performed by one or more processors.
The additional elements “wherein the group-based communication system facilitates an exchange of messages and an initiation of at least one of video calls or audio calls within the group-based communication channel by the members of the group-based communication channel; wherein the first request is a selection of an object representing the channel calendar that is displayed in association with the group-based communication channel and the channel calendar; automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel” and “automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client” are mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering, transmitting and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05. It is similar to other concepts that have been identified by the courts Gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques and displaying the result, TLI Communications, 823 F.3d at 612-13, 118 USPQ2d at 1747-48; Collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis, Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1742 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
Further, the steps of “determining that a channel calendar is associated with a group-based communication channel of a group-based communication system…, receiving, from a member of the members of the group-based communication channel, a first request to view the channel calendar…, in response to receiving the first request, automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel, the channel calendar, receiving, from the member and via the channel calendar, a second request to view information associated with an event of the events, and in response to receiving the second request, automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client, the information associated with the event”, are recited as being performed by the one or more processors. The one or more processors are recited at a high level of generality. In the limitations “in response to receiving the first request, automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel, the channel calendar, and in response to receiving the second request, automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client, the information associated with the event”, the one or more processors are used as a tool to perform the generic computer function of gathering and outputting data. See MPEP 2106.05(f). In limitations “determining that a channel calendar is associated with a group-based communication channel of a group-based communication system…, receiving, from a member of the members of the group-based communication channel, a first request to view the channel calendar…, and receiving, from the member and via the channel calendar, a second request to view information associated with an event of the events”, the one or more processors are used to perform an abstract idea, as discussed above in Step 2A, Prong One, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f). The additional elements recite generic computer components the one or more processors, a memory, and software programming instructions that are recited a high-level of generality that merely perform, conduct, carry out, implement, and/or narrow the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, the additional elements evaluated individually and in combination do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they comprise or include limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application such as adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea -- See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Moreover, these additional elements do not provide any improvements to the technology, improvements to the functioning of the computer, the processor, the memory, improvement to the user interface, or other technology. They just merely used as general means for collecting, displaying data and performing the abstract idea. They do not recite a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claims, and do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing.
Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO), and the claim is directed to the judicial exception (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Step 2B: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole, amounts to significantly more than the recited exception i.e., whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, adds an inventive concept to the claim. See MPEP 2106.05.
The additional elements “wherein the group-based communication system facilitates an exchange of messages and an initiation of at least one of video calls or audio calls within the group-based communication channel by the members of the group-based communication channel; wherein the first request is a selection of an object representing the channel calendar that is displayed in association with the group-based communication channel and the channel calendar; automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel” and “automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client” were found to be insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A, Prong Two, because they were determined to be insignificant limitations as necessary data gathering and outputting. However, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra solution activity in Step 2A, Prong Two should be re-evaluated in Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05, subsection I.A. At Step 2B, the evaluation of the insignificant extra-solution activity consideration takes into account whether or not the extra-solution activity is well understood, routine, and conventional in the field. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the additional elements of “wherein the group-based communication system facilitates an exchange of messages and an initiation of at least one of video calls or audio calls within the group-based communication channel by the members of the group-based communication channel; wherein the first request is a selection of an object representing the channel calendar that is displayed in association with the group-based communication channel and the channel calendar; automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel” and “automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client” are recited at a high level of generality. These elements amount to gathering and displaying data over a network and are well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely genetic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the recitation of the one or more processors to perform limitations “determining that a channel calendar is associated with a group-based communication channel of a group-based communication system…, receiving, from a member of the members of the group-based communication channel, a first request to view the channel calendar…, in response to receiving the first request, automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel, the channel calendar, receiving, from the member and via the channel calendar, a second request to view information associated with an event of the events, and in response to receiving the second request, automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client, the information associated with the event”, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer and insignificant extra-solution activity, which do not provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO).
Regarding independent claims 1 and 8, Alice Corp. establishes that the same analysis should be used for all categories of claims. Therefore, independent claim 1 directed to a method, independent claim 8 directed to a medium, are also rejected as ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101 for substantially the same reasons as independent method claim 15.
Regarding dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20, the dependent claims do not impart patent eligibility to the abstract idea of the independent claim. The dependent claims rather further narrow the abstract idea and the narrower scope does not change the outcome of the two-part Mayo test. Narrowing the scope of the claims is not enough to impart eligibility as it is still interpreted as an abstract idea, a narrower abstract idea.
Regarding dependent claims 2, 9 and 16, the claims recite the additional elements receiving, from within the group-based communication channel, a third request to add one or more events…; and based at least in part on receiving the third request, causing display of the one or more events within the channel calendar.…, which are mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 15 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 3, 10 and 17, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting responsive to receiving the third request, causing a post associated with the one or more events to be created within the group-based communication channel…, that fall under the category of Organizing Human activity and Mental process groupings of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 15. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 4, 11 and 18, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting wherein the group-based communication channel is automatically set as a host for hosting the one or more events, that fall under the category of Organizing Human activity and Mental process groupings of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 11. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 5, 12 and 19, the claims recite the additional elements receiving a third request to access the group-based communication channel;
causing, based at least in part on the third request, display of the group-based communication channel, wherein the group-based communication channel includes a selectable control to add the channel calendar to the group-based communication channel; and receiving, from within the group-based communication channel, a selection of the selectable control, which are mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 15 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 6 and 13, the claims recite the additional elements wherein, upon the selection of the selectable control, the channel calendar becomes visible to the members of the group-based communication channel, which are mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 11 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 7, 14 and 20, the claims recite the additional elements wherein the channel calendar displays one or more upcoming events that are associated with the group-based communication channel…, which are mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 11 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Therefore, none of the dependent claims alone or as an ordered combination add limitations that qualify as significantly more than the abstract idea.
Accordingly, claims 1-20 are not draw to eligible subject matter as they are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more and are rejected under 35 USC § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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 of this title, 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.
6. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hubner et al. (hereinafter Hubner, US 2012/0084286) in view of Donneau-Golencer et al. (hereinafter Donneau-Golencer, US 2015/0135094).
Regarding to claim 1, Hubner discloses a method comprising:
determining that a channel calendar is associated with a group-based communication channel of a group-based communication system, wherein members of the group-based communication channel are authorized to access the channel calendar and non-members of the group-based communication channel lack authorization to access the channel calendar (para [0025], FIG. 2 is a diagram of a calendar management platform for enabling the sharing of calendar information between one or more devices for executing different calendar applications, in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. The calendar management platform 103 includes various executable modules for performing one or more computing, data processing and network based instructions that in combination provide a means of facilitating shared execution and use of calendar information across users, user groups and/or different calendar applications; para [0038], the calendar management platform 103 maintains user profile data 107a that is useful for enabling a subscribing user/device to readily engage participant users/devices for sharing synchronized content. While contents of the user profile has been indicated throughout, in general the user profile data 107a may include data for characterizing and defining a user, including the user's role (father, coach, student, grandparent, etc.), group affiliations (e.g., family, team, accounting team, book club), peer users associated with a given group, identifier values, user related statistics and preference data, contact information, authentication codes and values, etc.; para [0027], Access by a user to a different user's calendar or to a different calendar application of said user, i.e., as representative different data views, may be performed based on a permission or affiliation basis. Under this scenario, restrictions or permissions may be allowed based on a common reference identifier or other value. By way of example, one permission setting may enforce that only users with common events--i.e., that are tagged with the same calendar identifier value--may be correlated and enabled access to differing data views. Another permission setting may call for common affiliation, wherein only users and/or events belonging to the same group are enabled access on differing data views);
receiving, from a member of the members of the group-based communication channel, a first request to view the channel calendar, wherein the first request is a selection of an object representing the channel calendar that is displayed in association with the group-based communication channel and the channel calendar includes events associated with the group-based communication channel (para [0026], the authentication module 201 receives a request to subscribe to a calendar service for receiving the data view of a specific user. The request may pertain to the receiving of a data view for a calendar of the requesting user or another user configured to the calendar management platform 103 via the service provider network 109. Authentication may include receiving and validating a login name and/or user identification value as provided or established for a particular user during a subscription or registration process with the service provider; para [0044], The calendar information includes a plurality of calendar events as generated by various data sources. In step 417, to facilitate distribution of the calendar events, the calendar management platform 103 tags the calendar events for classification into one of a plurality of user groups. The tags may serve as specific data types or descriptors for referencing specific users; para [0045], FIGS. 5A and 5B are diagrams of graphical user interfaces (GUIs) of devices for presenting a data view for calendar information, according to an exemplary embodiment. By way of example, execution of the GUIs for devices 501 and 503 are presented from the perspective of an exemplary use case. This use case involves an interaction between a first user 505 of user device 501 and a second user 507 of user device 503, in which both of the users are subscribed to the calendar management platform 103 and have established user profiles; para [0046], In this example, the Parent 507 takes part in their child's little league soccer team and desires to know when games and practices are scheduled to occur. The Coach 505 of the soccer team maintains an online calendar 509 for the team which is accessible from his user device 501 and presentable to the device display. All parents are given the appropriate permissions (e.g., login, password, permissions) for accessing the online calendar 509 maintained by the Coach 505. The Parent 507, however, while having access to the online calendar 509 or an instance thereof typically employs a calendar application 511 integrated on his mobile device 503, which features its own interface characteristics, design features, etc.);
in response to receiving the first request, automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel, the channel calendar (para [0028], a data source retrieval module periodically synchronizes with data sources (e.g., 101a-101n, 117) to retrieve calendar information pertaining to a user and/or related peers. Periodicity settings may be established as part of a user profile 107a. Data retrieval may include acquiring calendar information input by peers, at their respective user devices 101, for inclusion in a data view of another user's calendar. This may also include retrieving calendar information input by the user to a calendar application 119 at the user device 101, for inclusion in a data view of a different calendar application of the users);
receiving, from the member and via the channel calendar, a second request to view information associated with an event of the events (para [0044], As shown in FIG. 4B, in step 413 of process 408, the calendar management platform 103 receives a request from a data source (e.g., a user device 101) to subscribe to a calendar service for receiving the data view. In step 415, the calendar management platform 103 also receives information relating to one or more devices configured to output the calendar information. The calendar information includes a plurality of calendar events as generated by various data sources. In step 417, to facilitate distribution of the calendar events, the calendar management platform 103 tags the calendar events for classification into one of a plurality of user groups);
in response to receiving the second request, automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client, the information associated with the event (para [0045], FIGS. 5A and 5B are diagrams of graphical user interfaces (GUIs) of devices for presenting a data view for calendar information, according to an exemplary embodiment. By way of example, execution of the GUIs for devices 501 and 503 are presented from the perspective of an exemplary use case. This use case involves an interaction between a first user 505 of user device 501 and a second user 507 of user device 503, in which both of the users are subscribed to the calendar management platform 103 and have established user profiles).
Hubner does not disclose, however, Donneau-Golencer discloses:
wherein the group-based communication system facilitates an exchange of messages and an initiation of at least one of video calls or audio calls within the group-based communication channel by the members of the group-based communication channel (para [0032], An implementation of the shared group area 240 may comprise chat functionality within the calendar application 230 that allows each of the plurality of users in the collaboration group to chat with other users in the collaboration group. It should be under stood that the chat may be by text, voice, or video; para [0074], Notifications of all kinds may also be presented within the shared group area so as to appear on a wall or other streamed mechanism thereby being accessed by the group. For example, the information shared may also include various types of multimedia such as conference calls, voice mail, text to speech, video, video streams, dedicated mediums for blind and deaf participants, and foreign language translations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Hubner’s to incorporate the features taught by Donneau-Golencer above, for the purpose of including the video calls or audio calls in the exchange of messages within the group-based communication channel, thus providing various types of multimedia includes video calls or audio calls. Since Hubner discloses the group-based communication system facilitates an exchange of messages within the group-based communication channel by the members of the group-based communication channel, Donneau-Golencer discloses the group-based communication system facilitates an exchange of messages and an initiation of at least one of video calls or audio calls, as described above, therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the combination of Hubner and Donneau-Golencer would have yield predictable results in facilitating an exchange of messages within the group-based communication channel.
Regarding to claim 2, Hubner discloses the method as recited in claim 1, further comprising:
receiving, from within the group-based communication channel, a third request to add one or more events associated with the group-based communication channel to the channel calendar (para [0053], It is noted in this example that the CEO 505 is able to review a data view related to the TEAM group 510 event and that of the BIZ group 533 event via a single calendar application 509. Hence, even though the BIZ group 533 event was not originally entered at the online calendar 509, the user 505 is provided with access to this information); and
based at least in part on receiving the third request, causing display of the one or more events within the channel calendar (para [0053], Based on the permission settings, the data view regarding the client meeting 523 is restricted from view of the peers associated with the TEAM group 510 with the exception of the user 505. While not shown, it is noted that the CEO 505 may be presented with the opportunity to toggle between various data views via the GUI of his device 501, each data view corresponding to that of a calendar application he employs. Under this scenario, the online calendar 509 for the team could be toggled to a view of the calendar application pertaining to the user's business activities).
Regarding to claim 3, Hubner discloses the method recited in claim 2, further comprising, responsive to receiving the third request, causing a post associated with the one or more events to be created within the group-based communication channel, wherein the post includes one or more event details associated with the one or more events (para [0044], As shown in FIG. 4B, in step 413 of process 408, the calendar management platform 103 receives a request from a data source (e.g., a user device 101) to subscribe to a calendar service for receiving the data view. In step 415, the calendar management platform 103 also receives information relating to one or more devices configured to output the calendar information. The calendar information includes a plurality of calendar events as generated by various data sources. In step 417, to facilitate distribution of the calendar events, the calendar management platform 103 tags the calendar events for classification into one of a plurality of user groups. The tags may serve as specific data types or descriptors for referencing specific users).
Regarding to claim 4, Hubner discloses the method recited in claim 2, wherein the group-based communication channel is automatically set as a host for hosting the one or more events (para [0049], It is noted that the Coach 505 may also apply various settings to the event, including a priority level, urgency level, reminder setting or alarm, attachment, note, recurrence, etc. In this example, the Coach 505 applies a high priority setting (e.g., level 1) to indicate the priority respective to him and an urgency level indicator 517 of maximum for indicating the importance to all members of the TEAM group 510).
Regarding to claim 5, Hubner discloses the method as recited in claim 1, further comprising associating the channel calendar with the group-based communication channel by:
receiving a third request to access the group-based communication channel (para [0046], All parents are given the appropriate permissions (e.g., login, password, permissions) for accessing the online calendar 509 maintained by the Coach 505. The Parent 507, however, while having access to the online calendar 509 or an instance thereof typically employs a calendar application 511 integrated on his mobile device 503, which features its own interface characteristics, design features, etc.);
causing, based at least in part on the third request, display of the group-based communication channel, wherein the group-based communication channel includes a selectable control to add the channel calendar to the group-based communication channel (para [0047], respective calendar applications 509 and 511 feature different data types and/or formats for presenting specific activities on a calendar view, which in this case is a monthly data view. A data view in the form of a specific calendar entry for the Coach's 505 and Parent's 507 calendar application is also shown as data views 513 and 515 respectively. Data types, corresponding formats and file types for data views 513 and 515 are as follows, per Table 1); and
receiving, from within the group-based communication channel, a second selection of the selectable control (para [0053], Although the Coach 505 operates a different calendar application 509 than the parent, both subscribe to the calendar management service for enabling peer coordination of scheduled activities across user, group and application platforms. Hence, in accordance with the exemplary techniques presented earlier, updates to the online calendar 509 (games or practices) are posted to the Parent's 507 mobile phone calendar application 511);
Regarding to claim 6, Hubner discloses the method as recited in claim 5, wherein, upon the second selection of the selectable control, the channel calendar becomes visible to the members of the group-based communication channel (para [0048], the Coach 505 updates a game event entry at his web based calendar application 509. The game time scheduled for Sep. 20th is adjusted from 6 PM to 5 PM, as represented in the data view 513 by the strikethrough time entry "6 PM." Once this change is submitted, calendar information representative of the event update is submitted to the calendar management platform 103 for distribution to the TEAM group 510).
Regarding to claim 7, Hubner discloses the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the channel calendar displays one or more upcoming events that are associated with the group-based communication channel and that are scheduled to occur within a predetermined time threshold (para [0048], the Coach 505 updates a game event entry at his web based calendar application 509. The game time scheduled for Sep. 20th is adjusted from 6 PM to 5 PM, as represented in the data view 513 by the strikethrough time entry "6 PM." Once this change is submitted, calendar information representative of the event update is submitted to the calendar management platform 103 for distribution to the TEAM group 510).
Claims 8-14 are written in computer-readable media and contain the same limitations found in claims 1-7 above, therefore, are rejected by the same rationale.
Regarding to claims 15-20, Hubner discloses a system comprising: memory; one or more processors; and one or more computer executable instructions stored in the memory and executable by the one or more processors (see figure 6, Processor 603, Main Memory 605) to perform the operations described in claims 1-5 and 7 above, therefore, are rejected by the same rationale.
Response to Arguments/Amendment
7. Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
I. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claim invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea) without significantly more. (See details above).
In response to the Applicant’s arguments that the features “automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel” and “automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client” provide technical benefits and advantages, which improve the functioning of various computing devices, including user devices associated with users and server devices associated with the group-based communication system, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that the features “automatically rendering, within a user interface that is displayed on a client of the member and that is associated with the group-based communication channel” and “automatically rendering, within the user interface that is displayed on the client” are additional elements and are recited at a high level of generality. These elements amount to gathering and displaying data over a network and are well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely genetic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
Moreover, these additional elements do not provide any improvements to the technology, improvements to the functioning of the computer, the processor, the memory, improvement to the user interface, or other technology. They just merely used as general means for collecting, displaying data and performing the abstract idea. They do not recite a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claims, and do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing.
Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible.
According, the 101 rejection is maintained.
II. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 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. New ground of 103 rejection described above.
Conclusion
8. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
9. Claims 1-20 are rejected.
10. The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Mori et al. (US 2009/0255153) disclose method for providing an improved group calendar. Information is received from a central server. A group is generated based on the information. The group is provided in the group calendar interface.
Aaron (US 9,002,328) discloses an electronic calendar is provided to a user that receives a request to schedule an event from the user. A plurality of events are scheduled based on the request to schedule an event and the obtained additional information.
Horvitz et al. (US 7,644,144) disclose a system for optimizing the value of communications between communicating parties. The system includes a communication group manager that facilitates specifying policies, preferences and/or automated analysis of ideal communication channels, routing and/or scheduling in terms of communicating party groups that can be pre-populated clusters of communicating parties, assembled based on relationships (e.g., organizational), and/or assembled based on satisfying inclusion criteria (e.g., age, location, competence, communication history, meeting history).
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to examiner NGA B NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-6796. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7AM-5PM.
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, Beth Boswell can be reached on (571) 272-6737. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NGA B NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625 May 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights