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
This non-final office action is in response to the Application filed on 6/20/2024, which is a CON of 17/305,978 Filing Date 07/19/2021 with priority to PRO 63/130,260 Filing Date 12/23/2020.
Claim(s) 1-20 are pending for examination. Claim(s) 1, 8, 15 is/are independent claim(s).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-6, 8-13, 15-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims, 1-3, 6-8, 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,056,332. Claims 1-4, 8-11, 15-18 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims, 5, 10, 15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,583,779. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present claims appear to be a broader version of the allowed claims, see table below.
US Pat. No. 12,056,332
US App. No. 18/749423
1. A method comprising:
receiving, from a client device, an identification of a user identifier from among a set of user identifiers;
causing display of a chat interface at a client device in response to the identification of the user identifier, the chat interface including a menu element at a position within the chat interface, the menu element comprising a display of a set of tabs that correspond with a set of application categories, the set of application categories comprising a plurality of application categories;
receiving a selection of a tab from among the set of tabs, the tab corresponding with an application category from among the set of application categories;
curating a set of applications based on the application category of the tab and context information associated with the client device, the set of applications comprising a plurality of applications,
and the context information including location data
associated with the client device;
determining a ranking of the set of applications based on one or more ranking criteria, the one or more ranking criteria including a score associated with each application among the set of applications, the score based on a number of active users executing each application among the set of applications;
causing display of a presentation of the set of applications within the chat interface based on the ranking, the presentation of the set of applications comprising a plurality of icons that include identifiers associated with each application among the set of applications;
receiving an input that selects an icon from among the plurality of icons, the icon corresponding with an application that comprises an identifier; and
causing display of a notification within the chat interface, the notification including a display of the identifier of the application, and configured to launch the application identified by the identifier based on an interactive input that selects the notification.
1. A method comprising:
receiving, from a client device, an identification of a user identifier from among a set of user identifiers;
causing display of a chat interface at a client device in response to the identification of the user identifier, the chat interface including a menu element that includes a display of a plurality of tabs that corresponds with a plurality of application categories;
receiving a selection of a tab from among the set of tabs, the tab corresponding with an application category from among the plurality of application categories;
curating a set of applications that correspond with the application category and contextual data from the client device;
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the contextual data includes one or more of:
location data; temporal data; and
user session state data.
4. The method of claim 2, wherein the user profile data includes user profile data associated with the client device.
determining a ranking of the set of applications based on a ranking criteria; and
causing display of a presentation of the set of applications within the chat interface based on the ranking.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving an input that selects an application from among the presentation of the set of applications;
generating a notification that identifies the application based on the input that selects the application; and
generating a message to a user account associated with the user identifier, the message including the notification.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the receiving the selection of the tab includes:
receiving the selection of the tab from the client device associated with a user profile; and
wherein the curating the set of applications includes curating the set of applications based on the application category and the user profile associated with the client device.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the receiving the selection of the tab includes:
accessing user profile data responsive to the selection of the tab; and
wherein the curating the set of applications includes curating the set of applications based on the application category and the user profile data.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the curating the set of applications further comprises:
accessing user profile data associated with the identifier selected by the input; and
curating the set of applications based on the application category, the context information, and the user profile data, the user profile data including an application usage history.
3. The method of claim 2, wherein the user profile data includes user profile data associated with the user identifier.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
updating a user status based on the identifier of the application.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the curating the set of applications based on the application category of the tab includes:
accessing a collection of applications associated with the application category; and curating the set of applications from the collection of applications.
US Pat. No. 12,056,332
US App. No. 18/749423
1. A method comprising: detecting user selection, in a chat interface displayed at a display device of a computing device, of an application icon, the chat interface including a chat interface display session that displays a chat session between a plurality of users and the user selection being detected based on signals received from a touch screen of the computing device; retrieving, using one or more processors, a first category of applications and a second category of applications in response to the detecting of the user selection of the application icon; generating a media application interface within the chat interface, the media application interface being displayed concurrently with the chat interface display session, the media application interface being an extended interface that is expanded from a top, side, or bottom portion of the chat interface, and the media application interface concurrently displaying a selection mechanism and at least one of the first category of applications or the second category of applications, the selection mechanism comprising a game selector, a commercial selector, and a collective selector, and wherein first applications included in the first category of applications correspond to one or more gaming application characteristics and second applications included in the second category of applications correspond to one or more commercial application characteristics that are different from the one or more gaming application characteristics; detecting user selection of the game selector; responsive to the detecting user selection of the game selector, causing the media application interface to display the first category of applications; detecting user selection of the commercial selector; responsive to the detecting user selection of the commercial selector, causing the media application interface to display the second category of applications; detecting user selection of the collective selector; and responsive to the detecting user selection of the collective selector, causing the media application interface to display the first category of applications and the second category of applications.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the displaying of the first category of applications in the media application interface comprises displaying at least one of a group of data items comprising a game description, a game graphic element, a gaming characteristic, and a game launching indicia, and wherein the second category of applications displayed in the media application interface comprises a commercial description, a commercial characteristic, a commercial graphic element, and a commercial launching indicia.
5. The method of claim 4, further comprising: comparing the gaming characteristic with the commercial characteristic; ranking the first and second category of applications based on the comparing of the gaming characteristics and the commercial characteristics; and causing the media application interface to display the ranked first and second category of applications.
1. A method comprising:
receiving, from a client device, an identification of a user identifier from among a set of user identifiers;
causing display of a chat interface at a client device in response to the identification of the user identifier, the chat interface including a menu element that includes a display of a plurality of tabs that corresponds with a plurality of application categories;
receiving a selection of a tab from among the set of tabs, the tab corresponding with an application category from among the plurality of application categories;
curating a set of applications that correspond with the application category and contextual data from the client device;
determining a ranking of the set of applications based on a ranking criteria; and
causing display of a presentation of the set of applications within the chat interface based on the ranking.
10. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a first user profile, the first user profile comprising an avatar and a contact list; retrieving, using the one or more processors, a third category of applications and a fourth category of applications based on the first user profile, the third category of applications is associated with the game selector, and the fourth category of applications is associated with the commercial selector; and responsive to the third and fourth categories of applications, causing the media application interface to display the third and fourth categories of applications.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the receiving the selection of the tab includes:
accessing user profile data responsive to the selection of the tab; and
wherein the curating the set of applications includes curating the set of applications based on the application category and the user profile data.
3. The method of claim 2, wherein the user profile data includes user profile data associated with the user identifier.
4. The method of claim 2, wherein the user profile data includes user profile data associated with the client device.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rathod; Yogesh Chunilal US Pub. No. 2018/0309801 (Rathod) in view of Witkowski; Barak et al. US Pub. No. 2017/0277424 (Witkowski).
Claim 1:
Rathod teaches:
A method comprising:
receiving, from a client device, an identification of a user identifier from among a set of user identifiers [¶ 0084, 223] (SMS includes calling user id, device id, application id, one or more called users id(s), groups id(s)) [¶ 0206, 263-265, 340-341] (user id);
causing display of a chat interface at a client device in response to the identification of the user identifier, the chat interface including a menu element that includes a display of a plurality of tabs that corresponds with a plurality of application categories [¶ 0097, 128, 138, 146, 158, 176, 183, 200, 217-218, 223-226, 242, 528-236, 554] (Fig. 48, user device are presented with Chat Interface so they can communicate or converse with each other via staying on or selecting current tab);
receiving a selection of a tab from among the set of tabs, the tab corresponding with an application category from among the plurality of application categories [¶ 0162-163, 219-222] (tabs for calling and messaging);
Rathod does not appear to explicitly disclose “curating a set of applications that correspond with the application category and contextual data from the client device”.
However, the disclosure of Witkowski teaches:
curating a set of applications that correspond with the application category and contextual data from the client device [¶ 0034, 46, 73-75, 143-146, 170, 271-273, 277-278] (displaying on the client terminal of the user a message recommending at least one application not installed on the client terminal of the user which has been installed on the client terminal of the certain contact);
determining a ranking of the set of applications based on a ranking criteria [¶ 143, 182] (ranking); and
causing display of a presentation of the set of applications within the chat interface based on the ranking [¶ 0128] (present recommended applications).
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 user interface tabs in Rathod and the method of recommending applications in Witkowski, 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 application recommendation in Witkowski could be applied to the user interface in Rathod. Witkowski and Rathod are similar devices because each display ranked and sorted user interface data. 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, for “make it easier to perform the selection and activation” [Witkowski: ¶ 0031, 226].
ALTERNATE REJECTION:
Claim(s) 1, 8, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaccari; Andrea et al. US Pub. No. 2018/0296928 (Vaccari).
Claim 1:
Vaccari teaches:
A method comprising:
receiving, from a client device, an identification of a user identifier from among a set of user identifiers [¶ 0096] (user ID);
causing display of a chat interface at a client device in response to the identification of the user identifier, the chat interface including a menu element that includes a display of a plurality of tabs that corresponds with a plurality of application categories [¶ 0056, 102] (message interface includes chat);
receiving a selection of a tab from among the set of tabs, the tab corresponding with an application category from among the plurality of application categories [¶ 0008, 59, 80] (games tab, games could be a “category”);
curating a set of applications that correspond with the application category and contextual data from the client device [¶ 0060, 103-104, 108, 112, 126, 145] (context ID);
determining a ranking of the set of applications based on a ranking criteria [¶ 0042, 81-87] (relevance and ranking); and
causing display of a presentation of the set of applications within the chat interface based on the ranking [¶ 0093] (games tab comprises a list of one or more of the identified games presented in ranked order and, for each game, one or more message threads associated with the respective game presented in ranked order (as shown for example in FIG. 6B)).
Vaccari teaches all the elements of the claim, however some of these elements may by in different embodiments and use different terminology, for example game tab for “category”. 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 different embodiments of Vaccari and that the difference in terminology is an obvious variant.
ALTERNATE REJECTION:
Claim(s) 1, 8, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rathod; Yogesh Chunilal US Pub. No. 2018/0309801 (Rathod) in view of Avadhanam; Phani Bhushan et al. US Pub. No. 2013/0191397 (Avadhanam).
Claim 1:
Rathod teaches:
A method comprising:
receiving, from a client device, an identification of a user identifier from among a set of user identifiers [¶ 0084, 223] (SMS includes calling user id, device id, application id, one or more called users id(s), groups id(s)) [¶ 0206, 263-265, 340-341] (user id);
causing display of a chat interface at a client device in response to the identification of the user identifier, the chat interface including a menu element that includes a display of a plurality of tabs that corresponds with a plurality of application categories [¶ 0097, 128, 138, 146, 158, 176, 183, 200, 217-218, 223-226, 242, 528-236, 554] (Fig. 48, user device are presented with Chat Interface so they can communicate or converse with each other via staying on or selecting current tab);
receiving a selection of a tab from among the set of tabs, the tab corresponding with an application category from among the plurality of application categories [¶ 0162-163, 219-222] (tabs for calling and messaging);
Rathod does not appear to explicitly disclose “curating a set of applications that correspond with the application category and contextual data from the client device”.
However, the disclosure of Avadhanam teaches:
curating a set of applications that correspond with the application category and contextual data from the client device [¶ 0009-12, 19-25, 28-29, 44-45] (selected and ranked based on context information describing a location and type of motion of the user equipment, and/or a time that the ranking request was made, compared to context information describing the applications);
determining a ranking of the set of applications based on a ranking criteria [¶ 0009-12, 19-25, 28-29, 44-45] (selected and ranked based on context information describing a location and type of motion of the user equipment, and/or a time that the ranking request was made, compared to context information describing the applications); and
causing display of a presentation of the set of applications within the chat interface based on the ranking [¶ 0011] (displaying the ranked list to the user).
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 user interface tabs in Rathod and the method of application in recommending applications in Avadhanam, 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 recommending applications in Avadhanam could be applied to the user interface in Rathod. Avadhanam and Rathod are similar devices because each display ranked and sorted user interface data. 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 more easily find useful apps [Avadhanam: ¶ 0006].
Claim 2:
Witkowski teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the receiving the selection of the tab includes:
accessing user profile data responsive to the selection of the tab [¶ 0104-119] (contact information and/or activity information is gathered from multiple applications installed on the client terminal, Gathered activity information may include activity logs of the respective communication applications, for example, call logs and SMS logs, this gathered data could be considered a “profile”); and
wherein the curating the set of applications includes curating the set of applications based on the application category and the user profile data [¶ 0143, 182] (visual representation may denote a recommendation ranking, for example, the largest applications are the most recommended, decreasing in size as the recommendation is reduced).
Claim 3:
Rathod teaches:
The method of claim 2, wherein the user profile data includes user profile data associated with the user identifier [¶ 0009, 27-29, 35-36, 50, 55-576, 61-63] (profile data).
Witkowski also teaches: [¶ 0104-119] (contact information and/or activity information is gathered from multiple applications installed on the client terminal, Gathered activity information may include activity logs of the respective communication applications, for example, call logs and SMS logs, this gathered data could be considered a “profile”)
Claim 4:
Rathod teaches:
The method of claim 2, wherein the user profile data includes user profile data associated with the client device [¶ 0084, 141, 223, 537] (device ID).
Claim 5:
Rathod teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the contextual data includes one or more of:
location data [¶ 0253, 261, 322, 553] (user is presented with contacts and/or groups and/or one or more types of destinations and/or auto select contacts including contextual contacts based on analyzing contents of photo or video or audio, location of captured photo or user's location,);
temporal data; and
user session state data.
Witkowski teaches: [¶ 0075] (location as current context).
Claim 6:
Witkowski teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving an input that selects an application from among the presentation of the set of applications [¶ 0222] (a notification may be displayed indicating that activation of the user interface within the running application integrates the running application within the user interface);
generating a notification that identifies the application based on the input that selects the application [¶ 0243] (application icons available for interaction with the selected contact are marked or tagged with a notification based on the presence representation of the selected contact); and
generating a message to a user account associated with the user identifier, the message including the notification [¶ 0244, 269] (application notifies client 904 of the type of content being displayed).
Claim 7:
Rathod teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the identifier includes a group identifier that corresponds with a user group, the user group comprising a plurality of user identifiers [¶ 0084] (group ID).
Witkowski teaches: [¶ 0125] (group name, which could be an identifier).
Claims 8-20:
Claim(s) 8, 15 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 8 is a “system” claim and claim 15 is a “medium” claim, but the steps or elements of each claim are essentially the same.
Claim(s) 9, 16 is/are substantially similar to claim 2 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 10, 17 is/are substantially similar to claim 3 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 11, 18 is/are substantially similar to claim 4 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 12, 19 is/are substantially similar to claim 5 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 13, 20 is/are substantially similar to claim 6 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 14 is/are substantially similar to claim 7 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:
Suggesting applications:
Willett; Daniel et al. US 20170149703 NLP-based text interpretation and suggestion of full actions and/or applications based upon the received message;
Context ranking and recommendations:
Wantland; Tim et al. US 20200026395 Fig. 5-6 info from different applications; rank, historical input, chat, message, context, geographic location, score the generated suggested candidate.
Rodriguez; Adam et al. US 20180367484 suggested items for use with embedded applications in chat conversations.
Ranking different apps:
Gross; Daniel C. et al. US 20160360336 set of results from the multiple search domains and ranks these results based on scores generated from each search domain and cross-domain information.
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).
Conclusion
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