DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is in response to the preliminary amendments filed 12/11/2024. Claims 2-15 are pending. Claim 1 is cancelled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/10/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Interview Summary
Examiner contacted applicants’ representative on 09/22/2025 to propose an Examiner's Amendment to expedite prosecution by addressing minor changes throughout the claim set for terminology consistency and to file an electronic Terminal Disclaimer in order to advance the prosecution of the application, however no agreement was reached. Examiner will proceed accordingly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-15 are objected as being allowable if claims overcome the Obviousness Double Patenting Rejection and Claim Objections.
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); and 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/forms/. The 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 2-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of the U.S. Patent No. 10,992,771. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claims 2-15 of the instant application and claims 1-20 of the U.S. Patent No. 10,992,771 is that the claims of the instant application discloses the scope of the invention to be broader than to the scope of the U.S. Patent No. 10,992,771.
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of the U.S. Patent No. 10,992,771. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claim 2 of the instant application and claim 1 of the U.S. Patent No. 10,992,771 is that the claims of the instant application are broader to the claims of the U.S. Patent No. 10,992,771.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of the U.S. Patent No. 10,992,771. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claim 9 of the instant application and claim 8 of the U.S. Patent No. 10,992,771 is that the claims of the instant application are broader to the claims of the U.S. Patent No. 10,992,771.
Claims Comparison Table
Instant Application:
18/750,635
U.S. Patent No. 10,992,771 B2
(common inventive entity and assignee)
Claim 2:
A computing-device implemented method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a computing device, comprising: associating, in a storage location, a plurality of unique verification identifiers with a Unified ID for a computing device; receiving a request from the computing device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the computing device; identifying with the host server a first unique verification identifier for the computing device; verifying the Unified ID by matching the first unique verification identifier for the computing device to one of the plurality of unique verification identifiers in the storage location; assigning an opt-out status for the computing device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID and the plurality of unique verification identifiers; receiving a subsequent request at the host server from the computing device; and processing the request based on the assigned opt-out status, the host server not storing a record of device activity related to the request.
Claim 1:
A method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, comprising: receiving at a host server a request for the Unified ID for the mobile device, the mobile device including a communication interface suitable for communicating over a voice or data network, the Unified ID being an identifier uniquely identifying the mobile device; identifying a unique first verification identifier for the mobile device; creating the Unified ID for the mobile device at the host server in response to the request; storing, via the host server, the Unified ID and the unique first verification identifier in a storage location, the stored Unified ID associated with the stored unique first verification identifier in the storage location; transmitting a copy of the Unified ID to the mobile device for storage on the mobile device; receiving a request at the host server from the mobile device for an opt-out status; verifying the Unified ID with the stored unique first verification identifier; and assigning, via the host server, the opt-out status for the mobile device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID.
Claim 3:
The method of claim 2, wherein the computing device is a mobile device.
Claim 1:
A method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, comprising: receiving at a host server a request for the Unified ID for the mobile device, the mobile device including a communication interface suitable for communicating over a voice or data network, the Unified ID being an identifier uniquely identifying the mobile device; identifying a unique first verification identifier for the mobile device; creating the Unified ID for the mobile device at the host server in response to the request; storing, via the host server, the Unified ID and the unique first verification identifier in a storage location, the stored Unified ID associated with the stored unique first verification identifier in the storage location; transmitting a copy of the Unified ID to the mobile device for storage on the mobile device; receiving a request at the host server from the mobile device for an opt-out status; verifying the Unified ID with the stored unique first verification identifier; and assigning, via the host server, the opt-out status for the mobile device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID.
Claim 9:
A non-transitory medium holding executable instructions for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a computing device, the instructions when executed by one or more processors on one or more computing devices causing the one or more computing devices to: associate, in a storage location, a plurality of unique verification identifiers with a Unified ID for a computing device; receive a request from the computing device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the computing device; identify with the host server a first unique verification identifier for the computing device; verify the Unified ID by matching the first unique verification identifier for the computing device to one of the plurality of unique verification identifiers in the storage location; assign an opt-out status for the computing device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID and the plurality of unique verification identifiers receive a subsequent request at the host server from the computing device; and process the request based on the assigned opt-out status, the host server not storing a record of device activity related to the request.
Claim 8:
A non-transitory medium holding computer-executable instructions for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, the instructions when executed causing at least one computing device to: receive at a host server a request for the Unified ID for the mobile device, the mobile device including a communication interface suitable for communicating over a voice or data network, the Unified ID being an identifier uniquely identifying the mobile device; identify a unique first verification identifier for the mobile device; create the Unified ID for the mobile device at the host server in response to the request; store, via the host server, the Unified ID and the unique first verification identifier in a storage location, the stored Unified ID associated with the stored unique first verification identifier in the storage location; transmit a copy of the Unified ID to the mobile device for storage on the mobile device; receive a request at the host server from the mobile device for an opt-out status; verify the Unified ID with the stored unique first verification identifier; and assign, via the host server, the opt-out status for the mobile device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID.
Claim 10:
The medium of claim 9, wherein the computing device is a mobile device.
Claim 8:
A non-transitory medium holding computer-executable instructions for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, the instructions when executed causing at least one computing device to: receive at a host server a request for the Unified ID for the mobile device, the mobile device including a communication interface suitable for communicating over a voice or data network, the Unified ID being an identifier uniquely identifying the mobile device; identify a unique first verification identifier for the mobile device; create the Unified ID for the mobile device at the host server in response to the request; store, via the host server, the Unified ID and the unique first verification identifier in a storage location, the stored Unified ID associated with the stored unique first verification identifier in the storage location; transmit a copy of the Unified ID to the mobile device for storage on the mobile device; receive a request at the host server from the mobile device for an opt-out status; verify the Unified ID with the stored unique first verification identifier; and assign, via the host server, the opt-out status for the mobile device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID.
Claims 2-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of the U.S. Patent No. 11,632,433. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claims 2-15 of the instant application and claims 1-20 of the U.S. Patent No. 11,632,433 is that the claims of the instant application discloses the scope of the invention to be broader than to the scope of the U.S. Patent No. 11,632,433.
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of the U.S. Patent No. 11,632,433. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claim 2 of the instant application and claim 1 of the U.S. Patent No. 11,632,433 is that the claims of the instant application are broader to the claims of the U.S. Patent No. 11,632,433.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of the U.S. Patent No. 11,632,433. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claim 9 of the instant application and claim 11 of the U.S. Patent No. 11,632,433 is that the claims of the instant application are broader to the claims of the U.S. Patent No. 11,632,433.
Claims Comparison Table
Instant Application:
18/750,635
U.S. Patent No. 11,632,433 B2
(common inventive entity and assignee)
Claim 2:
A computing-device implemented method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a computing device, comprising: associating, in a storage location, a plurality of unique verification identifiers with a Unified ID for a computing device; receiving a request from the computing device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the computing device; identifying with the host server a first unique verification identifier for the computing device; verifying the Unified ID by matching the first unique verification identifier for the computing device to one of the plurality of unique verification identifiers in the storage location; assigning an opt-out status for the computing device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID and the plurality of unique verification identifiers; receiving a subsequent request at the host server from the computing device; and processing the request based on the assigned opt-out status, the host server not storing a record of device activity related to the request.
Claim 1:
A computing-device implemented method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, comprising: receiving a request from the mobile device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the mobile device; identifying a unique first verification identifier for the mobile device; determining that the unique first verification identifier is associated with a plurality of Unified IDs for the mobile device in a storage location; linking the plurality of Unified IDs based on the determining; and assigning an opt-out status for the mobile device to the linked plurality of Unified IDs, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with each of the plurality of Unified IDs.
Claim 2:
The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a subsequent request for a resource at the host server from the mobile device accompanied by one of the linked plurality of Unified IDs; verifying the one of the linked plurality of Unified IDs that accompanied the request using the associated unique first verification identifier; identifying, at the host server, based on the verifying, the opt-out status for the mobile device; and processing the received subsequent request at the host server based on the opt-out status.
Claim 3:
The method of claim 2, wherein the computing device is a mobile device.
Claim 1:
A computing-device implemented method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, comprising: receiving a request from the mobile device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the mobile device; identifying a unique first verification identifier for the mobile device; determining that the unique first verification identifier is associated with a plurality of Unified IDs for the mobile device in a storage location; linking the plurality of Unified IDs based on the determining; and assigning an opt-out status for the mobile device to the linked plurality of Unified IDs, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with each of the plurality of Unified IDs.
Claim 9:
A non-transitory medium holding executable instructions for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a computing device, the instructions when executed by one or more processors on one or more computing devices causing the one or more computing devices to: associate, in a storage location, a plurality of unique verification identifiers with a Unified ID for a computing device; receive a request from the computing device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the computing device; identify with the host server a first unique verification identifier for the computing device; verify the Unified ID by matching the first unique verification identifier for the computing device to one of the plurality of unique verification identifiers in the storage location; assign an opt-out status for the computing device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID and the plurality of unique verification identifiers receive a subsequent request at the host server from the computing device; and process the request based on the assigned opt-out status, the host server not storing a record of device activity related to the request.
Claim 11:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium holding computing device-executable instructions for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, the instructions when executed causing at least one computing device to: receive a request from the mobile device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the mobile device; identify a unique first verification identifier for the mobile device; determine that the unique first verification identifier is associated with a plurality of Unified IDs for the mobile device in a storage location; link the plurality of Unified IDs based on the determining; and assign an opt-out status for the mobile device to the linked plurality of Unified IDs, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with each of the plurality of Unified IDs.
Claim 12:
The medium of claim 11, wherein the instructions when executed further cause the at least one computing device to: receive a subsequent request for a resource at the host server from the mobile device accompanied by one of the linked plurality of Unified IDs; verify the one of the linked plurality of Unified IDs that accompanied the request using the associated unique first verification identifier; identify, at the host server, based on the verifying, the opt-out status for the mobile device; and process the received subsequent request at the host server based on the opt-out status.
Claim 10:
The medium of claim 9, wherein the computing device is a mobile device.
Claim 11:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium holding computing device-executable instructions for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, the instructions when executed causing at least one computing device to: receive a request from the mobile device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the mobile device; identify a unique first verification identifier for the mobile device; determine that the unique first verification identifier is associated with a plurality of Unified IDs for the mobile device in a storage location; link the plurality of Unified IDs based on the determining; and assign an opt-out status for the mobile device to the linked plurality of Unified IDs, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with each of the plurality of Unified IDs.
Claims 2-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,021,936. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claims 2-15 of the instant application and claims 1-18 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,021,936 is that the claims of the instant application discloses the scope of the invention to be broader than to the scope of the U.S. Patent No. 12,021,936.
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,021,936. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claim 2 of the instant application and claim 1 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,021,936 is that the claims of the instant application are broader to the claims of the U.S. Patent No. 12,021,936.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 10 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,021,936. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claim 9 of the instant application and claim 10 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,021,936 is that the claims of the instant application are broader to the claims of the U.S. Patent No. 12,021,936.
Claims Comparison Table
Instant Application:
18/750,635
U.S. Patent No. 12,021,936 B2
(common inventive entity and assignee)
Claim 2:
A computing-device implemented method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a computing device, comprising: associating, in a storage location, a plurality of unique verification identifiers with a Unified ID for a computing device; receiving a request from the computing device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the computing device; identifying with the host server a first unique verification identifier for the computing device; verifying the Unified ID by matching the first unique verification identifier for the computing device to one of the plurality of unique verification identifiers in the storage location; assigning an opt-out status for the computing device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID and the plurality of unique verification identifiers; receiving a subsequent request at the host server from the computing device; and processing the request based on the assigned opt-out status, the host server not storing a record of device activity related to the request.
Claim 1:
A computing device-implemented method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, the method executed using at least one processor and comprising: receiving a request from the mobile device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the mobile device; identifying a first unique verification identifier for the mobile device that is anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information; associating the first unique verification identifier with a Unified ID for the mobile device in a storage location; and assigning an opt-out status for the mobile device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID.
Claim 6:
The method of claim 5, further comprising: receiving a subsequent request for a resource at the host server from the mobile device, the request accompanied by the Unified ID; verifying the Unified ID that accompanied the request using the associated unique first verification identifier or one of the additional unique verification identifiers; identifying, at the host server, based on the verifying, the opt-out status for the mobile device; and processing the received subsequent request at the host server based on the opt-out status.
Claim 3:
The method of claim 2, wherein the computing device is a mobile device.
Claim 1:
A computing device-implemented method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, the method executed using at least one processor and comprising: receiving a request from the mobile device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the mobile device; identifying a first unique verification identifier for the mobile device that is anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information; associating the first unique verification identifier with a Unified ID for the mobile device in a storage location; and assigning an opt-out status for the mobile device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID.
Claim 5:
The method of claim 2, wherein one or more of the plurality of unique verification identifiers includes anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information.
Claim 1:
A computing device-implemented method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, the method executed using at least one processor and comprising: receiving a request from the mobile device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the mobile device; identifying a first unique verification identifier for the mobile device that is anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information; associating the first unique verification identifier with a Unified ID for the mobile device in a storage location; and assigning an opt-out status for the mobile device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID.
Claim 6:
The method of claim 5, wherein the anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information is an email address, physical address and/or phone number.
Claim 2:
The method of claim 1 wherein the anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information is an email address.
Claim 3:
The method of claim 1 wherein the anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information is a physical address.
Claim 4:
The method of claim 1 wherein the anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information is a phone number.
Claim 9:
A non-transitory medium holding executable instructions for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a computing device, the instructions when executed by one or more processors on one or more computing devices causing the one or more computing devices to: associate, in a storage location, a plurality of unique verification identifiers with a Unified ID for a computing device; receive a request from the computing device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the computing device; identify with the host server a first unique verification identifier for the computing device; verify the Unified ID by matching the first unique verification identifier for the computing device to one of the plurality of unique verification identifiers in the storage location; assign an opt-out status for the computing device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID and the plurality of unique verification identifiers receive a subsequent request at the host server from the computing device; and process the request based on the assigned opt-out status, the host server not storing a record of device activity related to the request.
Claim 10:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium holding computing device-executable instructions for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, the instructions when executed by a processor causing at least one computing device to: receive a request from the mobile device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the mobile device; identify a first unique verification identifier for the mobile device that is anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information; associate the first unique verification identifier with a Unified ID for the mobile device in a storage location; and assign an opt-out status for the mobile device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID.
Claim 15:
The medium of claim 14, wherein the instructions when executed cause the at least one computing device to: receive a subsequent request for a resource at the host server from the mobile device, the request accompanied by the Unified ID; verify the Unified ID that accompanied the request using the associated unique first verification identifier or one of the additional unique verification identifiers; identify, at the host server, based on the verifying, the opt-out status for the mobile device; and process the received subsequent request at the host server based on the opt-out status.
Claim 10:
The medium of claim 9, wherein the computing device is a mobile device.
Claim 10:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium holding computing device-executable instructions for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, the instructions when executed by a processor causing at least one computing device to: receive a request from the mobile device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the mobile device; identify a first unique verification identifier for the mobile device that is anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information; associate the first unique verification identifier with a Unified ID for the mobile device in a storage location; and assign an opt-out status for the mobile device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID.
Claim 12:
The medium of claim 9, wherein one or more of the plurality of unique verification identifiers includes anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information.
Claim 10:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium holding computing device-executable instructions for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a mobile device, the instructions when executed by a processor causing at least one computing device to: receive a request from the mobile device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the mobile device; identify a first unique verification identifier for the mobile device that is anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information; associate the first unique verification identifier with a Unified ID for the mobile device in a storage location; and assign an opt-out status for the mobile device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID.
Claim 13:
The medium of claim 13, wherein the anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information is an email address, physical address and/or phone number.
Claim 11:
The medium of claim 10 wherein the anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information is an email address.
Claim 12:
The medium of claim 10 wherein the anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information is a physical address.
Claim 13:
The medium of claim 10 wherein the anonymized or hashed personally identifiable information is a phone number.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 7-9, and 13-15 are objected to because of the following informalities: lack of terminology consistency
Claim 2, line 4, recites “for a computing device” and should be changed to -- for [[a]]the computing device --.
Similar changes are suggested for subsequent claims.
Claim 2, line 11, recites “assigning an opt-out status” and should be changed to -- assigning [[an]]the opt-out status --.
Similar changes are suggested for subsequent claims.
Claim 2, line 15, recites “processing the request” and should be changed to -- processing the subsequent request --.
Similar changes are suggested for subsequent claims.
Claim 7, line 2, recites “receiving a subsequent request” and should be changed to -- receiving [[a]]the subsequent request --.
Similar changes are suggested for subsequent claims.
Claim 7, line 6, recites “relacing the one of the plurality of unique verification identifiers” and should be changed to -- relacing the determined one of the plurality of unique verification identifiers--.
Similar changes are suggested for subsequent claims.
Claim 8, line 1, recites “claim 7 wherein” and should be changed to -- claim 7, wherein --.
Claim 9, line 14, recites “identifiers” and should be changed to -- identifiers;--.
Claim 13, line 11, recites “claim 13, wherein” and should be changed to -- claim [[13]]12, wherein --.
Claim 15, line 1, recites “claim 14 wherein” and should be changed to -- claim 14, wherein --.
Appropriate correction is required.
In interpreting the currently amended claims, in light of the specification, the Examiner finds the claimed invention to be patentable distinct from the prior art of records.
Batni et al. (2007/0003046) discloses a computing-device implemented method for associating opt-out status to a unified identifier (“Unified ID”) for a computing device, comprising: associating, in a storage location, a plurality of unique verification identifiers with a Unified ID for a computing device; and receiving a request from the computing device at a host server for an opt-out status for tracking of the computing device.
However, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest identifying with the host server a first unique verification identifier for the computing device; verifying the Unified ID by matching the first unique verification identifier for the computing device to one of the plurality of unique verification identifiers in the storage location; assigning an opt-out status for the computing device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID and the plurality of unique verification identifiers; receiving a subsequent request at the host server from the computing device; and processing the request based on the assigned opt-out status, the host server not storing a record of device activity related to the request as set forth in independent Claim 2. The cited prior art does not teach or suggest identifying with the host server a first unique verification identifier for the computing device. The cited art does not teach or suggest verifying the Unified ID by matching the first unique verification identifier for the computing device to one of the plurality of unique verification identifiers in the storage location. The cited art does not teach or suggest assigning an opt-out status for the computing device to the Unified ID, the opt-out status stored in the storage location and associated with the Unified ID and the plurality of unique verification identifiers. The cited art does not teach or suggest receiving a subsequent request at the host server from the computing device; and/or processing the request based on the assigned opt-out status, the host server not storing a record of device activity related to the request. Thus, these are some of the reasons why the claims are allowable.
Similar limitations are present with independent claim 9. Therefore, Claims 2 and 9 are objected to be allowable because of the combination of other limitations and the limitations listed above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW WOO whose telephone number is (571)270-7521. The examiner can normally be reached on Telework 9:00AM-6:00PM | IFP M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, Wing Chan can be reached on 571-272-7493. 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.
/ANDREW WOO/
Examiner, Art Unit 2441
/WING F CHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2441