Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/22/2025 has been entered.
DETAILED ACTION
The following Non-Final office action is in response to application 18/765,629 filed on 12/22/2025.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 2, 6-11, 15-19, and 22-28 are currently pending and have been rejected as follows.
Response to Amendments
Rejections under 35 USC 101 are maintained and updated below. New rejections under 35 USC 103 are issued below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s 35 USC 101 arguments and amendments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive to overcome the rejection.
Applicant argues on p. 17-18 that the claims are mischaracterized at Step 2A, Prong 1 and do not include any elements reciting identifying and/or coordinating with influencers. Examiner respectfully submits that in describing the claimed solution on p. 20 of the Remarks, applicant points to Specification [0013], which illustrates the method of influencers using the claimed invention to be compensated when a social media user clicks through an influencers content and makes a purchase.
Applicant argues on p. 18-22 that the claims are eligible at Step 2A, Prong 2 because the additional element of “detecting a click-through event” covers a particular solution to a problem in electronic commerce technology, as explained in applicant’s specification at [0013]. Examiner respectfully disagrees.“performing click-through monitoring … by: upon an online content platform user device (i) viewing and interacting with the online content posted … and (ii) being directed from the online content platform to the online resource, via the link included in the online content, based on the interacting, detecting a click-through event from the online content platform user device based on web data associated with the online content platform accessed over the electronic network;”
The claimed features describe ordinary hyperlink behavior, which directs a user when clicking a link. The click-through event detected through use of HTTP data and use of HTTP data for sales and commission data is also generally applying the abstract idea to a particular technological environment because it reads broadly as data gathering, monitoring, and storing. The claimed automated completion action responsive to a performed task status also does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because mere automation of an abstract idea is not an improvement to a computer or technology.
Applicant argues on p. 22-26 that the claimed invention has additional elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because the claims recite features that are necessarily rooted in computer technology and have no pre-computer analogue, similar to DDR. Examiner respectfully disagrees.DDR addressed an Internet-centric challenge. In DDR, the solution was found necessarily rooted in computer technology, because it could have not been performed otherwise, as there was "[...] no possibility that by walking up to this kiosk, the customer will be suddenly and completely transported outside the warehouse store and relocated to a separate physical venue associated with the third-party - the analog of what ordinarily occurs in "cyberspace" after the simple click of a hyperlink - where that customer could purchase a cruise package without any indication that they were previously browsing the aisles of the warehouse store, and without any need to "return" to the aisles of the store after completing the purchase" (see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotelsn.com, LP 113 USPQ2d 1097, No. 2013-1505, 2014 BL 342453, 773 F.3d 1245 page 1106 mid-4). DDR required a particular hybrid web page that combines visual “look and feel” elements from the host website and product information from the third-party merchant's website related to the clicked advertisement. In contrast, the present claim’s language is routine behavior of a link directing a user to an online resource, monitoring, detecting, and logging that routine behavior, and triggering a completion action. Further, lack of pre-computer/internet is not determinative for patent eligibility.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s prior art arguments and amendments have been fully considered but they are moot in light of the newly cited Laliberte reference.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-2, 6-11, 15-19, and 22-28 are clearly drawn to at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter recited in 35 U.S.C. 101 (method, system and non-transitory computer readable medium). Claims 1-2, 6-11, 15-19, and 22-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without integrating the abstract idea into a practical application or amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding Step 1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (‘2019 PEG”), Claims 1-2, 5-9, and 22-28 are directed toward the statutory category of a process (reciting a “method). Claims 10-11, 15-18 are directed toward the statutory category of a machine (reciting a “system”). Claim 19 is directed toward the statutory category of an article of manufacturer (reciting a “non-transitory computer readable medium”).
Regarding Step 2A, prong 1 of the 2019 PEG, Claims 1, 10 and 19 are directed to an abstract idea by reciting receiving, for each of a plurality of users, a plurality of rules associated with a completion of an online content posting operation, wherein the plurality of rules are different among the plurality of users and the plurality of rules, for each user, specify one or more online content platforms on which online content is to be posted for viewing over an electronic network; automatically configuring a task set specific to each of the plurality of users based on the plurality of rules, the task set including one or more online content posting tasks to each of the one or more online content platforms specified by the plurality of rules, and criteria associated with the one or more online content posting tasks, to be performed to complete the online content posting operation; automatically implementing online content posting operation completion monitoring for each of the plurality of users based on the automatically configured task set specific to each of the plurality of users by: identifying, for each of the plurality of users and from the automatically configured task set specific to each of the plurality of users, the one or more online content platforms to which online content of the respective user is to be posted; […] determining (i) the online content posting task performed corresponds to one of the one or more online content posting tasks included in the task set specific to the one of the plurality of users and (ii) the new online content complies with the criteria associated with the one of the one or more online content posting tasks; and updating a status of the completion of the online content posting operation for the one of the plurality of users based on the determining; […] and further based on the web data, identifying and storing, in association with the respective user of the plurality of users, item interaction data representing interaction of the online content platform user device with the item at the online resource resulting from the click-through event; and in response to determining each of the one or more online content posting tasks included in the task set specific to any one of the plurality of users has been performed based on the status, automatically initiating a completion action in association with the respective one of the plurality of users, wherein the completion action is based in part on the item interaction data stored in association with the respective one of the plurality of users. (Example claim 1).
The claims recite steps involving receiving rules, configuring tasks for users based on the rules, accessing and monitoring content platforms to detect performance of task, determining compliance, and initiating a completion action, which are certain methods of organizing human activity such as managing interactions and commercial interactions. Applicant’s specification identifies the problem the invention sets out to solve in [0014]-[0015] as brands being unable to find the best influencer for a new product and solving this problem with “a collaboration system … that allows brands to identify influencers in advance of mass production, and to coordinate with those influencers to engage in marketing for virtual retail operations.” By this evidence, the claims recite a type of managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
Regarding Step 2A, prong 2 of the 2019 PEG, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims (the judicial exception and the additional elements such as at least one processor; and at least one storage device; accessing, over the electronic network, the one or more online content platforms identified for each of the plurality of users to monitor for online content generated and posted to the one or more online content platforms by a plurality of devices associated with the plurality of users, wherein the online content generated and posted includes an item and a link to an online resource associated with the item; detecting a performance of an online content posting task by one of the plurality of users based on detecting, via the accessing, new online content generated and posted by a device, from the plurality of devices, associated with the one of the plurality of users to an online content platform, from the one or more online content platforms; performing click-through monitoring of the online content generated and posted to the one or more online content platforms by the plurality of devices by: upon an online content platform user device (i) viewing and interacting with the online content posted to the online content platform over the electronic network and (ii) being directed from the online content platform to the online resource, via the link included in the online content, based on the interacting, detecting a click-through event from the online content platform user device based on web data associated with the online content platform accessed over the electronic network;) are not an improvement to a computer or a technology, the claims do not apply the judicial exception with a particular machine, the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing nor do the claims apply the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment such that the claims as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (see MPEP §§ 2106.05(a-c, e)).
Dependent claims 2, 6-9, 11, 15-18, and 22-28 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the limitations recite 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).
Regarding Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, the additional elements have been considered above in Step 2A Prong 2. The claim limitations do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are directed to limitations referenced in MPEP 2106.05I.A. that are not enough to qualify as significantly more when recited in a claim with an abstract idea because the limitations recite 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).
Applicant's claims mimic conventional, routine, and generic computing by their similarity to other concepts already deemed routine, generic, and conventional [Berkheimer Memorandum, Page 4, item 2] by the following [MPEP § 2106.05(d) Part (II)]. The claims recite steps like: “Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data,” Symantec, “Performing repetitive calculations,” Flook, and “storing and retrieving information in memory,” Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc. (citations omitted), by performing steps of “receiving” rules, “automatically configuring” a task set, “automatically implementing content posting completion monitoring,” “identifying” and “accessing” data platforms, “detecting” performance, “determining” compliance, “updating” a status, “performing” click-through monitoring, “detecting” a click-through event, “identifying and storing” item interaction data, and “initiating” a completion action (example Claim 1).
By the above, the claimed computing “call[s] for performance of the claimed information collection, analysis, and display functions ‘on a set of generic computer components' and display devices” [Elec. Power Group, 830 F.3d at 1355] operating in a “normal, expected manner” [DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d at 1245, 1258 (Fed. Cir. 2014)].
Conclusively, Applicant's invention is patent-ineligible. When viewed both individually and as a whole, Claims 1-2, 6-11, 15-19, and 22-28 are directed toward an abstract idea without integration into a practical application and lacking an inventive concept.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6-11, 16-19, 22-24, 26, and 28 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of
Haaland et al., US 20180204243 A1, cite no. 28 on IDS filed 9/26/2024, hereinafter Haaland, in view of
Laliberte, US 20160359957 A1, hereinafter Laliberte. As per,
Claims 1, 10, 19
Haaland teaches
A computer-implemented method comprising: /
A system comprising: at least one processor; and at least one storage device storing instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising: /
At least one non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions which, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising: (Haaland fig. 2; [0075]-[0076])
[…];
automatically configuring a task set specific to each of the plurality of users based on the plurality of rules, the task set including one or more online content posting tasks to each of the one or more online content platforms specified by the plurality of rules, and criteria associated with the one or more online content posting tasks, to be performed to complete the online content posting operation; (Haaland [0030] “groups may be assembled automatically to meet a given demographic. An advertiser may list their demographic … The advertising platform may assemble several influencers into a group that may cover the targeted demographic;” [0031] “The groups may be paid using various payment options. In one option, each influencer may be paid individually for their contributions. In such an option, each influencer may be paid for each post, conversion, or other performance metric” note the automatic configuration of a content posting task set to reach a target demographic; note the individual influencers being paid individually based on their contributions and a performance metric)
automatically implementing online content posting operation completion monitoring for each of the plurality of users based on the automatically configured task set specific to each of the plurality of users by: identifying, for each of the plurality of users and from the automatically configured task set specific to each of the plurality of users, the one or more online content platforms to which online content of the respective user is to be posted; (Haaland [0052] “Statistics or other information may be provided for individual influencers. Such information may include the influencer's name or handle, their followers;” [0087] “an application programming interface 242 may be available for collecting information about activities on the social media network 238. Such information may include analytics that may be used to identify posts made by influencers 240 as well as the responses or reactions to those posts” note the system containing the influencer’s information such as their handle and followers and identifying their content posted to social media platforms. A social media handle is unique to each social media platform. As such, Haaland’s system identifies the content platform specific to a user performing a task)
accessing, over the electronic network, the one or more online content platforms identified for each of the plurality of users to monitor for online content generated and posted to the one or more online content platforms by a plurality of devices associated with the plurality of users, wherein the online content generated and posted includes an item and a link to an online resource associated with the item; (Haaland fig. 2 noting the network in communication with the social media platforms, the performance analysis system, the system and access platform; [0086] “Various social media platforms 234 may be the platforms on which influencers 240 may engage with other users and may share content as part of an advertising campaign; [0087] “A social media network 238 may operate on a hardware platform 236, and may host the influencers 240. In many cases, an application programming interface 242 may be available for collecting information about activities on the social media network 238. Such information may include analytics that may be used to identify posts made by influencers 240;” [0088] “A performance analysis system 244 may be an analytics platform which may gather performance metrics about influencer activities on a social media network” noting the performance analysis system gathering influencers performance metrics from a social media network; [0089] “A typical device 256 for accessing the various platforms may be a desktop or portable device, although many other devices may also be used;” [0048] “One tracking mechanism may be to use a customized Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or Uniform Resource Locator (URL) in various collateral. The customized URI or URL may send a consumer from an advertisement by an influencer into a landing page or other location that may be tracked. Because each URI or URL may be different for each influencer, the performance of individual influencers may be monitored and measured.” Note the accessing of the URL tracked; [0112] noting the collateral corresponding to products/items)
detecting a performance of an online content posting task by one of the plurality of users based on detecting, via the accessing, new online content generated and posted by a device, from the plurality of devices, associated with the one of the plurality of users to an online content platform, from the one or more online content platforms; (Haaland [0088] “performance analysis system 244 may be an analytics platform which may gather performance metrics about influencer activities on a social media network” note the performance analysis)
determining (i) the online content posting task performed corresponds to one of the one or more online content posting tasks included in the task set specific to the one of the plurality of users and (ii) the new online content complies with the criteria associated with the one of the one or more online content posting tasks; and (Haaland [0106] “The performance goals may be any metric that may define success for a campaign. A performance goal may be as simple as the number of posts, or may include items like the number of views, responses, clicks, conversions, email collected, sales completed … the performance goals may be something that may be tracked using an analytics system” noting the analytics system determining if a performance goal is met corresponding to determining the content task is performed and complies with the task criteria)
updating a status of the completion of the online content posting operation for the one of the plurality of users based on the determining; (Haaland [0088] “A performance analyzer 252 may analyze and aggregate data, which may be made available through an application programming interface 254” noting the performance statistics published through an API)
performing click-through monitoring of the online content generated and posted to the one or more online content platforms by the plurality of devices by: upon an online content platform user device (i) viewing and interacting with the online content posted to the online content platform over the electronic network and (ii) being directed from the online content platform to the online resource, via the link included in the online content, based on the interacting, detecting a click-through event from the online content platform user device based on web data associated with the online content platform accessed over the electronic network; and (Haaland [0048] “One tracking mechanism may be to use a customized Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or Uniform Resource Locator (URL) in various collateral. The customized URI or URL may send a consumer from an advertisement by an influencer into a landing page or other location that may be tracked. Because each URI or URL may be different for each influencer, the performance of individual influencers may be monitored and measured.” Note the accessing of the URL tracked)
further based on the web data, identifying and storing, in association with the respective user of the plurality of users, item interaction data representing interaction of the online content platform user device with the item at the online resource resulting from the click-through event; and (Haaland [0106] “A performance goal may be … the number of views … clicks … sales completed … the performance goals may be something that may be tracked using an analytics system.” Noting the tracking of clicks, views, and sales completed corresponding to the stored item interaction data resulting from the clickthrough event)
in response to determining each of the one or more online content posting tasks included in the task set specific to any one of the plurality of users has been performed based on the status, automatically initiating a completion action in association with the respective one of the plurality of users, wherein the completion action is based in part on the item interaction data stored in association with the respective one of the plurality of users. (Haaland [0031] “each influencer may be paid individually for their contributions. In such an option, each influencer may be paid for each post, conversion, or other performance metric” note the influencer paid in response to the completion of the data operation)
Haaland does not explicitly teach, Laliberte however in the analogous art of marketing campaign management teaches
receiving, for each of a plurality of users, a plurality of rules associated with a completion of an online content posting operation, wherein the plurality of rules are different among the plurality of users and the plurality of rules, for each user, specify one or more online content platforms on which online content is to be posted for viewing over an electronic network; (Laliberte Abstract “a graphical user interface (GUI) is rendered on each system users' personal communication device. The GUI produces a content selection function selecting, under user operation, user content for sharing, and a sharing platform selection function selecting, under user operation, one or more sharing platforms;” [0046] “the user module 102 comprises a user content upload engine 122 for uploading user content and preferences/selections to a user database 124” note the plurality of system users and each user specifying the sharing platforms; note the individual user preferences/selections corresponding to the rules)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haaland’s marketing management system to include receiving rules and which platform content is to be posted on in view of Laliberte in an effort to customize and control applied to the content shared to each platform (see Laliberte ¶ [0076] & MPEP 2143G).
Claims 2, 11
Haaland teaches
wherein the plurality of rules received for each of the plurality of users include one or more of a number, a type, or content media of the online content to be generated and posted to each of the one or more online content platforms by the respective user. (Haaland [0106] “ The performance goals may be any metric that may define success for a campaign. A performance goal may be as simple as the number of posts, or may include items like the number of views, responses, clicks, conversions, email collected, sales completed, downloads, or some other metric” noting the number of posts)
Claim 6
Haaland teaches
prior to detecting the performance of the online content posting task, receiving, from the device of the one of the plurality of users, the new online content as part of a request for approval for posting; automatically analyzing the new online content based on the task set specific to the one of the plurality of users to evaluate compliance with the criteria associated with the one of the one or more online content posting tasks; and providing feedback to the device of the one of the plurality of users based on the analyzing. (Haaland [0036] “a lead influencer or group manager may manage the other influencers by scheduling the campaign, reminding group members when to post items, analyze the performance of the group against campaign goals, and provide feedback to group members” noting the analysis and providing of feedback to the group members)
Claims 7, 16
Haaland teaches
wherein receiving the plurality of rules comprises: receiving, for each of the plurality of users, a data file including the plurality of rules, the data file being received in response to an approval of the plurality of rules by an entity and the respective user performing the online content posting operation for the entity. (Haaland [0084] “A group manager 230 may have mechanisms by which a manager of an influencer group may interact with the system 202 … the group manager 230 may have the ability to negotiate terms and conditions with an advertiser, including pricing and performance terms” noting the negotiation of terms and conditions between the manager of the influencers and the advertiser occurring through the system; [0088] note the performance analysis system)
Claims 8, 17
Haaland teaches
wherein each of the plurality of rules is proposed by one of the entity or the respective user. (Haaland [0082] “ The campaign manager 224 may have mechanisms for a marketing manager to change parameters or goals of a campaign” noting the campaign manager with the ability to alter the parameters)
Claims 9, 18
Haaland teaches
wherein the completion action includes generating and providing a completion alert to one or more of the respective one of the plurality of users or an entity the online content posting operation is being performed for. (Haaland [0106] “Campaign performance goals may be identified in block 404. The performance goals may be any metric that may define success for a campaign. A performance goal may be as simple as the number of posts, or may include items like the number of views, responses, clicks, conversions, email collected, sales completed, downloads, or some other metric;” [0031] “each influencer may be paid individually for their contributions. In such an option, each influencer may be paid for each post, conversion, or other performance metric” note the influencer paid in response to the completion of the data operation; see also [0049] for performance tracking)
Claim 22
Haaland teaches
wherein the criteria associated with the one of the one or more online content posting tasks includes posting a particular type of content having particular content substance to the online content platform, from the one or more online content platforms, and determining the new online content complies with the criteria associated with the one of the one or more online content posting tasks comprises: analyzing the new online content accessed via the online content platform; and determining the new online content is of the particular type of content and includes the particular content substance. (Haaland fig. 4 noting the defining of the campaign and the identifying of campaign performance goals; [0106] “Campaign performance goals may be identified in block 404. The performance goals may be any metric that may define success for a campaign. A performance goal may be as simple as the number of posts, or may include items like the number of views, responses, clicks, conversions, email collected, sales completed, downloads, or some other metric. In many cases, the performance goals may be something that may be tracked using an analytics system;” fig. 5 noting the display of performance statistics; [0031] “each influencer may be paid individually for their contributions. In such an option, each influencer may be paid for each post, conversion, or other performance metric” note the influencer paid in response to the successful completion of a campaign goal)
Claim 23
Haaland teaches
monitoring, for each of the plurality of users, performance data associated with the online content generated and posted to the one or more online content platforms. (Haaland [0088] “A performance analysis system 244 may be an analytics platform which may gather performance metrics about influencer activities on a social media network”)
Claim 24
Haaland teaches
wherein the plurality of users comprises a subset of a population of users identified based on historical performance data for the plurality of users, the historical performance data including outputs attributed to the plurality of users responsive to historical data generated and provided to the one or more online content platforms, the outputs including at least item sales data and online content platform performance data attributed to historical user online content posted by the plurality of users on the one or more online content platforms. (Haaland [0118] “the influencer's followers and the influencer's performance history may be analyzed to find an appropriate influencer” noting the historical performance of a user in prior campaigns considered; [0106] “A performance goal may be as simple as the number of posts, or may include items like the number of views, responses, clicks, conversions, email collected, sales completed)
Claim 26
Haaland teaches
wherein the item is purchasable at the online resource, and the method further comprises: tracking viewing of the online content posted to the one or more online content platforms by the online content platform user device and the interaction of the online content platform user device with the online content causing the accessing of the online resource by the online content platform user device via the link, receiving, as part of the item interaction data representing the interaction of the online content platform user device with the item at the online resource, an indication of a purchase of the item from the online store; and (Haaland [0048] “One tracking mechanism may be to use a customized Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or Uniform Resource Locator (URL) in various collateral. The customized URI or URL may send a consumer from an advertisement by an influencer into a landing page or other location that may be tracked. Because each URI or URL may be different for each influencer, the performance of individual influencers may be monitored and measured.”)
indicating, in the item interaction data stored in association with the respective user, the purchase of the item was driven by the viewing of and the interaction with the online content. (Haaland [0106] “A performance goal may be … the number of views … clicks … sales completed … the performance goals may be something that may be tracked using an analytics system.” Noting the tracking of clicks, views, and sales completed)
Claim 28
wherein automatically initiating the completion action in association with the respective one of the plurality of users comprises automatically initiating resource allocation to the one of the plurality of users for a resource allocation amount for online content posting operation completion included in the plurality of rules, the resource allocation amount based at least in part on the item interaction data stored in associated with the respective one of the plurality of users. (Haaland [0031] “each influencer may be paid individually for their contributions. In such an option, each influencer may be paid for each post, conversion, or other performance metric” note the influencer paid in response to the completion of the data operation)
Claims 15 and 27 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of
Haaland in view of Laliberte in view of
Root et al., US 20120150631 A1, hereinafter Root. As per,
Claim 15
Haaland teaches
prior to detecting the performance of the online content posting task, receiving, from the device of the one of the plurality of users, the new online content as part of a request for approval for posting; automatically analyzing the new online content based on the task set specific to the one of the plurality of users to evaluate compliance with the criteria associated with the one of the one or more online content posting tasks; and providing feedback to the device of the one of the plurality of users based on the analyzing, (Haaland [0036] “a lead influencer or group manager may manage the other influencers by scheduling the campaign, reminding group members when to post items, analyze the performance of the group against campaign goals, and provide feedback to group members” noting the analysis and providing of feedback to the group members)
Haaland / Laliberte do not explicitly teach, Root however in the analogous art of marketing campaign management teaches
wherein the feedback indicates noncompliance with the criteria associated with the one of the one or more online content posting tasks, the new online content is modified based on the feedback to enable compliance, and the new online content detected as part of the detecting the performance of the online content posting task is the modified new online content. (Root fig. 9; [0070] “Method 900 begins with a review of upcoming client events 902 and creation of posts about them 904. At steps 906, 908, and 910, an editor and an interactive producer review the created post. Next, at step 912, the social media partner handling the client business is asked for his or her review of the post. If the partner approves it, it is posted to a blog 914; if it is not approved, it is rewritten.” Noting the noncompliance and modification in response)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haaland’s marketing management system and Laliberte’s multiple online content platform assignments to include detecting and correcting noncompliant content in view of Root in an effort to provide a template for success (see Root ¶ [0030]; [0070] & MPEP 2143G).
Claim 27
Haaland / Laliberte do not explicitly teach, Root however in the analogous art of marketing campaign management teaches
wherein the feedback indicates noncompliance with the criteria associated with the one of the one or more online content posting tasks, the new online content is modified based on the feedback to enable compliance, and the new online content detected as part of the detecting the performance of the online content posting task is the modified new online content. (Root fig. 9; [0070] “Method 900 begins with a review of upcoming client events 902 and creation of posts about them 904. At steps 906, 908, and 910, an editor and an interactive producer review the created post. Next, at step 912, the social media partner handling the client business is asked for his or her review of the post. If the partner approves it, it is posted to a blog 914; if it is not approved, it is rewritten.” Noting the noncompliance and modification in response)
The motivation/rationale to combine Haaland / Laliberte with Root persists.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of
Haaland in view of Laliberte in view of
Haaland, US 20180150870 A1, hereinafter Lynn. As per,
Claim 25
Haaland discloses estimating future performance of influencers [0057]. Haaland / Laliberte do not explicitly teach, however Lynn in the analogous art of marketing campaign management teaches
wherein identifying the subset of the population of users comprises: executing a plurality of algorithms on the historical performance data of the population of users, including the item sales data and the online content platform performance data, to (i) identify, from the population, the subset of the population of users and (ii) determine an estimated number of views and sales to be generated for one or more proposed campaigns that include one or more users in the identified subset, (Lynn [0085] “A performance analyzer 234 may track various performance metrics about campaigns and influencers, and may populate the various databases with campaign histories, performance summaries, and other data” note the populating of performance summaries based on campaign histories for influencers; [0132] “Tracking may begin in block 730. As activity indicators may be received in block 732, the indicators may be added to a tracking database in block 734. Any statistics that may be derived from such data may be updated in block 736.” Note the tracking and derivation of statistic from the tracked data)
wherein the plurality of algorithms include: a first algorithm executed to identify one or more users among the population of users with a greatest percentage increase in sales for one or more predetermined item types over a first predetermined time period, and a second algorithm executed to identify one or more users among the population of users with a highest persistent sales for the one or more predetermined item types over a second predetermined time period. (Lynn [0062] “A leaderboard 112 may be presented that may show all of the other influencers 114 ranked according to performance. The rankings may be made based on a performance metric 126” note the leaderboard according to any performance metric)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haaland’s marketing management system and Laliberte’s multiple online content platform assignments to include calculating specific metrics to identify and measure influencer effectiveness in view of Lynn in an effort to assist influencers and brands improve their conversion rates (see Lynn ¶ [0004] & MPEP 2143G).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20080201225 A1; WO 2013155033 A1; Petrut, Reimagining the Living Room, 2016.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED EL-BATHY whose telephone number is (571)270-5847. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8AM-4:30PM.
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, PATRICIA MUNSON can be reached on (571) 270-5396. 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.
/MOHAMED N EL-BATHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624