Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This Office Action is in response to the Amendment filed on March 10, 2026, which paper has been placed of record in the file.
2. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted March 10, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claim invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea) without significantly more.
Regarding independent claim 11, which is analyzing as the following:
Step 1: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim falls within any statutory category. See MPEP 2106.03. The claim recites a system related to social media postings. Thus, the claim is to a machine, which is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A, Prong One: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04, subsection II, a claim “recites” a judicial exception when the judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claim.
The claim recites a system related to social media postings. The claim recites the steps: establishing a link between user accounts associated with a social media application and an external application for a first user; detecting engagement with a social media posting associated with the social media application by the first user using their social media account, determining whether the engagement exceeds a predetermined positive or negative engagement threshold; and in response to determining that the engagement exceeds the positive engagement threshold: obtaining metadata associated with the engagement with the social media posting, under its broadest reasonable interpretation when read in light of the Specification, falls within “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas as they cover performance of managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between popple including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions.
The claim recites the steps of: establishing a link between user accounts associated with a social media application and an external application for a first user; detecting engagement with a social media posting associated with the social media application by the first user using their social media account, determining whether the engagement exceeds a predetermined positive or negative engagement threshold; and in response to determining that the engagement exceeds the positive engagement threshold: obtaining metadata associated with the engagement with the social media posting, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation when read in light of the Specification, covers performance of the limitations in the mind, can be practically performed by human in their mind or with pen/paper, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “a computer/processor/automatically”, nothing in the claim elements preclude the steps from practically being performed in the mind. The mere nominal recitation of generic computing devices does not take the claim limitation out of the Mental Processes grouping of abstract ideas. Thus, if a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas (concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III.
Therefore, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Step 2A, Prong Two: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception or whether the claim is “directed to” the judicial exception. This evaluation is performed by (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d).
The claim recites the additional elements of “communication circuitry configured to access a social media application”, “wherein the link is established automatically based on crawling and identifying user accounts on external application and social media application”, “configuring display for the user account associated with the external application using the obtained metadata” and “displaying on a user interface for the user account associated with the external application.” The claim also recites that the steps of “establishing a link between user accounts associated with a social media application and an external application for a first user; detecting engagement with a social media posting associated with the social media application by the first user using their social media account, determining whether the engagement exceeds a predetermined positive or negative engagement threshold; and in response to determining that the engagement exceeds the positive engagement threshold: obtaining metadata associated with the engagement with the social media posting, configuring display for the user account associated with the external application using the obtained metadata” and “displaying on a user interface for the user account associated with the external application” are performed by a control circuitry.
The additional elements “communication circuitry configured to access a social media application”, “wherein the link is established automatically based on crawling and identifying user accounts on external application and social media application”, “configuring display for the user account associated with the external application using the obtained metadata” and “displaying on a user interface for the user account associated with the external application” are mere data gathering, transmitting and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering, transmitting and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05. Moreover, these additional elements do not provide any improvement to the technology, improvement to the functioning of the computer, improvement to the communication circuitry/the user interface, they are just merely used as general means for collecting, transmitting, and displaying data. It is similar to other concepts that have been identified by the courts Gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques and displaying the result, TLI Communications, 823 F.3d at 612-13, 118 USPQ2d at 1747-48; Collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis, Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1742 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
Further, the steps of “establishing a link between user accounts associated with a social media application and an external application for a first user; detecting engagement with a social media posting associated with the social media application by the first user using their social media account, determining whether the engagement exceeds a predetermined positive or negative engagement threshold; and in response to determining that the engagement exceeds the positive engagement threshold: obtaining metadata associated with the engagement with the social media posting, configuring display for the user account associated with the external application using the obtained metadata” and “displaying on a user interface for the user account associated with the external application”, are recited as being performed by the control circuitry. The control circuitry is recited at a high level of generality. In the limitations “configuring display for the user account associated with the external application using the obtained metadata” and “displaying on a user interface for the user account associated with the external application”, the control circuitry.is used as a tool to perform the generic computer function of gathering, transmitting, and outputting data. See MPEP 2106.05(f). In limitations “establishing a link between user accounts associated with a social media application and an external application for a first user; detecting engagement with a social media posting associated with the social media application by the first user using their social media account, determining whether the engagement exceeds a predetermined positive or negative engagement threshold; and in response to determining that the engagement exceeds the positive engagement threshold: obtaining metadata associated with the engagement with the social media posting”, the control circuitry is used to perform an abstract idea, as discussed above in Step 2A, Prong One, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f). The additional elements recite generic computer components the control circuitry, a memory, and software programming instructions that are recited a high-level of generality that merely perform, conduct, carry out, implement, and/or narrow the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, the additional elements evaluated individually and in combination do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they comprise or include limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application such as adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea -- See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO), and the claim is directed to the judicial exception (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Step 2B: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole, amounts to significantly more than the recited exception i.e., whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, adds an inventive concept to the claim. See MPEP 2106.05.
The additional elements “communication circuitry configured to access a social media application”, “wherein the link is established automatically based on crawling and identifying user accounts on external application and social media application”, “configuring display for the user account associated with the external application using the obtained metadata” and “displaying on a user interface for the user account associated with the external application” were found to be insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A, Prong Two, because they were determined to be insignificant limitations as necessary data gathering and outputting. However, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra solution activity in Step 2A, Prong Two should be re-evaluated in Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05, subsection I.A. At Step 2B, the evaluation of the insignificant extra-solution activity consideration takes into account whether or not the extra-solution activity is well understood, routine, and conventional in the field. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the additional elements of “communication circuitry configured to access a social media application”, “wherein the link is established automatically based on crawling and identifying user accounts on external application and social media application”, “configuring display for the user account associated with the external application using the obtained metadata” and “displaying on a user interface for the user account associated with the external application” are recited at a high level of generality. These elements amount to gathering and displaying data over a network and are well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely genetic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the recitation of the control circuitry to perform limitations “establishing a link between user accounts associated with a social media application and an external application for a first user; detecting engagement with a social media posting associated with the social media application by the first user using their social media account, determining whether the engagement exceeds a predetermined positive or negative engagement threshold; and in response to determining that the engagement exceeds the positive engagement threshold: obtaining metadata associated with the engagement with the social media posting, configuring display for the user account associated with the external application using the obtained metadata” and “displaying on a user interface for the user account associated with the external application”, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer and insignificant extra-solution activity, which do not provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO).
Regarding independent claim 1, Alice Corp. establishes that the same analysis should be used for all categories of claims. Therefore, independent claim 1s directed to a system, is also rejected as ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101 for substantially the same reasons as independent method claim 11.
Regarding dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20, the dependent claims do not impart patent eligibility to the abstract idea of the independent claim. The dependent claims rather further narrow the abstract idea and the narrower scope does not change the outcome of the two-part Mayo test. Narrowing the scope of the claims is not enough to impart eligibility as it is still interpreted as an abstract idea, a narrower abstract idea.
Regarding dependent claims 2 and 12, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting wherein the external application in an OTT application, that fall under the category of Organizing Human activity and Mental process groupings of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 11. Moreover, the claim recites the additional elements the display associated with a media asset provided by the external OTT application is a scene from the media asset, which are mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 11 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 3 and 13, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting wherein the engagement with the social media posting by the first user relates to the first user’s selection of a screen saver…, that fall under the category of Organizing Human activity and Mental process groupings of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 11. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 4 and 14, the claims recite the additional elements receiving the first user’s selection of the screen saver…, configuring the display for the user account associated with the external application comprises displaying the image associated with the social media posting as either a screen saver…, which are mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 11 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 5 and 15, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting determining a genre preference by the first user based on the obtained metadata; searching for one or more media assets offered via the OTT application…, that fall under the category of Organizing Human activity and Mental process groupings of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 11. Moreover, the claims recite the additional element configuring the display for the user account associated with the external application comprises displaying the one or more media assets…, which is mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 11 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 6 and 16, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting determining that the engagement with the social media posting exceeds the predetermined negative threshold…, determining a genre of the social media posting associated with the engagement, that fall under the category of Organizing Human activity and Mental process groupings of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 11. Moreover, the claims recite the additional element configuring display for the user account associated with the OTT application …, which is mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 11 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 7 and 17, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting determining whether a topic of the search query is related to a topic of the social media posting …, that fall under the category of Organizing Human activity and Mental process groupings of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 11. Moreover, the claims recite the additional elements receiving a search query inputted by the first user into the external application…, displaying on a user interface associated with the first user’s account on the search application…, which are mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 11 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 8 and 18, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting ranking the search results based on obtained metadata, that fall under the category of Organizing Human activity and Mental process groupings of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 11. Moreover, the claims recite the additional elements receiving the search results in response to performing a search using a search engine…, displaying the search results in an order associated with the ranking…, which are mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 11 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 9 and 19, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting determining whether a topic of the search query is related to a topic of the social media posting…, eliminating a search result, from the search results responsive to the received…, that fall under the category of Organizing Human activity and Mental process groupings of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 11. Moreover, the claims recite the additional elements receiving a search query inputted by the first user into the external application…, which are mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05 (See claim 11 above). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 10 and 20, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting wherein the engagement detected with the social media posting is any one of selecting the social media posting, hovering over the social media posting, commenting on the social media posting, reposting the social media posting, retweeting the social media posting, liking or disliking the social media posting, gazing at the social media posting for a predetermined duration of time, or skipping over the social media posting, that fall under the category of Organizing Human activity and Mental process groupings of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 11. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Therefore, none of the dependent claims alone or as an ordered combination add limitations that qualify as significantly more than the abstract idea.
Accordingly, claims 1-20 are not draw to eligible subject matter as they are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more and are rejected under 35 USC § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carter (US 2021/0286705) in view of Pal (US 2025/0202849).
Regarding to claim 1, Carter discloses a method comprising:
establishing a link between user accounts associated with a social media application and an external application for a first user, wherein the link is established automatically (para [0002], techniques for dynamically linking social media reactions to actions performed by remote applications. A social media platform that provides a social media service may allow users of the social media platform to post content to the social media service, as well as comment on and express a reaction to content posted by other users. The social media platform associates reactions expressed by users of the social media platform with actions performed by the social media platform itself, or actions performed by remote applications that execute outside of and separate from the social media platform itself);
detecting engagement with a social media posting associated with the social media application by the first user using their social media account, wherein the social media posting includes an image, scene, or a video having a plurality of attributes (para [0032], In the example of FIG. 1, action management modules 122 receives an indication of content included in a post to a social media service. For example, a user of computing device 110A may interact with social media system 160 to post content to social media system 160. As used in this disclosure, content may refer to human readable data or human understandable data, such as text, images, videos, etc. UIC 112 may detect user input interacting with social media system 160. For example, UIC 112 may output, for display, a graphical user interface 114A associated with social media system 160, such as “home” page for a social media account associated with a user of computing device 110A. UIC 112 may detect user input creating content to be posted to the social media platform via a graphical user interface 114A or an audio interface);
determining whether the engagement exceeds a predetermined positive or negative engagement threshold (para [0040], For example, action management modules 122 may associate social media reactions with the one or more actions in response to receiving a threshold number of social media reactions to the content of the post or in response to the content being consumed by users of social media system 160 a threshold amount); and
in response to determining that the engagement exceeds the positive engagement threshold (para [0040], In some scenarios, receiving a threshold number of social media reactions or being consumed by a threshold amount may indicate that the content is popular enough to trigger one or more actions in another application):
obtaining metadata associated with the engagement with the social media posting (para [0041], Action management modules 122 may store an indication of the association between the social media reactions for a particular post and actions to be performed by the application module 117. For example, action management modules 122 may store data indicating the association in metadata for the post);
configuring display for the user account associated with the external application using the obtained metadata (para [0042], Social media module 126 of social media system 160 may output to a requesting device from devices 110, 116, an indication a post created by a user of computing device 110A that has been published to the social media platform of social media system 160. For example, computing device 110B may request, from social media system 160, content created by the user of computing device 110A. In response, social media module 126 may output, to computing device 110B and for display by computing device 110B, an indication of a graphical user interface 114B that includes content corresponding to one or more posts created by the user of computing device 110A); and
displaying on a user interface for the user account associated with the external application, the display configured based on the obtained metadata (para [0042], graphical user interface 114B includes a graphical element 132 (e.g., a text box, graphical icon, animated gif, etc.) indicative of a social media reaction. In the example of FIG. 1, graphical element 132 is indicative of an affirmative social media reaction indicating agreement with the content of the post and includes the text “I agree.”).
Carter does not disclose, however, Pal discloses:
wherein the link is established automatically based on crawling and identifying user accounts on external application and social media application, wherein the external application and social media application are separate applications (para [0064],The application manager may perform multifactor authentication by automatically providing information in the authentication message to the platform, following a link sent by the platform in the authentication message, etc. According to some embodiments, the application manager automatically performs multifactor authentication as necessary to continue using the new account; para [0055], …target recipient activity on the selected social media platform may be identified by querying the selected social media platform for information about an account associated with the target recipient. For example, target recipient activity may be determined by crawling social media content. Quantifying target recipient activity may include counting interactions involving the target recipient, determining a frequency of interactions on the platform by the target recipient, determining a latest interaction date on the platform, or otherwise determining any other summarization of target recipient activity; para [0056], Target recipient activity may in various embodiments be quantified by crawling content on the selected social media platform by any known web crawling algorithm beginning at a selected web page and recording information about interactions involving the target recipient. The selected web page to begin crawling from may in some instances be a web page including an interaction by the target recipient with the selected social media platform. For example, the selected web page to begin crawling from may be a web page the target recipient has visited, left a comment on, etc. According to some embodiments, a search for appearances of the target recipient's name or username may be used to quantify target recipient activity on the social media platform);
the display associated with a media asset provided by the external application (para [0030], the applications may not be installed on the user devices, rather the application manager may access the platforms 114a-114c via one or more websites or web-based interfaces; para [0032], application manager 136 provides a custom user interface by which the user interacts. The custom user interface may enable the user to communicate with other social media applications not associated with the application manager).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Carter’s to incorporate the features taught by Pal above, for the purpose of providing more effectiveness in collecting user information by crawling user accounts on external application and social media application. Since Carter discloses establishing a link between user accounts associated with a social media application and an external application, Pal discloses wherein the link is established automatically based on crawling and identifying user accounts on external application and social media application, as described above, therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the combination of Carter and Pal would have yield predictable results in collecting user accounts on external applications
Regarding to claim 2, Carter discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the external application in an OTT application and display associated with a media asset provided by the external OTT application is a scene from the media asset (para [0046], While described in the context of linking social media reactions to a bug tracking application, techniques of this disclosure may enable a computing system to link social media reactions to actions performed by any other type of application executing at a remote computing device that is distinct from the social media system. In some examples, the application may be a payroll application, calendar application, etc. For example, action management modules 122 may link social media reactions to a calendar application).
Regarding to claim 3, Carter discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the engagement with the social media posting by the first user relates to the first user’s selection of a screen saver or a wallpaper option for an image associated with the social media posting (para [0064], For example, application modules 226 (e.g., a social media client executing at computing device 210) may output the content as video data, image data, and/or text data to social media system 160, such that social media system 160 may publish the content to social media module 126).
Regarding to claim 4, Carter discloses the method of claim 3, further comprising:
receiving the first user’s selection of the screen saver or the wallpaper option, wherein the received selection includes a post ID associated with the social media posting and a user ID associated with the first user (para [0032], For example, a user of computing device 110A may interact with social media system 160 to post content to social media system 160. As used in this disclosure, content may refer to human readable data or human understandable data, such as text, images, videos, etc. UIC 112 may detect user input interacting with social media system 160); and
in response to receiving the first user’s selection, configuring the display for the user account associated with the external application comprises displaying the image associated with the social media posting as either a screen saver or a wallpaper, based on the received selection, on the first user’s account associated with the OTT application (para [0028], For example, UI module 120 may cause UIC 112 to output user interfaces 114 based on data UI module 120 receives via network 130 from social media system 160. UI module 120 may receive, as input from social media system 160 and/or action management module 122A, data (e.g., audio data, text data, image data, etc.) and instructions for presenting as user interfaces 114).
Regarding to claim 5, Carter discloses the method of claim 2, wherein configuring display for the user account associated with the external application using the obtained metadata further comprises:
determining a genre preference by the first user based on the obtained metadata (para [0069], Content analysis module 236 of action management module 222 may determine whether a post is associated with an action. For instance, content analysis module 236, in some examples, categorizes the content of the post into one or more topics or subjects);
searching for one or more media assets offered via the OTT application that matches the determined genre preference (para [0072], For example, content analysis module 236 may output, via UI module 220 and for display by output component 202, an indication of a graphical user interface that includes a search bar allowing a user of computing device 210 to search through a list of pre-defined topics); and
configuring the display for the user account associated with the external application comprises displaying the one or more media assets that match the determined genre preference as recommendations to the first user (para [0072], Content analysis module 236 may determine one or more topics of the content based on user input. In some examples, content analysis module 236 may output (e.g., for display via output component 202, a group of candidate topics. For example, content analysis module 236 may output, via UI module 220 and for display by output component 202, an indication of a graphical user interface that includes a search bar allowing a user of computing device 210 to search through a list of pre-defined topics).
Regarding to claim 6, Carter discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising:
determining that the engagement with the social media posting exceeds the predetermined negative threshold (para [0083], As another example, the content of a post may be associated with calendar application module 117B and action association module 238 may associate a reaction indicating a negative response to a post with an action to remove an event from the user's calendar that maintained by calendar application module 117B); and
in response to determining that the engagement exceeds the predetermined negative threshold:
determining a genre of the social media posting associated with the engagement (para [0069], Content analysis module 236 of action management module 222 may determine whether a post is associated with an action. For instance, content analysis module 236, in some examples, categorizes the content of the post into one or more topics or subjects); and
configuring display for the user account associated with the OTT application such that a media asset that matches the genre of the social media posting associated with the engagement is not recommended to the first user on the first user’s account associated with the OTT application (para [0072], Content analysis module 236 may determine one or more topics of the content based on user input. In some examples, content analysis module 236 may output (e.g., for display via output component 202, a group of candidate topics. For example, content analysis module 236 may output, via UI module 220 and for display by output component 202, an indication of a graphical user interface that includes a search bar allowing a user of computing device 210 to search through a list of pre-defined topics).
Regarding to claim 7, Carter discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a search query inputted by the first user into the external application, wherein the external application is a search application that is separate from the social media application (para [0072], For example, content analysis module 236 may output, via UI module 220 and for display by output component 202, an indication of a graphical user interface that includes a search bar allowing a user of computing device 210 to search through a list of pre-defined topics);
determining whether a topic of the search query is related to a topic of the social media posting with which the first user engaged (para [0072], Input component 204 may detect a user input selecting a topic and may output an indication of the user input (e.g., (x,y) coordinates). UI module 220 may receive indication of the user input, determine a topic that is displayed at a location of output component 202 corresponding to the user input, and output an indication of the selected topic to content analysis module 236); and
in response to determining that the topic of the search query is related to the topic of the social media posting with which the first user engaged, displaying on a user interface associated with the first user’s account on the search application, a) search results responsive to the received search query and b) the social media posting with which the first user engaged (para [0073], In such examples, content analysis module 236 may update the social media profile associated with the post created by the user of computing device 210 to include data indicating the topics of the post created by the user of computing device 210. In some examples, content analysis module 236 may output, to social media system 160, an indication of the topics of the post such that social media system 160 may store data indicating the topics of the post).
Regarding to claim 8, Carter discloses the method of claim 7, wherein displaying the search results on the user interface associated with the first user’s account on the search application further comprises:
receiving the search results in response to performing a search using a search engine associated with the search application (para [0035], For example, action management modules 122 may query bug tracking application module 117A for data about bugs tracked within bug tracking application module 117A);
ranking the search results based on obtained metadata (para [0020], For instance, in examples where application module 117A includes a bug tracking application, bug tracking application module 117A may be configured to add bugs to a database, add or update a bug description, change a priority level or ranking associated with a bug, or the like); and
displaying the search results in an order associated with the ranking (para [0020], remote computing device 116 may output (e.g., to social media system 160 and/or one or more of computing devices 110) data identifying one or more bugs, data about the bugs, data indicative of a group of actions bug tracking application 117A is configured to perform, and the like).
Regarding to claim 9, Carter discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a search query inputted by the first user into the external application, wherein the external application is a search application that is separate from the social media application (para [0072], For example, content analysis module 236 may output, via UI module 220 and for display by output component 202, an indication of a graphical user interface that includes a search bar allowing a user of computing device 210 to search through a list of pre-defined topics);
determining whether a topic of the search query is related to a topic of the social media posting with which the first user engaged (para [0072], Input component 204 may detect a user input selecting a topic and may output an indication of the user input (e.g., (x,y) coordinates). UI module 220 may receive indication of the user input, determine a topic that is displayed at a location of output component 202 corresponding to the user input, and output an indication of the selected topic to content analysis module 236); and
in response to determining that a) the topic of the search query related to the topic of the social media posting with which the first user engaged and b) that the engagement with the social media posting by the first user exceed the negative threshold (para [0083], Responsive to determining one or more actions that an application executing outside of social media system 160 is configured to perform correspond to the content of the post, action association module 238 associates at least one of the actions with one or more social media reactions to the content of the post… As another example, the content of a post may be associated with calendar application module 117B and action association module 238 may associate a reaction indicating a negative response to a post with an action to remove an event from the user's calendar that maintained by calendar application module 117B):
eliminating a search result, from the search results responsive to the received
search query, whose topic relates to the topic of the second social media posting (para [0083], As another example, the content of a post may be associated with calendar application module 117B and action association module 238 may associate a reaction indicating a negative response to a post with an action to remove an event from the user's calendar that maintained by calendar application module 117B).
Regarding to claim 10, Carter discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the engagement detected with the social media posting is any one of selecting the social media posting, hovering over the social media posting, commenting on the social media posting, reposting the social media posting, retweeting the social media posting, liking or disliking the social media posting, gazing at the social media posting for a predetermined duration of time, or skipping over the social media posting (para [0037], Examples of social media reactions include agreement of the content of a post (e.g., “I agree”, a smile, a head nod indicating affirmation, or the like), disagreement of the content of the post (e.g., “I disagree”, “No way”, a frown, a head nod indicating disapproval, or the like). In some examples, social media reactions include degrees of approval or disapproval, such as “I love this”, “I like this”, “I dislike this” or “I loathe this.” In some examples, user may express social media reactions via user comments (e.g., initial comment or edits to a comment) to a post, by selecting graphical elements (e.g., icons) that are associated with a post and represent respective social media reactions to the post, or by selecting graphical elements to share, repost, or report a post. A user input indicative of a social media reaction may be a direct input (e.g., via an input device, such as a keyboard or mouse) or an indirect input (e.g., facial expression or body language captured by a camera).).
Regarding to claims 11-20, Carter discloses a system comprising:
communication circuitry (see figure 2, communication unit 242) configured to access a social media application; and
control circuitry (see figure 2, Processor 240) configured to perform the method described in claims 1-10 above, therefore are rejected by the same rationale.
Response to Arguments/Amendment
8. Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
I. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claim invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea) without significantly more. (See details above).
In response to the Applicant’s arguments that the new features added to the claims “wherein the link is established automatically based on crawling and identifying user accounts on external application and social media application, wherein the external application and social media application are separate applications” the Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that the new features added are additional elements, which are mere data gathering, transmitting and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering, transmitting and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05.
Moreover, these additional elements do not provide any improvement to the technology, improvements to the functioning of the computer, the computing device, improvement to the external application/social media application, or other technology. They just merely used as general means for collecting and outputting data. They do not recite a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claims, and do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing.
Thus, even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application.
Further, the additional elements of “wherein the link is established automatically based on crawling and identifying user accounts on external application and social media application, wherein the external application and social media application are separate applications” are recited at a high level of generality. These elements amount to gathering and displaying data over a network and are well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely genetic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer and insignificant extra-solution activity, which do not provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible.
According, the 101 rejection is maintained.
II. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. New ground of 103 rejection described above.
Conclusion
9. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
10. Claims 1-20 are rejected.
11. The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Adibowo (US 2023/0267558) discloses methods and systems for receiving, by a social media management platform, an incoming message on a social media platform of a plurality of social media platforms, determining an enterprise of the plurality of enterprises that the incoming message is directed to, determining a class of the incoming message from a set of classes, generating, by one of a public relations (PR) bot and a social bot of the social media management platform.
Harris et al. (US 2017/0046355) disclose systems and methods of identifying social media influencers and providing location-based alerts based on social media content items posted to social media providers from monitored locations.
Park et al. (US 2012/0254152) disclose methods for optimizing social media are disclosed. Such methods may include identifying at least one keyword utilized for at least one webpage, identifying social media correspondence referencing the at least one keyword, analyzing content collected from the social media to determine a frequency of references to the at least one keyword and generating at least one report including information based on the analysis.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to examiner NGA B NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-6796. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7AM-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Beth Boswell can be reached on (571) 272-6737. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NGA B NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625 May 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights