Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Response to Election/Restriction filed 01/21/2026. Claims 1-28 are pending and have been examined.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/06/2024 was considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-28 in the reply filed on 01/21/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that all the groups of claims relate to purchasing items from a media stream. This is not found persuasive because the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification; the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 and 10-13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,831,960 in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559), herein Wang.
Application No. 18/807,129
U.S. Patent No. 11,831,960
1. A shopping interface for purchasing items on media, comprising:
1. A media sharing and communication system, comprising:
a user system including a user interface displaying items for purchase that allows a user to engage in a shopping experience seamlessly while interacting with said media,
said user system including software stored on non-transitory computer readable media that recognizes and tags purchasable items in said media, wherein said user system displays items for purchase when said media is paused or a button is toggled and allows said user to browse, navigate through displayed items, and select a desired item without any disruption to said media, and
the first user system including a first user interface having an input device and screen view that is generated by software stored on a memory device of the first user transmitter/receiver, the first user system including a user profile generator interface and a store section for shopping for products and listing products for sale, wherein said store section includes software that recognizes and tags items available to purchase in said media by analyzing images within the media for pixel values and gradients to compare to images of items available for sale in order to correctly identify the items,
and wherein said store section displays products for sale by a mechanism chosen from the group consisting of toggling a screenshot of the media such that items for purchase pop up and are displayed on the first user interface allowing the first individual user to select an item for purchase
However, the patented claims do not explicitly teach said user system including a one-click purchase function for securely storing payment and address information of said user on non-transitory computer readable media allowing for secure and efficient purchases.
In an analogous art, Wang, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches a user system including a one-click purchase function for securely storing payment and address information of said user on non-transitory computer readable media allowing for secure and efficient purchases. (Items from the video can be purchased using a “one-click” technique wherein address and payment information are stored, [0030], [0046], [0062].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the patented claims by a user system including a one-click purchase function for securely storing payment and address information of said user on non-transitory computer readable media allowing for secure and efficient purchases, as taught by Wang, for the benefit of enabling the user to more easily purchase items.
Claim 2 of the application corresponds to claim 1 of the patent.
Claim 3 of the application corresponds to claim 1 of the patent.
Claim 4 of the application corresponds to claim 1 of the patent.
Claim 5 of the application corresponds to claim 1 of the patent.
Claim 6 of the application corresponds to claim 1 of the patent.
Claim 7 of the application corresponds to claim 1 of the patent.
Claim 8 of the application corresponds to claim 1 of the patent.
Claim 9 of the application corresponds to claim 1 of the patent.
Claim 10 of the application corresponds to claim 2 of the patent.
Claim 11 of the application corresponds to claim 3 of the patent.
Claim 12 of the application corresponds to claim 4 of the patent.
Claim 13 of the application corresponds to claim 5 of the patent.
Claim 14 of the application corresponds to claim 6 of the patent.
Claim 15 of the application corresponds to claim 7 of the patent.
Claim 16 of the application corresponds to claim 8 of the patent.
Claim 17 of the application corresponds to claim 1 of the patent.
Claim 18 of the application corresponds to claim 10 of the patent.
Claim 19 of the application corresponds to claim 11 of the patent.
Claim 20 of the application corresponds to claim 12 of the patent.
Claim 21 of the application corresponds to claim 13 of the patent.
Claim 22 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,831,960 in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Jiang et al. (US 2024/0223862), herein Jiang.
Consider claim 22, the patented claims combined with Wang clearly teach said user interface allows said user to view said item.
However, the patented claims combined with Wang do not explicitly teach view said item in a 360 degree view.
In an analogous art, Jiang, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches view said item in a 360 degree view. (Figs. 5, 6: A 360-degree image of the product is displayed, [0080], [0081].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the patented claims combined with Wang by view said item in a 360 degree view, as taught by Jiang, for the benefit of providing the user with an improved visualization of the product.
Claim 23 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,831,960 in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Walters et al. (US 2021/0150621), herein Walters.
Consider claim 23, the patented claims combined with Wang clearly teach said user system
However, the patented claims combined with Wang do not explicitly teach view push notifications for allowing approval to protect against unapproved purchases.
In an analogous art, Walters, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches view push notifications for allowing approval to protect against unapproved purchases. (A push notification is sent to obtain approval the purchase, [0052].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the patented claims combined with Wang by view push notifications for allowing approval to protect against unapproved purchases, as taught by Walters, for the benefit of preventing unapproved purchases.
Claim 24 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,831,960 in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Bueno Lobl (US 2016/0125507).
Consider claim 24, the patented claims combined with Wang clearly teach said user system.
However, the patented claims combined with Wang do not explicitly teach geo tag purchases.
In an analogous art, Bueno Lobl, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches geo tag purchases. (The user is notified if they are near a geo-tagged item, [0055].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the patented claims combined with Wang by geo tag purchases, as taught by Bueno Lobl, for the benefit of alerting the user if they are near to a store which sells the desired item.
Claims 25 and 27 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,831,960 in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Pavlosky et al. (US 11,134,316), herein Pavlosky.
Consider claim 25, the patented claims combined with Wang clearly teach said item.
However, the patented claims combined with Wang do not explicitly teach said item is a service.
In an analogous art, Pavlosky, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches said item is a service. (The user may purchase tickets to an upcoming sporting event while watching a sporting event, col. 33 lines 42-56.)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the patented claims combined with Wang by said item is a service, as taught by Pavlosky, for the benefit of allowing the user to purchase services of interest.
Claim 27 of the application corresponds to claim 1 of the patent in view of Pavlosky col. 33 lines 42-56.
Claim 26 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,831,960 in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Pavlosky et al. (US 11,134,316) in view of Desmond et al. (US 2021/0019779), herein Desmond.
Consider claim 28, the patented claims combined with Wang and Pavlosky clearly teach said service.
However, the patented claims combined with Wang and Pavlosky do not explicitly teach said service is chosen from the group consisting of beauty services, haircuts, auto repair services, home repair services, healthcare services, and legal services and wherein said store section allows the first individual user to obtain, fill out, and submit intake forms.
In an analogous art, Desmond, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches said service is chosen from the group consisting of beauty services, haircuts, auto repair services, home repair services, healthcare services, and legal services and wherein said store section allows the first individual user to obtain, fill out, and submit intake forms. (The user may schedule an appointment with a doctor based on an offer presented in the video, [0119], [0120].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the patented claims combined with Wang and Pavlosky by said service is chosen from the group consisting of beauty services, haircuts, auto repair services, home repair services, healthcare services, and legal services and wherein said store section allows the first individual user to obtain, fill out, and submit intake forms, as taught by Desmond, for the benefit of easily scheduling an appointment for the selected service.
Claim 28 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,831,960 in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Ohliger et al. (US 11,432,046), herein Ohliger.
Consider claim 28, the patented claims combined with Wang clearly teach said shopping interface.
However, the patented claims combined with Wang do not explicitly teach access to a cloud-based website that allows a media content provider or user who creates content or advertising to monetize their content by having access to all sales that are created from the purchase of products or services from the shopping interface and crediting the media content provider or user with a percentage of sales.
In an analogous art, Ohliger, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches access to a cloud-based website that allows a media content provider or user who creates content or advertising to monetize their content by having access to all sales that are created from the purchase of products or services from the shopping interface and crediting the media content provider or user with a percentage of sales. (Content creators receive a percentage of the profits generated by the purchase of items in the media content, col. 9 lines 16-19, col. 21 lines 45-62.)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the patented claims combined with Wang by access to a cloud-based website that allows a media content provider or user who creates content or advertising to monetize their content by having access to all sales that are created from the purchase of products or services from the shopping interface and crediting the media content provider or user with a percentage of sales, as taught by Ohliger, for the benefit of incentivizing content creators to include purchasable items in the media content.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor (US 2021/0274260) in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559), herein Wang.
Consider claim 1, Taylor clearly teaches a shopping interface for purchasing items on media, comprising:
a user system including a user interface displaying items for purchase that allows a user to engage in a shopping experience seamlessly while interacting with said media, (Fig. 1: Fist user system 28 displays user interface 32 which includes a store section enabling the user to purchase products displayed in a playing media, [0031].)
said user system including software stored on non-transitory computer readable media ([0050]) that recognizes and tags purchasable items in said media, (Images of the media are analyzed to recognize the purchasable items and the items are tagged, [0031].) wherein said user system displays items for purchase when said media is paused or a button is toggled and allows said user to browse, navigate through displayed items, and select a desired item without any disruption to said media, (When the media is paused or a screenshot is toggled items available for purchase are displayed in the user interface, [0031], [0033], [0037], [0038].) and
said user system including a purchase function for securely storing payment and address information of said user on non-transitory computer readable media allowing for secure and efficient purchases. (The user may purchase a selected item using stored payment and address information, [0037]-[0039].)
However, Taylor does not explicitly teach said system for video distribution, clearly teaches a user system including a one-click purchase function for securely storing payment and address information of said user on non-transitory computer readable media allowing for secure and efficient purchases
In an analogous art, Wang, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches a user system including a one-click purchase function for securely storing payment and address information of said user on non-transitory computer readable media allowing for secure and efficient purchases. (Items from the video can be purchased using a “one-click” technique wherein address and payment information are stored, [0030], [0046], [0062].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Taylor by a system for video distribution, clearly teaches a user system including a one-click purchase function for securely storing payment and address information of said user on non-transitory computer readable media allowing for secure and efficient purchases, as taught by Wang, for the benefit of enabling the user to more easily purchase items.
Consider claim 2, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said items for purchase includes food. ([0043] Taylor)
Consider claim 3, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said items for purchase are gifted to an individual. ([0034] Taylor)
Consider claim 4, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said software is further defined as software that recognizes and tags items available to purchase in said media by analyzing images within said media for pixel values and gradients to compare to images of items available for sale in order to correctly identify the items. ([0031] Taylor)
Consider claim 5, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user system further includes:
a recording mechanism that records a desired portion of media upon activation by a first individual user who is not a content provider, the portion of media being less than a full media episode; (Fig. 1: Digital recording device 26 allows the first user to record portions of the media content, [0019], [0023], [0056] Taylor.)
a friend request mechanism for sending and receiving friend requests between users to be approved to receive and share media and wherein the friend request mechanism suggests friends who have similar interests of the first individual user, and wherein the friends are searchable by information chosen from the group consisting of name, user name, gamer tag, telephone, address, and email; (The user can send friend requests to suggested users or search for other users by name, username, gamer tag, telephone, address, or email, [0049] Taylor.)
a first user transmitter/receiver included in the user system that transmits the portion of media and a message generated by the first individual user regarding the portion of media to a second individual user who is not a content provider, (The recorded media portion and a message are transmitted to a second user, [0023], [0056] Taylor.) the user system including the user interface having an input device and screen view that is generated by software stored on a memory device of the first user transmitter/receiver, (User systems 14 include input devices and screens which display user interface 32 generated by stored software, [0030] Taylor.) the user system including a user profile generator interface (User interface 32 generates a user profile, [0044] Taylor.) and a store section for shopping for products and listing products for sale; (User interface 32 includes a store section, [0031].)
a confirmation mechanism that confirms that the second individual user is authorized to view the portion of media and a notification mechanism that notifies the first individual user if the second individual user is not authorized to receive the portion of media and notifies the second individual user that the portion of media cannot be received due to programming configuration subscribed to by the second individual user; (It is confirmed if the transmitted media is authorized to be viewed by the second user system and the first and second user systems are notified if the second user system is not authorized, [0027] Taylor.) and
a second user transmitter/receiver included in a second user system that receives the portion of media upon authorization of the second individual user; (Second user system receives the authorized media portion, [0023], [0056] Taylor.) the second user system including a second user interface having an input device and screen view that is generated by software stored on a memory device of the second user transmitter/receiver, (User systems 14 include input devices and screens which display user interface 32 generated by stored software, [0030] Taylor.) the second user system including a user profile generator interface (User interface 32 generates a user profile, [0044] Taylor.) and a store section for shopping for products and listing products for sale, (User interface 32 includes a store section, [0031] Taylor.) wherein said store section includes software that recognizes and tags items available to purchase in said media. (Images of the media are analyzed to recognize the purchasable items and the items are tagged, [0031] Taylor.)
Consider claim 6, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user system further includes a search mechanism that allows the first individual user and second individual user to search by keywords for media and products used in media. ([0040] Taylor)
Consider claim 7, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user system further includes a video recording mechanism that allows the first individual user to record a video of themselves and share the video with the second individual user. ([0041] Taylor)
Consider claim 8, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user system further includes an online betting module that allows the first individual user to place bets on sporting events and online games, and wherein a bet can be placed before or during the sporting events and online games, and including an age verification mechanism. ([0042] Taylor)
Consider claim 9, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user system further includes an online food ordering module that allows the first individual user to order food from food advertised in a commercial, food advertised in an online ad, and food shown in a media program, wherein the online food ordering module interacts with an existing food ordering and delivery platform, wherein the first individual user can gift food and delivery to another user, and wherein said online food ordering module includes software that recognizes and tags food available to order in said media by analyzing images within said media for pixel values and gradients to compare to images of food items available for sale in order to correctly identify the food items. ([0043] Taylor)
Consider claim 10, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user interface further includes a quick share button that allows for instant recording of media for a length of time chosen from the group consisting of 5 seconds, 10 seconds, 15 seconds, 30 seconds, 1 minute, and 5 minutes. ([0030] Taylor)
Consider claim 11, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches the user system and second user system are capable of receiving and executing voice commands chosen from the group consisting of rewinding media, fast forwarding media, recording media, adding a message to recorded media, and sending media and/or a message. ([0052] Taylor)
Consider claim 12, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user system and said second user system are integrated in a smartphone or tablet and are accessible by using an application stored on non-transitory computer readable media. ([0050] Taylor)
Consider claim 13, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said media is chosen from the group consisting of program information, programming shows, movies, concerts, sporting events, online games, preset blocks of media, and commercials. ([0019], [0024] Taylor)
Consider claim 14, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches the second user transmitter/receiver includes a recording mechanism that records a desired portion of media upon activation by the second individual user and can transmit the portion of media to the first individual user. ([0023], [0029] Taylor)
Consider claim 15, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches the user interface transmits the portion of media to the second user transmitter/receiver based upon a profile established through a user interface of the second user transmitter/receiver. ([0023] Taylor)
Consider claim 16, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches the profile comprises select program or program type disseminated by a media content provider and personal information of the user of the first user transmitter/receiver. (claim 11 Taylor)
Consider claim 17, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user system is in electronic communication with a camera on a smartphone for identifying items for purchase on a separate screen (The store section can generate QR codes which may be scanned by a mobile device for purchase, [0031], [0039] Taylor) or in a store window.
Consider claim 18, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches the first user transmitter/receiver automatically records media disseminated by said media content provider based upon preferences entered into a user profile of the first user transmitter/receiver. (claim 13 Taylor)
Consider claim 19, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches the notification mechanism notifies the first individual user, the second individual user, or both, if the second user transmitter/receiver does not have sufficient memory to receive the portion of media. (claim 14 Taylor)
Consider claim 20, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches the message is chosen from the group consisting of text, voice, video, emojis, and images. ([0057] Taylor)
Consider claim 21, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches the products are chosen from the group consisting of product directly advertised to the first individual user, products based on a user profile, products shown in a program, and combinations thereof. (claim 16 Taylor)
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor (US 2021/0274260) in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Jiang et al. (US 2024/0223862), herein Jiang.
Consider claim 22, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user interface allows said user to view said item.
However, Taylor combined with Wang does not explicitly teach view said item in a 360 degree view.
In an analogous art, Jiang, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches view said item in a 360 degree view. (Figs. 5, 6: A 360-degree image of the product is displayed, [0080], [0081].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Taylor combined with Wang by view said item in a 360 degree view, as taught by Jiang, for the benefit of providing the user with an improved visualization of the product.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor (US 2021/0274260) in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Walters et al. (US 2021/0150621), herein Walters.
Consider claim 23, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user system.
However, Taylor combined with Wang does not explicitly teach push notifications for allowing approval to protect against unapproved purchases.
In an analogous art, Walters, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches view push notifications for allowing approval to protect against unapproved purchases. (A push notification is sent to obtain approval the purchase, [0052].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Taylor combined with Wang by push notifications for allowing approval to protect against unapproved purchases, as taught by Walters, for the benefit of preventing unapproved purchases.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor (US 2021/0274260) in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Bueno Lobl (US 2016/0125507).
Consider claim 24, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said user system.
However, Taylor combined with Wang does not explicitly teach geo tag purchases.
In an analogous art, Bueno Lobl, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches geo tag purchases. (The user is notified if they are near a geo-tagged item, [0055].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Taylor combined with Wang by geo tag purchases, as taught by Bueno Lobl, for the benefit of alerting the user if they are near to a store which sells the desired item.
Claims 25 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor (US 2021/0274260) in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Pavlosky et al. (US 11,134,316), herein Pavlosky.
Consider claim 25, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said item.
However, Taylor combined with Wang does not explicitly teach said item is a service.
In an analogous art, Pavlosky, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches said item is a service. (The user may purchase tickets to an upcoming sporting event while watching a sporting event, col. 33 lines 42-56.)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Taylor combined with Wang by said item is a service, as taught by Pavlosky, for the benefit of allowing the user to purchase services of interest.
Consider claim 27, Taylor combined with Wang and Pavlosky clearly teaches the item is tickets for sporting events. (The user may purchase tickets to an upcoming sporting event while watching a sporting event, col. 33 lines 42-56 Pavlosky.)
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor (US 2021/0274260) in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Pavlosky et al. (US 11,134,316) in view of Desmond et al. (US 2021/0019779), herein Desmond.
Consider claim 26, Taylor combined with Wang and Pavlosky clearly teaches said service.
However, Taylor combined with Wang and Pavlosky does not explicitly teach said service is chosen from the group consisting of beauty services, haircuts, auto repair services, home repair services, healthcare services, and legal services and wherein said store section allows the first individual user to obtain, fill out, and submit intake forms.
In an analogous art, Desmond, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches said service is chosen from the group consisting of beauty services, haircuts, auto repair services, home repair services, healthcare services, and legal services and wherein said store section allows the first individual user to obtain, fill out, and submit intake forms. (The user may schedule an appointment with a doctor based on an offer presented in the video, [0119], [0120].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Taylor combined with Wang and Pavlosky by said service is chosen from the group consisting of beauty services, haircuts, auto repair services, home repair services, healthcare services, and legal services and wherein said store section allows the first individual user to obtain, fill out, and submit intake forms, as taught by Desmond, for the benefit of easily scheduling an appointment for the selected service.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor (US 2021/0274260) in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0237559) in view of Ohliger et al. (US 11,432,046), herein Ohliger.
Consider claim 28, Taylor combined with Wang clearly teaches said shopping interface.
However, Taylor combined with Wang does not explicitly teach access to a cloud-based website that allows a media content provider or user who creates content or advertising to monetize their content by having access to all sales that are created from the purchase of products or services from the shopping interface and crediting the media content provider or user with a percentage of sales.
In an analogous art, Ohliger, which discloses a system for video distribution, clearly teaches access to a cloud-based website that allows a media content provider or user who creates content or advertising to monetize their content by having access to all sales that are created from the purchase of products or services from the shopping interface and crediting the media content provider or user with a percentage of sales. (Fig. 1: Content creators receive a percentage of the profits generated by the inclusion of items in the media content by use of video object hyperlink exchange 300, col. 8 lines 58 to col. 9 line 23, col. 21 lines 45-62.)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Taylor combined with Wang by access to a cloud-based website that allows a media content provider or user who creates content or advertising to monetize their content by having access to all sales that are created from the purchase of products or services from the shopping interface and crediting the media content provider or user with a percentage of sales, as taught by Ohliger, for the benefit of incentivizing content creators to include purchasable items in the media content.
Conclusion
In the case of amending the claimed invention, applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN R SCHNURR whose telephone number is (571)270-1458. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6a-4p.
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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at (571)272-7527. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOHN R SCHNURR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425