DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the amendments filed on 09 March 2026.
Claims 1, 7 & 13-15 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09 March 2016 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, “In particular, the amended claims 8 and 20 include the claim limitation of storing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content; selecting, by the vehicle control apparatus, content to be displayed among pieces of stored content based on an input of a passenger of the vehicle through a user interface; providing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the passenger with
a state indicating whether the selected content is displayed on the display; and displaying, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content to an outside of the vehicle by a display of the vehicle", which amount to significantly more than the abstract idea or a human activity but
instead is a practical application of the presently claimed invention, for a vehicle control apparatus for transacting content displayed on a vehicle.
In addition, by amending the claims, the present invention provides the effect of accurately transacting content displayed on a vehicle, content for communication or expression, which is effective and emotional and providing an e-commerce service for allowing a platform to
ensure big data by brokering the transaction of content displayed on a vehicle and a method thereof and for allowing a user to ensure a profit by advertising content displayed on a vehicle. Therefore, Applicant respectfully submits that aforementioned feature of the present invention amounts to significantly more and practical application of the presently claimed invention.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The amended language recites extra-solution activity (i.e. storing data, transmitting data through a network and displaying data). Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Furthermore, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity supported under Berkheimer. Thus, the claim is ineligible.
Applicant’s arguments on pages 9-14 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of in further view of Brubaker US 2009/0299857 A1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
The determination of whether a claim recites patent ineligible subject matter is a two-step inquiry.
STEP 1: the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter), See MPEP 2106.03, or
STEP 2: the claim recites a judicial exception, e.g. an abstract idea, without reciting additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as determined using the following analysis: See MPEP 2106.04
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1)
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2)
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP 2106.05
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to the abstract idea of authorizing a transaction based on an authentication challenge and a risk level of the transaction without significantly more.
Claim 1. A method for providing an e-commerce service through communication in a terminal of a user who utilizes a vehicle including a vehicle control apparatus and a server of a platform, the method including:
posting, by the server, pieces of content for communication or expression, the pieces of content being uploaded to the server, to the user by the terminal;
paying, by the terminal, a price of content selected by a user input among the pieces of posted content;
transmitting, by the terminal, a request for obtaining the paid content to the server;
providing, by the server, a seller who uploads the paid content with an amount corresponding to a portion or all of the price;
transmitting, by the server, the paid content to the vehicle control apparatus; and
storing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content;
selecting, by the vehicle control apparatus, content to be displayed among pieces of stored content based on an input of a passenger of the vehicle through a user interface;
providing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the passenger with a state indicating whether the selected content is displayed on the display; and
displaying, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content to an outside of the vehicle by a display of the vehicle..
101 Analysis - Step 1: Statutory category – Yes
Claim 1 recites a method, claim 13 recites a apparatus and claim 15 recites a system. The claims fall within one of the four statutory categories. See MPEP 2106.03
Step 2A Prong one evaluation: Judicial Exception – Yes – Methods of Organizing Human Activity
In Step 2A, Prong one of the 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance (PEG), a claim is to be analyzed to determine whether it recites subject matter that falls within one of the following groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) mental processes, and/or c) certain methods of organizing human activity.
The Office submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitutes judicial exceptions in terms of “Methods of Organizing Human Activity” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the limitations can be “commercial or legal interactions”. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)
The claim recites the limitation of A method for providing an e-commerce service, posting pieces of content for communication or expression, the pieces of content being uploaded to the server, to the user by the terminal; paying a price of content selected by a user input among the pieces of posted content and providing a seller who uploads the paid content with an amount corresponding to a portion or all of the price. These limitation, as drafted, are simple processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers commercial or legal interaction. Thus, the claim recites a method of organizing human activity.
Step 2A Prong two evaluation: Practical Application - No
In Step 2A, Prong two of the 2019 PEG, a claim is to be evaluated whether, as a whole, it integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application. As noted in MPEP 2106.04(d), it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements such as: merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
The Office submits that the foregoing underlined limitation(s) recite additional elements that do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application.
The claim recites additional elements or steps of communication in a terminal of a user who utilizes a vehicle including a vehicle control apparatus and a server of a platform, the method including; by the server, by the terminal, transmitting, by the server, the paid content to the vehicle control apparatus; and storing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content; selecting, by the vehicle control apparatus, content to be displayed among pieces of stored content based on an input of a passenger of the vehicle through a user interface; providing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the passenger with a state indicating whether the selected content is displayed on the display; and displaying, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content to an outside of the vehicle by a display of the vehicle are recited at a high level of generality amounting to extra-solution activity (i.e. storing data, transmitting data through a network and displaying data). Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B evaluation: Inventive concept - No
In Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, a claim is to be evaluated as to 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.
As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claim amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception on a generic computer cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Under the 2019 PEG, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra- solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B. Here, the transmitting steps and displaying step were considered to be insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A, and thus they are re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field.
The claimed feature recited transmitting a request, transmitting the paid content and displaying by the vehicle control apparatus the paid content. Paragraph 0042 of applicant’s specification discloses “…a vehicle control apparatus may include a display, a vehicle communication device that performs wireless or wired communication of a vehicle including the vehicle control apparatus, and a processor. In other words, the specification discloses generic computer components displaying content and transmitting data. Hence, the specification indicates well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here).
Accordingly, a conclusion that communication in a terminal of a user who utilizes a vehicle including a vehicle control apparatus and a server of a platform, the method including; by the server, by the terminal, transmitting, by the server, the paid content to the vehicle control apparatus; and storing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content; selecting, by the vehicle control apparatus, content to be displayed among pieces of stored content based on an input of a passenger of the vehicle through a user interface; providing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the passenger with a state indicating whether the selected content is displayed on the display; and displaying, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content to an outside of the vehicle by a display of the vehicle are well-understood, routine, conventional activity supported under Berkheimer. Thus, the claim is ineligible. Claims 13 & 15 are rejected for the same reasons as described above.
Dependent claims 2-12, 14 & 16-20 only narrow the abstract idea and do not add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claims are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-11 & 13-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. US 2019/0080356 A1, hereafter Han in view of Watanabe US 2014/0372317 A1 and in further view of Brubaker US 2009/0299857 A1.
Claim 1, 13 & 15
Han discloses:
A method for providing an e-commerce service through communication in a terminal of a user who utilizes a vehicle including a vehicle control apparatus and a server of a platform, the method including (para. 0007):
posting, by the server, pieces of content for communication or expression, the pieces of content being uploaded to the server, to the user by the terminal (para. 0008: “The advertisement server may include a database (DB) configured to store the advertisement contents, an advertisement selection unit configured to select some advertisement contents from among the advertisement contents stored in the database (DB), and an advertisement transceiver configured to transmit the advertisement contents selected by the advertisement selection unit by communicating with the advertisement controller.”);
transmitting, by the terminal, a request for obtaining the paid content to the server (para. 0014: “The advertisement method may further include, after selecting the advertisement, calculating a usage fee of the advertisement. The playing back of the advertisement through the vehicle may include playing back the advertisement through at least one of a display, a light, and a speaker installed inside or outside of the vehicle. The advertisement server may include advertisement contents supplied from a plurality of advertisers.”);
transmitting, by the server, the paid content to the vehicle control apparatus; and displaying, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content to an outside of the vehicle by a display of the vehicle (para. 0014: “The advertisement method may further include, after selecting the advertisement, calculating a usage fee of the advertisement. The playing back of the advertisement through the vehicle may include playing back the advertisement through at least one of a display, a light, and a speaker installed inside or outside of the vehicle. The advertisement server may include advertisement contents supplied from a plurality of advertisers.”).
Han does not disclose the following, however Watanabe does teach:
paying, by the terminal, a price of content selected by a user input among the pieces of posted content (Para. 0195: “The operation input unit 104 of the on-vehicle apparatus 100 or the operation input unit 204 of the communication terminal 200 receives from the user an input to the purchasing procedure page that performs the purchasing procedure for the content (S65). This input includes, for example, an input selecting the content to which the purchasing procedure is performed, and an input of information necessary for the payment such as a credit-card number, and becomes more complicated than the simple input performed by the user upon the request for the temporary license. The operation input unit 104 or the operation input unit 204 generates input information indicating the input detail from the user, and outputs the resultant to the control unit 103 or the control unit 203.”);
providing, by the server, a seller who uploads the paid content with an amount corresponding to a portion or all of the price (para. 0196: “The formal license request information is generated so as to indicate the content ID of the content (to which the issuance of the formal license is requested) selected as a subject for the purchasing procedure, and the input detail of the user (information necessary for the payment) indicated by the input information.) Note: the payment of the formal license request would go to the service provider who uploaded the content.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to [combine/modify] the method of Watanabe with the technique of Han to increase the ease and convenience of ordering in vehicle content. Therefore, the design incentives of increased ease and convenience provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Han & Watanabe do not disclose the following, however Brubaker does teach:
storing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content; (para. 0123: “It is a another object of the present invention to enable the uploading of information stored in moving objects relating to content, time, place, nature and trigger for any logged delivery, and to then process and to feedback that information to authorized government users, advertising agencies, advertisers or registered fleet, business or personal users for the purposes of tracking, engagement measurement, accounting, compensation or billing)
selecting, by the vehicle control apparatus, content to be displayed among pieces of stored content based on an input of a passenger of the vehicle through a user interface (para. 0212: Using an individual's home or office computer, a networked laptop, a PDA or even a cell phone, user personal profiles can be updated and submitted periodically from nearly any location having network access. Also, because ad preferences can be highly personal in nature--and because they directly influence the kinds of products and services, or the kinds of entertainment and lifestyles a user is interested in or curious about--it is possible for users, at 443, to select and control the timing and circumstances for all outgoing content requests. For example, if an individual is interested in certain kinds of personal products or subject matter which he prefers remaining confidential, when he completes this portion of his Personal Ad Viewing Preferences, he can limit such content requests, for example, to only the times he is alone in his vehicle. It is also possible to control the external display viewing angle so that others in vehicles adjacent to a viewed vehicle are unable or less able to see any content that is displayed.);
providing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the passenger with a state indicating whether the selected content is displayed on the display (para. 0042: interactive);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to [combine/modify] the method of Brubaker with the technique of Han to increase the ease and convenience of directing hyper-relevant content to consumers through the use of wireless technologies for the exchange of information. Therefore, the design incentives of increased ease and convenience provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Claim 2 & 16
Han discloses:
wherein the paying of the price of the content selected by the user input among the pieces of posted content by the terminal includes: paying, by the terminal, the price of the content selected by the user input among the pieces of content including at least one of a symbol indicating an intention of the user, information indicating the intention of the user, a symbol associated with safety, information associated with the safety, a symbol for a profit of the user, information for the profit of the user (para. 0009: “In particular, the fee calculation unit may be configured to calculate a usage fee of the advertisement contents and pay the calculated usage fee as a parking fee of the vehicle when the vehicle arrives at an exit of a parking region. The fee calculation unit may further be configured to calculate a usage fee of the advertisement contents and pay the calculated usage fee to a vehicle owner.), a symbol for performing decoration or styling of the vehicle, or information for performing the decoration or the styling of the vehicle, or any combination thereof.
Claim 3 & 17
Han discloses:
in response that the selected content includes at least one of a symbol for a profit of the user or information for the profit of the user (para. 0009: “In particular, the fee calculation unit may be configured to calculate a usage fee of the advertisement contents and pay the calculated usage fee as a parking fee of the vehicle when the vehicle arrives at an exit of a parking region. The fee calculation unit may further be configured to calculate a usage fee of the advertisement contents and pay the calculated usage fee to a vehicle owner.), or any combination thereof: transmitting, by the terminal, a request for obtaining the selected content to the server, without paying the price of the selected content; and providing, by the server, the user registered in the terminal with a price of displaying the selected content on the display, without providing the seller with the amount corresponding to the portion or all of the price.
Claim 4 & 18
Han discloses:
performing, by the server, at least one of charging the user a fee, charging the seller the fee, or obtaining cost for an advertisement posted on the platform from an advertiser, or any combination thereof, in a process of brokering and managing a transaction between the seller and the user (para. 0039: “The vehicle status information supplied to the advertisement server 100 may then be used by the advertisement server 100 to select advertisement contents to be allocated to a parking region of the vehicle 200 and the advertisement server 100 may be configured to calculate a usage fee of the advertisement. The fee calculation unit 140 of the advertisement server 100 may be configured to calculate the usage fee of the advertisement and use the calculated advertisement usage fee as the parking fee of the vehicle 200 having been used for the advertisement when the vehicle 200 arrives at an exit of the parking region or may be configured to transmit the calculated advertisement usage fee to a pre-registered account of an owner (or user) of the vehicle 200. In particular, the advertisement usage fee may be accumulated as points and the accumulated points may also be used as a payment method for paying the parking fee, prices of articles (e.g., consumer goods), etc.”).
Claim 5 & 19
Han, Watanabe & Brubaker discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of Claim 1 & 15 above. Han does not disclose the limitation of wherein the paying of the price of the content selected by the user input among the pieces of posted content by the terminal includes: paying, by the terminal, the price of the content selected by the user input, based on execution of an application for providing the content, and wherein the transmitting of the request for obtaining the paid content to the server by the terminal includes: transmitting, by the terminal, the request for obtaining the paid content to the server, based on the execution of the application. However, Watanabe in paragraph 0558 teaches wherein the paying of the price of the content selected by the user input among the pieces of posted content by the terminal includes: paying, by the terminal, the price of the content selected by the user input, based on execution of an application for providing the content, and wherein the transmitting of the request for obtaining the paid content to the server by the terminal includes: transmitting, by the terminal, the request for obtaining the paid content to the server, based on the execution of the application. Paragraph 0195 teaches “The operation input unit 104 of the on-vehicle apparatus 100 or the operation input unit 204 of the communication terminal 200 receives from the user an input to the purchasing procedure page that performs the purchasing procedure for the content (S65). This input includes, for example, an input selecting the content to which the purchasing procedure is performed, and an input of information necessary for the payment such as a credit-card number, and becomes more complicated than the simple input performed by the user upon the request for the temporary license. The operation input unit 104 or the operation input unit 204 generates input information indicating the input detail from the user, and outputs the resultant to the control unit 103 or the control unit 203.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to [combine/modify] the method of Watanabe with the technique of Han to increase the ease and convenience of ordering in vehicle content. Therefore, the design incentives of increased ease and convenience provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Claim 7
Han, Watanabe & Brubaker discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of Claim 1 above. Han does not disclose the limitation of displaying, by the vehicle control apparatus, content specified based on the input of a passenger of the vehicle through the user interface among pieces of content stored in the vehicle control apparatus on the display; and providing, by the vehicle control apparatus, the passenger with the state in which the specified content is displayed on the display. However, Brubaker in paragraph 042 discloses “Remember the last item on the list of advertising holy grails? Buy at the push of a button? XM Satellite Radio is preparing to ship portable MP3 players that will do just that, at least for music. A deal with Napster lets users push a button to "bookmark" songs they hear, and then the next time they dock their player with their computer it automatically buys those songs over the Internet. This is possibly the start of a trend. The present invention, however, goes a few steps further, thanks to a totally integrated advertising and distribution infrastructure. When users in moving objects in the field see an ad that intrigues them, they can push a button to get immediate information (such as pricing and availability), or they can request other things such as having a brochure sent to their computer. If they really like what they see and hear, however, they can buy the item on the spot. No need to dock with the Internet to complete a transaction, because credit and shipping have all been set up in advance, as will be explained later. Y… Then follow it up with a push button opportunity to have tickets waiting at a theater just minutes from their precise locations along with an electronic discount at a nearby Burger King? The present invention allows exactly such a promotion to be executed, both instantly and seamlessly. “ Paragraph 0212 discloses “Using an individual's home or office computer, a networked laptop, a PDA or even a cell phone, user personal profiles can be updated and submitted periodically from nearly any location having network access. Also, because ad preferences can be highly personal in nature--and because they directly influence the kinds of products and services, or the kinds of entertainment and lifestyles a user is interested in or curious about--it is possible for users, at 443, to select and control the timing and circumstances for all outgoing content requests. For example, if an individual is interested in certain kinds of personal products or subject matter which he prefers remaining confidential, when he completes this portion of his Personal Ad Viewing Preferences, he can limit such content requests, for example, to only the times he is alone in his vehicle. It is also possible to control the external display viewing angle so that others in vehicles adjacent to a viewed vehicle are unable or less able to see any content that is displayed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to [combine/modify] the method of Brubaker with the technique of Han to increase the ease and convenience of directing hyper-relevant content to consumers through the use of wireless technologies for the exchange of information. Therefore, the design incentives of increased ease and convenience provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Claim 8
Han, Watanabe & Brubaker discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of Claim 1 above. Han does not disclose the limitation of collecting or analyzing, by the server, information indicating the user and information related to details in which the user pays the price of the content. However, Watanabe in paragraph 0195 teaches “The operation input unit 104 of the on-vehicle apparatus 100 or the operation input unit 204 of the communication terminal 200 receives from the user an input to the purchasing procedure page that performs the purchasing procedure for the content (S65). This input includes, for example, an input selecting the content to which the purchasing procedure is performed, and an input of information necessary for the payment such as a credit-card number, and becomes more complicated than the simple input performed by the user upon the request for the temporary license. The operation input unit 104 or the operation input unit 204 generates input information indicating the input detail from the user, and outputs the resultant to the control unit 103 or the control unit 203.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to [combine/modify] the method of Watanabe with the technique of Han to increase the ease and convenience of ordering in vehicle content. Therefore, the design incentives of increased ease and convenience provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Claim 9
Han, Watanabe & Brubaker discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of Claim 1 above. Han does not disclose the limitation of wherein the transmitting of the paid content to the vehicle control apparatus by the server includes: receiving, by the vehicle control apparatus, the paid content from the server via a vehicle communication device for performing wireless or wired communication of the vehicle. However, Watanabe in paragraph 0441 teaches “According to the reception of the purchase content selection page information, the control unit 203 or the control unit 103 displays the purchase content selection page indicated by the purchase content selection page information (S603). Specifically, the control unit 203 or the control unit 103 generates image information indicating the purchase content selection page based on the purchase content selection page information. The control unit 203 outputs the generated image information to the image/sound presenting unit 205 or the image/sound presenting unit 105. The image/sound presenting unit 205 or the image/sound presenting unit 105 displays the purchase content selection page indicated by the image information, according to the output of the image information from the control unit 203.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to [combine/modify] the method of Watanabe with the technique of Han to increase the ease and convenience of ordering in vehicle content. Therefore, the design incentives of increased ease and convenience provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Claim 10
Han, Watanabe & Brubaker discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of Claim 1 above. Han does not disclose the limitation of uploading, by terminals of a plurality of sellers, the pieces of content for communication or expression to the server for sale. However, Watanabe in paragraph 0088 teaches “The on-vehicle apparatus 100 downloads content data indicating content a user intends to purchase from the server 300, and reproduces the content based on the downloaded content data. The on-vehicle apparatus 100 also presents, to a user, content that becomes a candidate for purchase (hereinafter merely referred to as "purchase candidate content") in order to enable the user to utilize content with simple operation while driving a vehicle.” Note: the content was downloaded from the server to the on-vehicle apparatus as a candidate for purchase which means it was uploaded to the server as a candidate for purchase.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to [combine/modify] the method of Watanabe with the technique of Han to increase the ease and convenience of ordering in vehicle content. Therefore, the design incentives of increased ease and convenience provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Claim 11
Han discloses:
in response that the price of the selected content is free: transmitting, by the terminal, a request for obtaining the selected content to the server, without paying the price of the selected content (para. 0009 & 0011); and
transmitting, by the server, the selected content to the vehicle control apparatus, without providing the seller with the amount corresponding to the portion or all of the price (para. 0011).
Claim(s) 6 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han & Watanabe in view of Brubaker and in further view of Xiao et al. US 2024/0223869 A1, hereafter Xiao.
Claim 6 & 20
Han, Watanabe & Brubaker discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of Claim 1 & 15 above. Han discloses wherein the posting of the pieces of content for communication or expression, the pieces of content being uploaded to the server, to the user by the terminal by the server includes in paragraph 0008: “The advertisement server may include a database (DB) configured to store the advertisement contents, an advertisement selection unit configured to select some advertisement contents from among the advertisement contents stored in the database (DB), and an advertisement transceiver configured to transmit the advertisement contents selected by the advertisement selection unit by communicating with the advertisement controller. Han does not disclose the limitation of classifying, by the server, the user as at least one category, based on personal information of the user; recommending, by the server, the pieces of content to the user, based on a frequency at which users included in the at least one category and different from the user pay for the pieces of content; and posting, by the terminal, the pieces of recommended content to the user. However, Xiao in paragraph 0065 teaches “In some embodiments, additional operations may be performed by content acquisition system 150. For example, content recommendation system simulator 155 can estimate an impact function value associated with a user demographics bucket for the recommended subset of content items for acquisition 159, and determine to distribute the recommended subset of content items for acquisition 159 to users of the user demographics bucket after the recommended subset of content items have been purchased. The user demographics bucket may be classified by an age group, such as 14-25 years old, or age-location group such as 14-25 years old in New York city, or any other user demographics bucket.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to [combine/modify] the method of Xiao with the technique of Han & Watanabe to improve identifying content items for acquisition in a media system or a media environment (Xiao para. 0004). Therefore, the design incentives of improving identifying content provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han & Watanabe in view of Brubaker and in further view of Mowry US 2017/0206562 A1.
Claim 12
Han, Watanabe & Brubaker discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of Claim 1 above. Han does not disclose the limitation of uploading, by the terminal of the seller included in the terminals of the plurality of sellers, to the server, custom-made request content included in the pieces of content and requested from the user or delivering, by the terminal of the seller included in the terminals of the plurality of sellers, the request content to the user. However, Mowry, in paragraph 0024 teaches “The visual display network in accordance with preferred embodiments improves and expands upon prior art visual displays and allows for additional specific programming aspects, including programming based on the public's, or one or more viewers', participation. In one configuration, an electronic and/or other form of sampling of viewers in a particular geographical area is provided for potential selection, customization and/or alteration of content that is presented on one or more displays.” Paragraph 0080 teaches “Mobile advertising containment, in this case vehicle 131, includes two exemplary mobile display units of an example venue, distinct from or related to that featured in FIGS. 1 and 2, including vehicle 131 and its location variable display 132. Herein, taxi 131, features content related to a content provider who has uploaded at least a media file to the hub information processor 101, and designated at least one targeted viewer advertising priority resulting in the inclusion of at least one mobile display, in this case a network/venue linked taxi with an interior display 133.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to [combine/modify] the method of Mowry with the technique of Han & Watanabe to provide enhanced advertising, data sampling and cross network viewing and interaction between viewers and providers of content such that visual displays allow additional specific programming aspects to be based on the public's, or one or more viewers', participation. Therefore, the design incentives of enhanced advertising and viewer interaction provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KITO R ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-3921. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am-5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James Trammell can be reached at (571) 272-6712. 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.
/KITO R ROBINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights