DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to Application No. 18/819,735 filed on 8/29/2024. Claims 1-20 have been examined.
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 .
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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,107,936 (hereinafter Patent ‘936). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Patent ‘936 teaches as follows:
Applicant’s Claims 1, 10, and 19
Claims 1 and 10 in Patent ‘936
apply, based on at least one of: one or more parameters associated with a plurality of notification messages received from one or more software applications and one or more parameters associated with a plurality of notification message delivery channels, a machine learning model to determine one or more notification message delivery channels in the plurality notification message delivery channels,
identifying, using at least one processor, a plurality of notification message delivery channels for delivery of one or more notification messages to one or more user devices (see, claim 1)
wherein the plurality of notification messages correspond to one or more events associated with the one or more software applications;
the one or more notification messages being received from one or more software applications and corresponding to one or more events associated with the one or more software applications (see, claim 1)
generate one or more scores for each notification message delivery channel in the plurality of notification message delivery channels in accordance with at least one of: a successful delivery of the received one or more notification messages, a failed delivery of the received one or more notification messages, and any combination thereof;
one or more scores for each notification message delivery channel in the plurality of notification message delivery channels in accordance with at least one of: a successful delivery of the received one or more notification messages, a failed delivery of the received one or more notification messages, and any combination thereof (see, claim 10)
select a first notification message delivery channel in the determined one or more notification message delivery channels for transmission of at least one notification message in the plurality of notification messages, wherein the first notification message delivery channel is selected at least based on a score generated for the first notification message delivery channel; and
selecting, using the at least one processor, based on one or more subscriptions associated with the one or more user devices to the one or more events and a history of at least one of: successful and unsuccessful deliveries of one or more prior notification messages using each of the plurality of notification message delivery channels, a first notification message delivery channel from the plurality of notification message delivery channels for delivery of the received one or more notification messages, the one or more subscriptions being configured using one or more subscription preferences received from the one or more user devices, the first notification message delivery channel has a first message delivery reliability score associated with a delivery of at least one notification message in the one or more notification messages, wherein the first message delivery reliability score is greater than at least another message delivery reliability score of at least another notification message delivery channel in the plurality of notification message delivery channels (see, claim1)
transmit the at least one notification message to one or more user devices using the first notification message delivery channel.
transmitting, using the at least one processor, the received one or more notification messages to the one or more user devices using the selected first notification message delivery channel (see, claim 1).
Regarding claims 1, 10, and 19, Patent ‘936 teaches similar limitations as presented above except for applying the well-known machine learning model.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Patent ‘936 to include the well-known machine learning model in order to efficiently predict and determine an optimal communication channel for notification messages.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeong S Park whose telephone number is (571)270-1597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00-4:30 ET.
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, Glenton B Burgess can be reached at 571-272-3949. 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.
/JEONG S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454
June 25, 2026
Prosecution Insights