DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the communication filed on 18 August 2024.
Claims 1-20 are being considered on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 17 Oct 2024, 04 Feb 2026, and 26 Aug 2026 have been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, initialed and dated copies of Applicant's IDS form 1499 are attached to the instant Office action.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 18 August 2024 are accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for the following reasons:
Claim 1:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1:
determining, by the first party computing system, an item interest level for at least one first party item of the plurality of first party items associated with the merchant based, at least in part, on the physical information; and (Mental Process: Determining an item interest level is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting a computing system, nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can watch how long another person inspect various items and judge their interest level entirely in their minds)
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
A computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving, by a first party computing system comprising one or more computing devices, physical information associated with a first party user and a physical location associated with a merchant, wherein the physical information is indicative of a location of the first party user relative to one or more of a plurality of first party items associated with the merchant; (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
receiving, by the first party computing system, user data associated with the first party user, wherein the user data is indicative of one or more user characteristics; (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
initiating, by the first party computing system, a presentation of a content item to the first party user via a user device associated with the first party user based, at least in part, on the user data and the item interest level, wherein the content item comprises information for the at least one first party item. (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Presenting offers and gathering statistics – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
A computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving, by a first party computing system comprising one or more computing devices, physical information associated with a first party user and a physical location associated with a merchant, wherein the physical information is indicative of a location of the first party user relative to one or more of a plurality of first party items associated with the merchant; (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
receiving, by the first party computing system, user data associated with the first party user, wherein the user data is indicative of one or more user characteristics; (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
initiating, by the first party computing system, a presentation of a content item to the first party user via a user device associated with the first party user based, at least in part, on the user data and the item interest level, wherein the content item comprises information for the at least one first party item. (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Presenting offers and gathering statistics is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence from MPEP 2106.05(d))
Claim 2:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the physical location associated with the merchant comprises a subset of onsite items of the plurality of first party items, the subset of onsite items comprising one or more first party items located within the physical location. (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the physical location associated with the merchant comprises a subset of onsite items of the plurality of first party items, the subset of onsite items comprising one or more first party items located within the physical location. (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
Claim 3:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the physical location comprises a plurality of physical devices configured to capture the physical information, (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))
wherein the physical information comprises sensor data received via at least one of the plurality of physical devices, (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
wherein each of the plurality of physical devices corresponds to one or more of the subset of onsite items. (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))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the physical location comprises a plurality of physical devices configured to capture the physical information, (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))
wherein the physical information comprises sensor data received via at least one of the plurality of physical devices, (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
wherein each of the plurality of physical devices corresponds to one or more of the subset of onsite items. (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))
Claim 4:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein each of the plurality of physical devices corresponds to a respective onsite item presented within the physical location. (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))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein each of the plurality of physical devices corresponds to a respective onsite item presented within the physical location. (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))
Claim 5:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
Step 2A Prong 2 and Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements.
The computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein determining the item interest level for the at least one first party item based, at least in part, on the physical information comprises: determining, by the first party computing system, at least one item type associated with the physical information of a plurality of item types associated with the plurality of first party items, wherein the at least one item type identifies one or more associated items; and (Mental Process: Determining an item type associated with physical information is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting a computing system, nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can see milk in a fridge with other dairy products and determine that the milk is associated with other dairy products)
determining, by the first party computing system, the item interest level for the at least one first party item based, at least in part, on the at least one item type, wherein the item interest level is indicative of a user interest in the one or more associated items. (Mental Process: Determining an item interest level associated with physical information is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting a computing system, nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can see a user looking at a particular milk in a fridge with other dairy products and determine that they are interested in milk products).
Claim 6:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein each of the plurality of physical devices corresponds to a respective area of a plurality of areas within the physical location, wherein each of the plurality of areas corresponds to one or more of the plurality of item types. (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))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein each of the plurality of physical devices corresponds to a respective area of a plurality of areas within the physical location, wherein each of the plurality of areas corresponds to one or more of the plurality of item types. (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))
Claim 7:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein initiating the presentation of the content item to the first party user via the user device comprises: generating, by the first party computing system, the content item based, at least in part, on the one or more associated items, wherein the content item comprises data indicative of at least one of the one or more associated items; and (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))
providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of the content item to the first party user device. (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Presenting offers and gathering statistics – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein initiating the presentation of the content item to the first party user via the user device comprises: generating, by the first party computing system, the content item based, at least in part, on the one or more associated items, wherein the content item comprises data indicative of at least one of the one or more associated items; and (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))
providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of the content item to the first party user device. (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Presenting offers and gathering statistics is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence from MPEP 2106.05(d))
Claim 8:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the content item comprises item location data for at least one of the one or more associated items, wherein the item location data is indicative of a location of the at least one associated item within the physical location. (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))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the content item comprises item location data for at least one of the one or more associated items, wherein the item location data is indicative of a location of the at least one associated item within the physical location. (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))
Claim 9:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the content item comprises one or more directions to the location of the at least one associated item within the physical location. The computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the content item comprises item location data for at least one of the one or more associated items, wherein the item location data is indicative of a location of the at least one associated item within the physical location. (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))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the content item comprises one or more directions to the location of the at least one associated item within the physical location. The computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the content item comprises item location data for at least one of the one or more associated items, wherein the item location data is indicative of a location of the at least one associated item within the physical location. (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))
Claim 10:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the method further comprises: receiving, by the first party computing system, item inventory data for at least one of the one or more associated items, wherein the item inventory data identifies an availability of the one or more associated items at the physical location; and (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of the item inventory data to the user device. (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
Step 2A Prong 2 and Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements.
The computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the method further comprises: receiving, by the first party computing system, item inventory data for at least one of the one or more associated items, wherein the item inventory data identifies an availability of the one or more associated items at the physical location; and (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of the item inventory data to the user device. (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
Claim 11:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
The computer-implemented method of claim 10, wherein the method further comprises: determining, by the first party computing system based, at least in part, on the item inventory data, that at least one of the one or more associated items is unavailable at the physical location; and (Mental Process: Determining an item whether an associated item is available based on inventory data is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting a computing system, nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can look at a paper inventory of a store and determine whether an item and associated items are available).
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
in response to determining that the at least one associated item is unavailable, providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of another physical location associated with the merchant. (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
in response to determining that the at least one associated item is unavailable, providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of another physical location associated with the merchant. (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
Claim 12:
Step 1: Independent claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 1 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
The computer-implemented method of claim 10, wherein the method further comprises: determining, by the first party computing system based, at least in part, on the item inventory data, that at least one of the one or more associated items is available at the physical location; and (Mental Process: Determining an item whether an associated item is available based on inventory data is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting a computing system, nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can look at a paper inventory of a store and determine whether an item and associated items are available).
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
in response to determining that the at least one associated item is available, providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of an incentive to purchase the at least one associated item at the physical location. (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
in response to determining that the at least one associated item is available, providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of an incentive to purchase the at least one associated item at the physical location. (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
Claim 13:
Step 1: Independent claim 13 recites a system and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1:
determining an item interest level for at least one first party item of the plurality of first party items based, at least in part, on the physical information; and (Mental Process: Determining an interest level based on physical information is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind; nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can see a user is near milk in the dairy aisle and determine an interest level in milk).
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
A first party computing system, comprising: one or more processors; and (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))
a memory storing instructions that when executed by the one or more processors cause the computing system to perform operations comprising: (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))
receiving physical information associated with a first party user and a physical location associated with a merchant, wherein the physical information is indicative of a location of the first party user relative to one or more of a plurality of first party items associated with the merchant; (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
initiating a presentation of a content item to the first party user via a user device associated with the first party user based, at least in part, on the item interest level, wherein the content item comprises information for the at least one first party item. (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Presenting offers and gathering statistics – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
A first party computing system, comprising: one or more processors; and (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))
a memory storing instructions that when executed by the one or more processors cause the computing system to perform operations comprising: (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))
receiving physical information associated with a first party user and a physical location associated with a merchant, wherein the physical information is indicative of a location of the first party user relative to one or more of a plurality of first party items associated with the merchant; (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
initiating a presentation of a content item to the first party user via a user device associated with the first party user based, at least in part, on the item interest level, wherein the content item comprises information for the at least one first party item. (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Presenting offers and gathering statistics is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence from MPEP 2106.05(d))
Claim 14:
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 13 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The first party computing system of claim 13, wherein the physical information comprises radar data descriptive of one or more user movements relative to one or more of the plurality of first party items. (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))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The first party computing system of claim 13, wherein the physical information comprises radar data descriptive of one or more user movements relative to one or more of the plurality of first party items. (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))
Claim 15:
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 13 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
determining the item interest level for the at least one item based, at least in part, on the gesture data. (Mental Process: Determining an item interest level based on gesture data is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind; nothing in this claim element precludes the step from pratically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can observe a user signaling a thumbs up or thumbs down opine on the user’s level of interest entirely in their mind.)
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The first party computing system of claim 14, wherein determining the item interest level for the at least one first party item based, at least in part, on the physical information, comprises: receiving gesture data for the first party user by inputting the radar data to a gesture recognition machine-learning model configured to identify one or more gestures corresponding to radar data; and (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The first party computing system of claim 14, wherein determining the item interest level for the at least one first party item based, at least in part, on the physical information, comprises: receiving gesture data for the first party user by inputting the radar data to a gesture recognition machine-learning model configured to identify one or more gestures corresponding to radar data; and (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
Claim 16:
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 13 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
wherein the first party data comprises user data for the first party user, the user data indicative of one or more user attributes for the first party user; and (Mental Process: Determining user attributes based on user data is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind; nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can evaluate a transaction history of a user that includes hair products or accessories and opine that it is indicative of the user having hair).
determining the item interest level for the at least one first party item based, at least in part, on the user data. (Mental Process: Determining an item interest level based on user data is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind; nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can observe that a user’s transaction history includes hair products and accessories and therefore opine that their interest in a particular hair product or accessory is high).
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The first party computing system of claim 13, wherein the operations further comprise: receiving first party data associated with a plurality of first party users of the merchant, (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The first party computing system of claim 13, wherein the operations further comprise: receiving first party data associated with a plurality of first party users of the merchant, (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
Claim 17:
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 13 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
The computing system of claim 16, wherein the one or more user attributes are indicative of a transaction history associated with the first party user, and (Mental Process: Determining that one or more user attributes are indicative of a transaction history is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind; nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can observe that a user has hair and opine that this indicative of a transaction history that includes hair products or accessories).
wherein the item interest level for the at least one item is determined based, at least in part, on the transaction history associated with the first party user. (Mental Process: Determining an item interest level based on transaction history is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind; nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can observe that a user’s transaction history includes hair products and accessories and therefore opine that their interest in hair products and accessories is high).
Step 2A Prong 2 and Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements.
Claim 18:
Step 2A Prong 1: See the rejection of claim 13 above. The same rationale applies to this dependent claim.
The computing system of claim 16, wherein the user data is indicative of one or more associated users, and (Mental Process: Determining that user data indicates one or more associated users is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind; nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can observe that a user has connections with others in their social media and determine that connection indicates an associated user).
wherein the operations further comprise: determining a secondary item interest level for the one or more associated users based, at least in part, on the physical information.(Mental Process: Determining a secondary item interest level based on physical information is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind; nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can determine that a user has selected a item from a shelf of similar products and judge there is some level of interest for the similar products based on the grouping of those products together entirely in their minds.)
Step 2A Prong 2 and Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements.
Claim 19:
Step 1: Independent claim 19 recites one or more non-transitory computer-readable media and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1:
determining an item interest level for at least one first party item of the plurality of first party items based, at least in part, on the physical information; and (Mental Process: Determining an item interest level is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind; nothing in this claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person can observe how long another person is looking at an item and judge the item interest level entirely in their minds)
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
One or more non-transitory computer-readable media comprising instructions that when executed by one or more computing devices cause the one or more computing devices to perform operations comprising: (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))
receiving physical information associated with a first party user and a physical location associated with a merchant, wherein the physical information is indicative of a location of the first party user relative to one or more of a plurality of first party items associated with the merchant; (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Receiving or transmitting data over a network – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
initiating a presentation of a content item to the first party user via a user device associated with the first party user based, at least in part, on the item interest level, wherein the content item comprises information for the at least one first party item. (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Presenting offers and gathering statistics – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
One or more non-transitory computer-readable media comprising instructions that when executed by one or more computing devices cause the one or more computing devices to perform operations comprising: (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))
receiving physical information associated with a first party user and a physical location associated with a merchant, wherein the physical information is indicative of a location of the first party user relative to one or more of a plurality of first party items associated with the merchant; (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence MPEP § 2106.05(d))
initiating a presentation of a content item to the first party user via a user device associated with the first party user based, at least in part, on the item interest level, wherein the content item comprises information for the at least one first party item. (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Presenting offers and gathering statistics is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence from MPEP 2106.05(d))
Claim 20:
Step 1: Independent claim 19 recites one or more non-transitory computer-readable media and therefore falls under one of the four statutory categories of patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1:
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application
The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 19, wherein the content item is displayed via a user interface of a first party software application. (insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception: Presenting offers and gathering statistics – See MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception
The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 19, wherein the content item is displayed via a user interface of a first party software application. (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity: Presenting offers and gathering statistics is well-understood, routine, conventional activity – see Berkheimer evidence from MPEP 2106.05(d))
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 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 1-13 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linden, et. al. (US 2019/0220878 A1) in view of Braintree, Brian (US 2018/0204244 A1).
Claim 1:
A computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving, by a first party computing system comprising one or more computing devices, physical information associated with a first party user and a physical location associated with a merchant, (Linden, para. 0037: “The merchant system 106, as illustrated in FIG. 1, may be associated with a merchant. For example, the merchant may manage and operate the merchant system 106. The merchant system 106 may comprise one or more computing devices. Further, the merchant system 106 may be associated with one or more of the merchant's physical retail locations.” Examiner notes specification para 135 defines a “first party computing system” as computing device(s) utilized by a merchant)
wherein the physical information is indicative of a location of the first party user relative to one or more of a plurality of first party items associated with the merchant; (Linden, para 0037: “For instance, the merchant system 106 may assist the merchant in tracking inventory, sales, product orders, etc., in connection with a retail location”)
receiving, by the first party computing system, user data associated with the first party user, wherein the user data is indicative of one or more user characteristics; (Linden, para. 0042 and 0049: “In an alternative embodiment, the client device 102 may detect the presence of one or more presence detectors 108 and send corresponding detection notifications, including identifiers, to the social networking system 104. For example, the user 112 of client device 102 may enter into a merchant's physical retail establishment.” “In one or more embodiments, a user profile may include, but is not limited to, user information, social networking activity information, merchant activity information, and third-party content activity information. User information can include personal information about a user (e.g., name, gender, age, birth date, hometown, etc.), contact information (e.g., residence address, mailing address, current city, email addresses, phone numbers, screen names, user ID, etc.), educational information (e.g., school, highest schooling level obtained, time period, class year, concentration, degree, etc.), employment information (e.g., employer, position, employer locations, employment history, etc.), family and relationship information (e.g., married to, engaged to, partners with, parents of, siblings of, children of, cousin of, relationship with, etc.), and other personal information”)
determining, by the first party computing system, an item interest level for at least one first party item of the plurality of first party items associated with the merchant based, at least in part, on the physical information; and (Linden, para. 0026 and 0054: “As another example, the merchant insights system can provide recommendations based on a user's location within a merchant's retail location. To illustrate, the merchant insights may include a recommendation to a merchant to add a brand of women's jeans to the women's clothing area based on user product preferences and where users shop in the merchant's store…Further, the same user profiles may show that corresponding users spend an above average amount of time in a particular area of the merchant's retail location.” “In one or more embodiments, the profile manager 202 can also infer interests levels in products, product brands, and/or product categories based on the information received from third parties” Examiner notes Linden teaches determining an interest level of inventory based on user’s location).
initiating, by the first party computing system, a presentation of a content item to the first party user via a user device associated with the first party user based, at least in part, on the user data and the item interest level, wherein the content item comprises information for the at least one first party item. (Braintree, para. 0020: “In one embodiment as illustrated in FIG. 1, an identifier (login, Facebook account, software ID, cookie etc.) is associated with a user 102 which may associate the user and/or her device(s) to an interest graph as well. Upon a user keyword search, or other user input such as search/browsing/input/purchases/actions 104, selected search results and ads/content, may be transmitted 106 to the user.” Examiner notes “content item” interpreted as information consistent with specification para. 0004; Examiner further notes Linden teaches providing users with product information i.e. of inventory, a first party item)
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Braintree into Linden. Linden teaches the generation and presentation of merchant insights to a brick-and-mortar merchant; Braintree teaches an input and processing system. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Braintree into Linden in order to enable users to easily input data about a piece of content including input which will block unwanted content such as particular ads or brands the consumer dislikes (Braintree, para. 0018).
Claim 2:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the physical location associated with the merchant comprises a subset of onsite items of the plurality of first party items (Linden, para 0037: “For instance, the merchant system 106 may assist the merchant in tracking inventory, sales, product orders, etc., in connection with a retail location”), the subset of onsite items comprising one or more first party items located within the physical location. (Linden, para. 0060: “In additional or alternative embodiments, a merchant profile may include information associated with a merchant's retail location. For example, the merchant profile can include a merchant's inventory, a layout of the merchant's store including an identification of where products are placed within the store, and/or purchase information for purchases made at the store (e.g., for the current customers of the merchant)” Examiner notes the plurality of first party items includes “inventory, sales, product orders , etc., in connection with a retail location” where a subset of onsite items i.e. inventory is taught by Linden).
Claim 3:
The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the physical location comprises a plurality of physical devices configured to capture the physical information, (Linden, para. 0038 and fig. 1: “As illustrated in FIG. 1, the system 100 may include one or more presence detectors 108. The presence detectors 108 may be configured to individually and/or collectively detect the presence of client device 102 and/or any other client devices. For example, the presence detectors 108 can be located within a physical retail location and can detect the presence of the client device 102 (or other client devices) within the physical retail location and/or within specific areas within the physical retail location, as will be explained in more detail below.”)
wherein the physical information comprises sensor data received via at least one of the plurality of physical devices, (Linden, para. 0038 and fig. 1: “As illustrated in FIG. 1, the system 100 may include one or more presence detectors 108. The presence detectors 108 may be configured to individually and/or collectively detect the presence of client device 102 and/or any other client devices. For example, the presence detectors 108 can be located within a physical retail location and can detect the presence of the client device 102 (or other client devices) within the physical retail location and/or within specific areas within the physical retail location, as will be explained in more detail below.”)
wherein each of the plurality of physical devices corresponds to one or more of the subset of onsite items. (Linden, para. 0040: “As another example, a presence detector may detect when a client device is within a specified proximity range, such as 0-1 meters, 1-5 meters, 5-10 meters, 10-50 meters, etc., or within a certain specified area (e.g., the dairy section or shoes department of a merchant's retail location). Examiner notes Linden teaches a physical device corresponding to a subset of inventory)
Claim 4:
The computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein each of the plurality of physical devices corresponds to a respective onsite item presented within the physical location (Linden, para. 0040: “As another example, a presence detector may detect when a client device is within a specified proximity range, such as 0-1 meters, 1-5 meters, 5-10 meters, 10-50 meters, etc., or within a certain specified area (e.g., the dairy section or shoes department of a merchant's retail location). Examiner notes Linden teaches a physical device corresponding to a subset of inventory i.e. an item is also a subset of items).
Claim 5:
The computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein determining the item interest level for the at least one first party item based, at least in part, on the physical information comprises: determining, by the first party computing system, at least one item type associated with the physical information of a plurality of item types associated with the plurality of first party items, wherein the at least one item type identifies one or more associated items; and (Linden, para. 0064: “In particular, the merchant may have a presence detector in each area (e.g., department) of a store. As a user moves from area to area within the store, different presence detectors can detect the user and notify the presence detection manager 204. To illustrate, and referring again to FIG. 1, user 112 may be browsing through a grocery store. The grocery store may have presence detectors 108 in the produce area, meat and seafood area, deli and bakery area, pharmacy area, and natural and organic products area.” Examiner notes Linden teaches an item type in the form of a category of item i.e. pharmacy item, bakery item, etc. where the type identifies items associated with that category i.e. cold medicines and eye drops or breads and donuts).
determining, by the first party computing system, the item interest level for the at least one first party item (Linden, para. 0026 and 0054: “As another example, the merchant insights system can provide recommendations based on a user's location within a merchant's retail location. To illustrate, the merchant insights may include a recommendation to a merchant to add a brand of women's jeans to the women's clothing area based on user product preferences and where users shop in the merchant's store…Further, the same user profiles may show that corresponding users spend an above average amount of time in a particular area of the merchant's retail location.” “In one or more embodiments, the profile manager 202 can also infer interests levels in products, product brands, and/or product categories based on the information received from third parties” Examiner notes Linden teaches determining an interest level of inventory based on user’s location) based, at least in part, on the at least one item type, (Linden, para. 0100: “The merchant insights system may identify each user, access the user profile associated with each user, and/or update the user profile to indicate the user's movements and browsing habits within the retail location 400. Subsequently, the merchant insights system may analyze the user profiles for the first and second user to identify common product preferences.”)
wherein the item interest level is indicative of a user interest in the one or more associated items. (Linden, para. 0064: “In particular, the merchant may have a presence detector in each area (e.g., department) of a store. As a user moves from area to area within the store, different presence detectors can detect the user and notify the presence detection manager 204. To illustrate, and referring again to FIG. 1, user 112 may be browsing through a grocery store. The grocery store may have presence detectors 108 in the produce area, meat and seafood area, deli and bakery area, pharmacy area, and natural and organic products area.” Examiner notes Linden teaches presence in a particular section as a level of interest where an item type in the form of a category of item associated with the section i.e. pharmacy item, bakery item, etc. where the type identifies items associated with that category i.e. cold medicines and eye drops or breads and donuts).
Claim 6:
The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein each of the plurality of physical devices corresponds to a respective area of a plurality of areas within the physical location, (Linden, para. 0100: “ As the first user and the second user may move about the retail location 400, the presence detectors 408 in each area may detect each user's movements. The presence detectors 408 may send detection notifications (or cause detection notifications to be sent by client devices 402a-b) for each user to the merchant insights system. The merchant insights system may identify each user, access the user profile associated with each user, and/or update the user profile to indicate the user's movements and browsing habits within the retail location 400.”)
wherein each of the plurality of areas corresponds to one or more of the plurality of item types. (Linden, para. 0064: “In particular, the merchant may have a presence detector in each area (e.g., department) of a store. As a user moves from area to area within the store, different presence detectors can detect the user and notify the presence detection manager 204. To illustrate, and referring again to FIG. 1, user 112 may be browsing through a grocery store. The grocery store may have presence detectors 108 in the produce area, meat and seafood area, deli and bakery area, pharmacy area, and natural and organic products area.” Examiner notes Linden teaches presence in a particular section as a level of interest where an item type in the form of a category of item associated with the section i.e. pharmacy item, bakery item, etc.).
Claim 7:
The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein initiating the presentation of the content item to the first party user via the user device comprises: generating, by the first party computing system, the content item based, at least in part, on the one or more associated items, wherein the content item comprises data indicative of at least one of the one or more associated items; and (Linden, para. 0147 and 0150: “A user may interact with anything that is capable of being represented in social-networking system 902 or by an external system of third-party system 908, which is separate from social-networking system 902 and coupled to social-networking system 902 via a network 904.” “A third-party content object provider may include one or more sources of content objects, which may be communicated to a client system 906. As an example and not by way of limitation, content objects may include information regarding things or activities of interest to the user, such as, for example, movie show times, movie reviews, restaurant reviews, restaurant menus, product information and reviews, or other suitable information” Examiner notes Linden teaches providing users with product information i.e. of inventory as taught by Linden above including data regarding product information and reviews i.e. data indicative of associated items).
providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of the content item to the first party user device. (Linden, para. 0147 and 0150: “A user may interact with anything that is capable of being represented in social-networking system 902 or by an external system of third-party system 908, which is separate from social-networking system 902 and coupled to social-networking system 902 via a network 904.” “A third-party content object provider may include one or more sources of content objects, which may be communicated to a client system 906. As an example and not by way of limitation, content objects may include information regarding things or activities of interest to the user, such as, for example, movie show times, movie reviews, restaurant reviews, restaurant menus, product information and reviews, or other suitable information” Examiner notes Linden teaches providing users with product information i.e. of inventory as taught by Linden above including data regarding product information and reviews i.e. data indicative of the information about the items).
Claim 8:
The computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the content item comprises item location data for at least one of the one or more associated items, (Linden, para. 0058 and 0060: “In identifying and/or managing product preferences, the profile manager 202 can utilize information available by way of a social graph maintained for a social networking system. For example, the profile manager 202 can utilize obtained information to look up product data from a product node within a social graph. The product node can include information such as a product name, product type, product brand, product category, model numbers, color options, size options, and/or any other suitable information associated with a product.” “ In additional or alternative embodiments, a merchant profile may include information associated with a merchant's retail location. For example, the merchant profile can include a merchant's inventory, a layout of the merchant's store including an identification of where products are placed within the store, and/or purchase information for purchases made at the store (e.g., for the current customers of the merchant)” Examiner notes Linden teaches product type and category which is informative of an item location as the product type and location would go in a particular aisle or department).
wherein the item location data is indicative of a location of the at least one associated item within the physical location. (Linden, para. 0058 and 0060: “In identifying and/or managing product preferences, the profile manager 202 can utilize information available by way of a social graph maintained for a social networking system. For example, the profile manager 202 can utilize obtained information to look up product data from a product node within a social graph. The product node can include information such as a product name, product type, product brand, product category, model numbers, color options, size options, and/or any other suitable information associated with a product.” “In additional or alternative embodiments, a merchant profile may include information associated with a merchant's retail location. For example, the merchant profile can include a merchant's inventory, a layout of the merchant's store including an identification of where products are placed within the store, and/or purchase information for purchases made at the store (e.g., for the current customers of the merchant)” Examiner notes Linden teaches product type and category which is informative of an item location as the product type and location would go in a particular aisle or department which would indicate other items in that same department and location).
Claim 9:
The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the content item comprises one or more directions to the location of the at least one associated item within the physical location. (Linden, para. 0058 and 0060: “In identifying and/or managing product preferences, the profile manager 202 can utilize information available by way of a social graph maintained for a social networking system. For example, the profile manager 202 can utilize obtained information to look up product data from a product node within a social graph. The product node can include information such as a product name, product type, product brand, product category, model numbers, color options, size options, and/or any other suitable information associated with a product.” “In additional or alternative embodiments, a merchant profile may include information associated with a merchant's retail location. For example, the merchant profile can include a merchant's inventory, a layout of the merchant's store including an identification of where products are placed within the store, and/or purchase information for purchases made at the store (e.g., for the current customers of the merchant)” Examiner notes Linden teaches product type and category which is informative of an item location as the product type and location would go in a particular aisle or department which would indicate other associated items in that same department and location).
Claim 10:
The computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the method further comprises: receiving, by the first party computing system, item inventory data for at least one of the one or more associated items, (Linden, para. 0037: “For instance, the merchant system 106 may assist the merchant in tracking inventory, sales, product orders, etc., in connection with a retail location.” Examiner notes Linden teaches an insights system including a profile manager in para. 0046 and receiving information via profile manager into the insights system in para. 0053).
wherein the item inventory data identifies an availability of the one or more associated items at the physical location; and (Linden, para. 0060: “In additional or alternative embodiments, a merchant profile may include information associated with a merchant's retail location. For example, the merchant profile can include a merchant's inventory, a layout of the merchant's store including an identification of where products are placed within the store, and/or purchase information for purchases made at the store (e.g., for the current customers of the merchant).”)
providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of the item inventory data to the user device. (Linden, para. 0032 and 0060: “For example, the client device 102 may directly communicate with the social networking system 104 and/or merchant system 106, bypassing the network 110.” “In additional or alternative embodiments, a merchant profile may include information associated with a merchant's retail location. For example, the merchant profile can include a merchant's inventory, a layout of the merchant's store including an identification of where products are placed within the store, and/or purchase information for purchases made at the store (e.g., for the current customers of the merchant).” Examiner notes Linden teaches a client device directly communicating with merchant systems where the merchant system includes inventory)
Claim 11:
The computer-implemented method of claim 10, wherein the method further comprises: determining, by the first party computing system based, at least in part, on the item inventory data, that at least one of the one or more associated items is unavailable at the physical location; and (Linden, para. 0092: “For example, as described above, the merchant insights system 101 may determine whether a preferred product, product brand, and/or product category fits the merchant type, is currently offered by the merchant at a particular retail location, and/or is available for the merchant to offer.” Examiner notes Linden teaches whether a product is available at a particular retain location which necessarily teaches whether a product is not available at a physical location).
in response to determining that the at least one associated item is unavailable, providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of another physical location associated with the merchant. (Linden, para. 0092: “For example, as described above, the merchant insights system 101 may determine whether a preferred product, product brand, and/or product category fits the merchant type, is currently offered by the merchant at a particular retail location, and/or is available for the merchant to offer.” Linden teaches a system that provides information on product availability at a particular retail location, which indicates other retail locations)
Claim 12:
The computer-implemented method of claim 10, wherein the method further comprises: determining, by the first party computing system based, at least in part, on the item inventory data, that at least one of the one or more associated items is available at the physical location; and (Linden, para. 0092: “For example, as described above, the merchant insights system 101 may determine whether a preferred product, product brand, and/or product category fits the merchant type, is currently offered by the merchant at a particular retail location, and/or is available for the merchant to offer.” Examiner notes Linden teaches whether a whether a preferred product brand or category is offered at a particular retail location which is indicative of whether associated items of the brand or category is available).
in response to determining that the at least one associated item is available, providing, by the first party computing system, data indicative of an incentive to purchase the at least one associated item at the physical location. (Linden, para. 0093: “As described above, merchant insights may provide the merchant with information that is otherwise unavailable to the merchant, which allows the merchant to increase product conversions at one or more of the merchant's retail locations.” Examiner notes Linden teaches an incentive to increase product conversions at a physical location)
Claim 13:
A first party computing system, comprising: one or more processors; and (Linden, para. 0121: “ Embodiments of the present disclosure may comprise or utilize a special purpose or general-purpose computer including computer hardware, such as, for example, one or more processors and system memory, as discussed in greater detail below.”)
a memory storing instructions that when executed by the one or more processors cause the computing system to perform operations comprising: (Linden, para. 0121: “Embodiments within the scope of the present disclosure also include physical and other computer-readable media for carrying or storing computer-executable instructions and/or data structures”)
receiving physical information associated with a first party user and a physical location associated with a merchant, (Linden, para. 0037: “The merchant system 106, as illustrated in FIG. 1, may be associated with a merchant. For example, the merchant may manage and operate the merchant system 106. The merchant system 106 may comprise one or more computing devices. Further, the merchant system 106 may be associated with one or more of the merchant's physical retail locations.” Examiner notes specification para 135 defines a “first party computing system” as computing device(s) utilized by a merchant)
wherein the physical information is indicative of a location of the first party user relative to one or more of a plurality of first party items associated with the merchant; (Linden, para 0037: “For instance, the merchant system 106 may assist the merchant in tracking inventory, sales, product orders, etc., in connection with a retail location”)
determining an item interest level for at least one first party item of the plurality of first party items based, at least in part, on the physical information; and (Linden, para. 0026 and 0054: “As another example, the merchant insights system can provide recommendations based on a user's location within a merchant's retail location. To illustrate, the merchant insights may include a recommendation to a merchant to add a brand of women's jeans to the women's clothing area based on user product preferences and where users shop in the merchant's store…Further, the same user profiles may show that corresponding users spend an above average amount of time in a particular area of the merchant's retail location.” “In one or more embodiments, the profile manager 202 can also infer interests levels in products, product brands, and/or product categories based on the information received from third parties” Examiner notes Linden teaches determining an interest level of inventory based on user’s location).
initiating a presentation of a content item to the first party user via a user device associated with the first party user (Braintree, para. 0138: “In another embodiment, brand information pertaining to a geographical area such as a city may be transmitted to a user's device upon user device request or arrival in an area 902 by a server such as an audience engine, content/brand server or other computing device over a network.”) based, at least in part, on the item interest level, (Linden, para. 0152: “Advertisement-pricing modules may combine social information, the current time, location information, or other suitable information to provide relevant advertisements, in the form of notifications, to a user.” Examiner notes “content item” interpreted as information consistent with specification para. 0004)
wherein the content item comprises information for the at least one first party item. (Linden, para. 0147 and 0150: “A user may interact with anything that is capable of being represented in social-networking system 902 or by an external system of third-party system 908, which is separate from social-networking system 902 and coupled to social-networking system 902 via a network 904.” “A third-party content object provider may include one or more sources of content objects, which may be communicated to a client system 906. As an example and not by way of limitation, content objects may include information regarding things or activities of interest to the user, such as, for example, movie show times, movie reviews, restaurant reviews, restaurant menus, product information and reviews, or other suitable information” Examiner notes Linden teaches providing users with product information i.e. of inventory as taught by Linden above)
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Braintree into Linden as set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Claim 16:
The first party computing system of claim 13, wherein the operations further comprise: receiving first party data associated with a plurality of first party users of the merchant, (Linden, para. 0041: “Upon receiving a detection notification that client device 102 has entered, remained in, and/or exited the detection range of a presence detector 108, the merchant system 106 may pass the information to the social networking system 104. For example, the merchant system 106 may pass identification numbers corresponding to the detected client devices (e.g., unique user or device IDs) to the social networking system 104.” Examiner notes Linden teaches multiple devices and unique users)
wherein the first party data comprises user data for the first party user, the user data indicative of one or more user attributes for the first party user; and (Linden, para. 0042 and 0049: “In an alternative embodiment, the client device 102 may detect the presence of one or more presence detectors 108 and send corresponding detection notifications, including identifiers, to the social networking system 104. For example, the user 112 of client device 102 may enter into a merchant's physical retail establishment.” “In one or more embodiments, a user profile may include, but is not limited to, user information, social networking activity information, merchant activity information, and third-party content activity information. User information can include personal information about a user (e.g., name, gender, age, birth date, hometown, etc.), contact information (e.g., residence address, mailing address, current city, email addresses, phone numbers, screen names, user ID, etc.), educational information (e.g., school, highest schooling level obtained, time period, class year, concentration, degree, etc.), employment information (e.g., employer, position, employer locations, employment history, etc.), family and relationship information (e.g., married to, engaged to, partners with, parents of, siblings of, children of, cousin of, relationship with, etc.), and other personal information”)
determining the item interest level for the at least one first party item based, at least in part, on the user data. (Braintree, para. 0020: “In one embodiment as illustrated in FIG. 1, an identifier (login, Facebook account, software ID, cookie etc.) is associated with a user 102 which may associate the user and/or her device(s) to an interest graph as well. Upon a user keyword search, or other user input such as search/browsing/input/purchases/actions 104, selected search results and ads/content, may be transmitted 106 to the user.” Examiner notes “content item” interpreted as information consistent with specification para. 0004; Examiner further notes Linden teaches providing users with product information i.e. of inventory, a first party item)
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Braintree into Linden as set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Claim 17:
The computing system of claim 16, wherein the one or more user attributes are indicative of a transaction history associated with the first party user, and wherein the item interest level for the at least one item is determined based, at least in part, on the transaction history associated with the first party user. (Braintree, para. 0042: “Information that may be useful in gleaning likely demographic information from the Swote operation which may also be analyzed can include contextual Swote information such as the time, date, user/advertar identity, device type, OS type, account information, location of the user when performing the Swote gesture, proximity of businesses, brands, friends and other information about the user, pre-assigned keywords, targeted demographics, browser history and other commands/tags associated to content such as: metadata, page source code, URL and related URLs, related files, data appearing on the same page or file system and related data such as links to other files, results from collaborative filtering, taxonomy data determined from analysis of the above data such as related categories/interests and marketing data/statistical probabilities related to the data above can be analyzed, etc.”)
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Braintree into Linden as set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Claim 18:
The computing system of claim 16, wherein the user data is indicative of one or more associated users, and (Braintree, para. 0204: “Specifically, the game's content may be to answer questions about the target user's interests (such as a social media friend or is otherwise connected to). Brands and other content may be presented to the target user via the above selection methods. Upon answering/sorting the content such as by the brand sorter illustrated in FIG. 19, brands or other content that the target user's interest graph that are associated with a substantial probability of interest or other criteria may be displayed to the answering user. This provides an entertaining way to supplement data about the target user from the answering users about the target user.”)
wherein the operations further comprise: determining a secondary item interest level for the one or more associated users based, at least in part, on the physical information. (Braintree, para. 0108: “Other user data 712 may comprise the purchaser's browsing history or those of his friends/family; past purchases; medical history; Facebook likes; screen scrapped data; spend graphs or other preexisting data. Other user data may also comprise the context of data, such as location of the data (e.g., data the user has input an affinity toward) within a webpage in relation to other data as determined by a Domain Object Model, hyperlinked data (as discussed in previous applications) etc. which has been discussed in the referenced applications.” Examiner notes Braintree teaches data of friends and interest data as above and Linden teaches physical information of users i.e. physical information collected on devices of friends).
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Braintree into Linden as set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Claim 19:
One or more non-transitory computer-readable media comprising instructions that when executed by one or more computing devices cause the one or more computing devices to perform operations comprising: (Linden, para. 0121: “ In particular, one or more of the processes described herein may be implemented at least in part as instructions embodied in a non-transitory computer-readable medium and executable by one or more computing devices (e.g., any of the media content access devices described herein). In general, a processor (e.g., a microprocessor) receives instructions, from a non-transitory computer-readable medium, (e.g., a memory, etc.), and executes those instructions, thereby performing one or more processes, including one or more of the processes described herein”)
receiving physical information associated with a first party user (Braintree, para. 0138: “In another embodiment, brand information pertaining to a geographical area such as a city may be transmitted to a user's device upon user device request or arrival in an area 902 by a server such as an audience engine, content/brand server or other computing device over a network.”) and a physical location associated with a merchant, (Linden, para. 0037: “The merchant system 106, as illustrated in FIG. 1, may be associated with a merchant. For example, the merchant may manage and operate the merchant system 106. The merchant system 106 may comprise one or more computing devices. Further, the merchant system 106 may be associated with one or more of the merchant's physical retail locations.” Examiner notes specification para 135 defines a “first party computing system” as computing device(s) utilized by a merchant)
wherein the physical information is indicative of a location of the first party user relative to one or more of a plurality of first party items associated with the merchant; (Linden, para 0037: “For instance, the merchant system 106 may assist the merchant in tracking inventory, sales, product orders, etc., in connection with a retail location”)
determining an item interest level for at least one first party item of the plurality of first party items based, at least in part, on the physical information; and (Linden, para. 0026 and 0054: “As another example, the merchant insights system can provide recommendations based on a user's location within a merchant's retail location. To illustrate, the merchant insights may include a recommendation to a merchant to add a brand of women's jeans to the women's clothing area based on user product preferences and where users shop in the merchant's store…Further, the same user profiles may show that corresponding users spend an above average amount of time in a particular area of the merchant's retail location.” “In one or more embodiments, the profile manager 202 can also infer interests levels in products, product brands, and/or product categories based on the information received from third parties” Examiner notes Linden teaches determining an interest level of inventory based on user’s location).
initiating a presentation of a content item to the first party user via a user device associated with the first party user (Linden, para. 0152: “Advertisement-pricing modules may combine social information, the current time, location information, or other suitable information to provide relevant advertisements, in the form of notifications, to a user.” Examiner notes “content item” interpreted as information consistent with specification para. 0004) based, at least in part, on the item interest level, wherein the content item comprises information for the at least one first party item. (Linden, para. 0147 and 0150: “A user may interact with anything that is capable of being represented in social-networking system 902 or by an external system of third-party system 908, which is separate from social-networking system 902 and coupled to social-networking system 902 via a network 904.” “A third-party content object provider may include one or more sources of content objects, which may be communicated to a client system 906. As an example and not by way of limitation, content objects may include information regarding things or activities of interest to the user, such as, for example, movie show times, movie reviews, restaurant reviews, restaurant menus, product information and reviews, or other suitable information” Examiner notes Linden teaches providing users with product information i.e. of inventory as taught by Linden above)
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Braintree into Linden as set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Claim 20:
The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 19, wherein the content item is displayed via a user interface of a first party software application. (Linden, para. 0162: “An advertisement may be displayed within dedicated pages, requiring the user to interact with or watch the advertisement before the user may access a page or utilize an application. The user may, for example view the advertisement through a web browser.”)
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linden, et. al. (US 2019/0220878 A1; hereinafter, “Linden”) in view of Braintree, Brian (US 2018/0204244 A1; hereinafter, “Braintree”) and further in view of Shmueli, Omar (US 2021/0224883 A1; hereinafter, “Shmueli”)
Claim 14:
The first party computing system of claim 13, wherein the physical information comprises radar data descriptive of one or more user movements relative to one or more of the plurality of first party items. (Shmueli, para. 0051 and 0063: “Each of said plurality of wearable devices is being worn on a hand of a different picker and configured to obtain visual input of activity performed by the hand of the different picker. Each picker is tasked with picking items to fulfill a shopping order of a different customer. Said control module is configured to identify a picking action that comprises picking up the object and placing the object in a tote associated with the shopping order of the customer, wherein the picking action is captured by the wearable device.” “In some exemplary embodiments, actions may be monitored using sensors, such as cameras, radars, LiDARs, or the like, that observe the human subject”)
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Shmueli into Linden as modified. Shmueli teaches obtaining a visual input from a sensor located on a wearable device, wherein the wearable device is worn on a hand of a picker, wherein the sensor is configured to capture at least an interior portion of a hand of the picker, wherein the picker is tasked with picking items to fulfill a shopping order of a customer. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Shmueli into Linden as modified in order to enable monitoring actions performed by a human subject without affecting performance of such actions so as to not interfere with the actions (Shmueli, para. 0060).
Claim 15:
The first party computing system of claim 14, wherein determining the item interest level for the at least one first party item based, at least in part, on the physical information, comprises: (Linden, para. 0026 and 0054: “As another example, the merchant insights system can provide recommendations based on a user's location within a merchant's retail location. To illustrate, the merchant insights may include a recommendation to a merchant to add a brand of women's jeans to the women's clothing area based on user product preferences and where users shop in the merchant's store…Further, the same user profiles may show that corresponding users spend an above average amount of time in a particular area of the merchant's retail location.” “In one or more embodiments, the profile manager 202 can also infer interests levels in products, product brands, and/or product categories based on the information received from third parties” Examiner notes Linden teaches determining an interest level of inventory based on user’s location).
receiving gesture data for the first party user by inputting the radar data (Shmueli, para. 0051 and 0063: “Each of said plurality of wearable devices is being worn on a hand of a different picker and configured to obtain visual input of activity performed by the hand of the different picker. Each picker is tasked with picking items to fulfill a shopping order of a different customer. Said control module is configured to identify a picking action that comprises picking up the object and placing the object in a tote associated with the shopping order of the customer, wherein the picking action is captured by the wearable device.” “In some exemplary embodiments, actions may be monitored using sensors, such as cameras, radars, LiDARs, or the like, that observe the human subject”) to a gesture recognition machine-learning model configured to identify one or more gestures corresponding to radar data; and (Shmueli, para. 0082: “In some exemplary embodiments, based on the visual input, the item and the action being performed thereon may be identified. The device may comprise a vision sensor such as a camera, an IR sensor, a radar, a LiDAR, an ultrasonic transductor, electro-magnetic waves-based sensor, a laser-based sensor, a visible-light based sensor, an invisible light-based sensor, a combination thereof, or the like, that provides visual representation of the item. It is noted that the visual input may be a visual representation as would be captured by a human being, data that is computationally processed to generate an image (e.g., by an imaging process), or the like. The device may be configured to identify the item using the visual data. As an example, the device may be configured to identify the item based on an optical image, based on QR code, barcode, an identifier of the item, such as a combination of numbers, letters, icons, or the like. In some exemplary embodiments, computer vision techniques may be employed to analyze the images, such as object recognition techniques, image analysis techniques, machine learning, or the like”)
determining the item interest level for the at least one item based, at least in part, on the gesture data. (Shmueli, para. 0095: “ The data collected by the disclosed subject matter may be utilized to improve store operations and checkout experience, to merge consumers online and offline identities, to re-target shoppers online based on in-store purchases, to learn shopper interests and habits, to learn consumers' reaction to various shelf displays and store layouts, or the like”)
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Shmueli into Linden, as modified, as set forth above with respect to claim 14.
Search Notes Highlight
Closest art found via IP.com with key words physical information associated with a first party user and a physical location associated with a merchant item interest purchase insights "gesture", further filtered by priority date and additional key terms: “Machine learning” “radar” and “gestures”
Prior Art
Nair, et. al. (US 2020/0204541 A1) teaches systems and methods for gesture and motion detection using a device radar component for user authentication.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sally T. Ley whose telephone number is (571)272-3406. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 10:00am - 6:00pm 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, Viker Lamardo can be reached at (571) 270-5871. 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.
/STL/Examiner, Art Unit 2147
/VIKER A LAMARDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2147
