Aop$4Notice 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 .
1. Applicant’s preliminary amendment filed 10/29/2024 is entered. Claims 11, 14-15 are canceled. New claims 16-23 are added. Claims 4-5, 8-10, 12-13 are amended. Claims 1-10, 12-13, 16-23 are pending for examination. Claims 2-10 depend from claim 1, Claims 16-19 depend from claim 12, and claims 20-23 depend from claim 13.
2. Continuity: This application filed 10/29/2024 is a National Stage entry of PCT/CN2023/096324 , International Filing Date: 05/25/2023 claims foreign priority to 202210677747.5, filed 06/15/2022.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 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 1-10, 12-13, 16-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, when analyzed as per MPEP 2106.
Step 1 analysis:
Claims 1-10 are to a process comprising a series of steps, clams 12, 16-19 to a device, and claims 13, 20-23 to manufacture, which are statutory (Step 1: Yes).
Step 2A Analysis:
Step 2A Prong 1 analysis: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04, subsection II, a claim “recites” a judicial exception when the judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claim.
Claims 1-10, 12-13, 16-23 recite abstract idea.
Claim 1 recites:
1. (Original) An information display method, comprising:
(i) displaying an information stream page, wherein the information stream page comprises an object display page; the object display page comprises summary information corresponding to one or more to-be-displayed objects, and the one or more to-be-displayed objects are to-be-displayed objects corresponding to the information stream page;
(iii) if the one or more to-be-displayed objects comprise a target to-be-displayed object, the summary information corresponding to the target to- be-displayed object further comprises one or more pieces of specification attribute information of the target to-be-displayed object;
(iv) displaying, if at least one piece of the specification attribute information is in a selected state, an order confirmation page corresponding to the target to-be-displayed object in response to a determination operation on the target summary information.
The highlighted limitations comprising, “ displaying, if at least one piece of the specification attribute information is in a selected state, an order confirmation page corresponding to the target to-be-displayed object in response to a determination operation on the target summary information”, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, recite a commercial process as stated in the Applicant’s Specification, see at least paragraph 0030, “ [0030] …………. The specification attribute selection page of commodity A displays all color options of commodity A. The user selects red in the specification attribute selection page of commodity A, and clicks the "Confirm" option to enter an order confirmation page. The user can only complete the whole order placing operation by clicking "Submit Order" on the order confirmation page. “ which is a sales activity for displaying items for purchase and receiving orders for displayed items/commodities, falling within “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. Accordingly, claim 1 with its dependent claims 2-10 recite an abstract idea.
Since the other two independent claims 12 and 13 with their dependent claims 16-19 and 20-23 recite similar limitations as claim 1, they are analyzed on the same basis reciting “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Limitations in pending claims 1-10, 12-13, 16-23 recite abstract idea for further analysis (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Step 2A Prong 2 analysis: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception or whether the claim is “directed to” the judicial exception. This evaluation is performed by (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d).
Claims 1-10, 12-13, 16-23: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Claim 1 recites the additional limitations of using generic computer components comprising a generic computer implementing the steps : (i) displaying an information stream page, wherein the information stream page comprises an object display page; the object display page comprises summary information corresponding to one or more to-be-displayed objects, and the one or more to-be-displayed objects are to-be-displayed objects corresponding to the information stream page; (iii) if the one or more to-be-displayed objects comprise a target to-be-displayed object, the summary information corresponding to the target to- be-displayed object further comprises one or more pieces of specification attribute information of the target to-be-displayed object; (iv) displaying, if at least one piece of the specification attribute information is in a selected state, an order confirmation page corresponding to the target to-be-displayed object in response to a determination operation on the target summary information.”; which are mere data outputting for observation by potential buyers recited at a high level of generality, and thus, are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and output, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05. The computer is recited at a high level of generality and is used as a tool to perform the generic computer function of receiving data. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Even when viewed individually in combination, these additional elements in claim 1 do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO), and the claim is directed to the judicial exception. (Step 2A: YES).
Since the other two independent claims 12 and 13 recite similar limitations as claim 1, they are analyzed on the same basis as directed to the judicial exception. (Step 2A: YES).
Dependent claims 2-10, 16-19, 20-23 recite limitations which are mere extension of the displaying data recited in the independent claims 1, 12 and 13 and further including non-functional descriptive subject matter recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g). The limitations, “ switching the pieces of specification attribute information displayed in the information display area in response to a trigger operation on the information display area.” [claim 8], “ displaying a specification attribute selection page in response to a trigger operation on the omit control, wherein the specification attribute selection page comprises all the specification attribute information of the target to-be-displayed object.” [claim 9], are mere generic computer functions related to displaying/outputting data and information related to displayed objects based upon certain actions and do not recite any specific details reflecting technical improvement over generic displaying functions on generic computers.
Thus, when viewed individually and in combination, the additional elements in the pending claims 1-10, 12-13, 16-19, 20-23 do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO), and the claims are directed to the judicial exception. (Step 2A: YES).
Step 2B analysis: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the recited exception i.e., whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, adds an inventive concept to the claim. See MPEP 2106.05.
The claims 1-10, 12-13, 16-19, 20-23 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Since claims are as per Step 2A are directed to an abstract idea, they have to be analyzed per Step 2B, if they recite an inventive step, i.e., the claim recite additional elements or a combination of elements that amount to “Significantly More” than the judicial exception in the claim.
As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claims 1-10, 12-13, 16-19, 20-23 amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components, and generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components, and generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use using a generic computer components cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
As per MPEP 2106 , a conclusion that an additional element or elements is/are extra-solution activity, or are well-understood, conventional and routine activity in step 2A should be re-evaluated in step 2B. Here the outputting/ displaying steps were considered insignificant extra-solution activity, and thus are re-evaluated in step 2B to determine if it is more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field.
The background of the example does not provide any indication that the computer components are anything other than a generic, off the shelf computer component and the Symantec, TLI, OIP Techs, Versata court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d) (ii) indicate that mere receiving, transmitting, and displaying steps using a generic computer is a well-understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). See MPEP 2106.05 (f) 2: Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit)
Accordingly, a conclusion that the transmitting, and displaying steps are well-understood, routine conventional activities are supported under Berkheimer Option 2.
Even when considered in combination, the additional elements in the pending claims 1-10, 12-13, 16-19, 20-23 represent mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer and insignificant extra-solution activity, which do not provide an inventive concept. (Step 2B: NO).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
4.1. Claims 1, 3-5, 7, 10, 12-13, 17-19, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 108230031 cited in the IDS, hereinafter CN’031 filed 11/20/2024 in view of Jiang [US 2022/0148072 A1].
Regarding claim 1, CN’031 teaches an information display method, comprising: displaying an information
“ [0014] To adapt to the procurement characteristics of the building materials industry and solve the above-mentioned technical problems, this invention provides a platform that supports parallel price comparison and parallel procurement from multiple suppliers at the customer's front end. [0015] The platform supports parallel price comparison and parallel procurement from multiple suppliers on the customer's front end. The platform's front-end display page includes primary categories, secondary categories, product modules, product areas, and order modules. [0016] The primary category is displayed in the product area and interacts with the secondary category and product module. It is used to call the secondary category and products belonging to the primary category in the product module. Selecting each primary category will correspond to multiple secondary categories.[0017] The second-level category is displayed in the product area and interacts with the first-level category and product module. It is used to call up products under its first-level category that belong to the second-level category. [0018] The product module is used to store product information and display the corresponding products in the product area by interacting with the first-level category and the second-level category; [0019] The product area is used to display all product information under the selected first-level or second-level category. The product area includes product groups arranged vertically by product name. Each product group contains several brand groups arranged horizontally by brand and information bars arranged vertically by product model or specification. Each brand group interacts with the product module to call the product information corresponding to the brand in its product group. When the brand group is selected, it is displayed in the information bar. [0020] The order module and the product module are connected for communication.[0021] The product information includes the product's price and description. [0022] The product area includes an information field for each product model or specification, which also includes a quantity input field. The product area also has a confirmation button that is connected to the shopping cart to store and record the corresponding products and quantities. The shopping cart is connected to the order module to submit and generate an order. [0023] This invention provides a platform that facilitates product selection, provides intuitive pricing, and significantly improves procurement efficiency by enabling parallel price comparison and procurement from multiple suppliers. …..”. These excerpts display information about a targeted category of a building product with its specification attributes and information such as, a price so that the user can place and confirm an order for a specifically selected item. CN’031 fails to disclose that the information displayed screen/page is a streaming page. Jiang, in the same field of endeavor , teaches displaying an order confirmation interface, using the interface to display order processing information including the target item/commodity attribute description [See Abstract , “ A method for processing order information comprising displaying an order confirmation interface of a target commodity in response to an order generating instruction of the target commodity in a live streaming page, and displaying order processing information in response to a confirmation instruction on the order confirmation interface. The order confirmation interface is configured for displaying commodity attribute information of the target commodity and an order generating manner of the target commodity. The order generating manner of the target commodity is a target generating manner, and the order processing information is used for indicating an order processing result of the target commodity.”, para 0003 “ With the rapid development of the Internet technologies, live streaming is widely used and e-commerce live streaming emerges. E-commerce live streaming means that offline physical stores promote and sell their products through a live-streaming platform or a live-streaming software. In the related technology, an anchor can introduce commodities through a live-streaming room, and a viewer in the live-streaming room can watch the live streaming and click on a commodity in a live streaming page for being redirected to a commodity details page to place an order for purchase.”., and para 0042, “The order editing instruction is an instruction or a command for instructing the client to display the order editing interface, and the order editing interface is a page for editing the commodity attribute information so as to acquire the edited commodity attribute information. Since the same commodity may have different categories, models and other attribute information, such as flavor, color, size, etc., and the different accounts may purchase different quantities of the commodity, the first account can select needed flavor, color or size via the order editing interface, and the selected flavor, color or size is the edited commodity attribute information which can be used for generating the order of the target commodity.” Therefore, in view of the teachings of Jiang, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified CN’031 to incorporate the concept of using a live streaming page for displaying information of a targeted item, because, as shown in Jiang, it would enable a viewer to watch the streaming and click an item to order it, and secondly, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings of CN’031 and Jiang teach that the information display method according to Claim 1, wherein, if at least two pieces of the specification attribute information are in the selected state, each piece of the specification attribute information in the selected state corresponds to a different category [See para 0011, “ This type of product display, which adapts to screens, uses large images to highlight a few products or arranges banners in a staggered manner within each category. It is suitable for websites with high-quality images..”
Regarding claim 4, the limitations, “ 4. The information display method according to any one of Claim 1 , wherein a display position of the summary information corresponding to the target to- be-displayed object is a first display position in the object display page.”, are covered in the analysis of claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, its limitations, “The information display method according to any one of Claim 1 , wherein, the displaying, if at least one piece of the specification attribute information is in a selected state, an order confirmation page corresponding to the target to-be-displayed object in response to a determination operation on the target summary information, comprises: in response to a selection operation on at least one piece of the specification attribute information, switching the selected piece of specification attribute information from an unselected state to the selected state; in response to the determination operation on the summary information of the target to-be- displayed object, displaying an order confirmation page corresponding to the target to-be- displayed object.”, are already covered in the analysis of claim 1 in view of the combined teachings of CN’031 and Jiang and the excerpts cited therein.
Regarding claim 7, the combined teachings of CN’0131 and Jiang teach the limitations, “ The information display method according to Claim 1, wherein the summary information comprises at least one of following: image information; if at least one piece of the specification attribute information is in the selected state, the image information is image information of the target to-be-displayed object under the specification attribute in the selected state; or label information; if at least one piece of the specification attribute information is in the selected state, the label information is label information of the target to-be-displayed object under the specification attribute in the selected state.”, see Jiang para 11 which teaches displaying images of the products to be selected and Jiang paras 0015—0016 describes displaying information of the primary category of a selected item [image] and its secondary categories [wherein attributes can relate to categories]. Further para 0012 describes displaying targeted items [in form of images as already described above] with their brands displayed [brands can relate to labels].
Regarding claim 10, its limitations, “The information display method according to claim 1, wherein the information stream page comprises a live room preview stream page or a live room display page ;the to-be-displayed objects comprise commodities; the specification attribute information comprises at least one of the following: size, style, material, and color.”, are already covered in the analysis of claim 1 in view of the combined teachings of CN’0131 in view of Jiang.”, are already covered in the analysis of claim 1 in view of the teachings of CN’031 and Jiang.
Regarding claims 12, 17-19, and 13, 21-23, since their limitations are similar to the limitations of claims 3-5, they are analyzed and rejected as being unpatentable over CN’031 view of Jiang based on same rationale.
4.2. Claims 2, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’031 in view of Jiang and in view of Xiao et al. [US 20120036037 A1], hereinafter Xiao.
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings of CN’031 and Jiang teach and render obvious the limitations of claim 1, as analyzed above but fail to disclose that the target to-be- displayed object comprises at least one of the following: to-be-displayed object in a state of being explained, a to-be-displayed object with a display priority meeting a preset display condition, and a to-be-displayed object with a popularity value meeting a preset popularity condition. Xiao, in the same field of online product purchasing and recommending teaches displaying products and items as per their popularity, see para 0003, “ [0003] Online shopping has become a common form of shopping. In the course of a user's browsing session at a merchant's website, a recommendation window associated with the website may recommend popular products to the user and also display information concerning such products on the web page for the user's view. …. For example, in a typical technique of recommending information, if the number of purchases of a particular product exceeds a certain threshold number, then the information related to the product is recommended to a user; or, if the click traffic for a certain product exceeds a certain threshold number, then the information for the product is recommended to a user.”. Therefore, in view of the teachings of Xiao, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combined teachings of CN’031 in view of Jiang to incorporate the concept of displaying items as per their rankings in popularity and arrive at the claimed limitations of to-be-displayed object in a state of being explained, a to-be-displayed object with a display priority meeting a preset display condition, and a to-be-displayed object with a popularity value meeting a preset popularity condition, because, as shown in Xiao, to recommend those products which are more popular than the others and secondly, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claims 16 and 20, since their limitations are similar to the limitations of claim 2, they are analyzed and rejected as being unpatentable over CN’031 view of Jiang in view of Xiao based on same rationale.
4.3. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’031 in view of Jiang and in view of JP 2010205072A, hereinafter JP’072
Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings of CN’031 and Jiang teach and render obvious the limitations of claims 1 and 5, as analyzed above but fail to disclose that at least one of the following is satisfied: a background color of the specification attribute information in the selected state is different from that of the specification attribute information in the unselected state; or, a text color of the specification attribute information in the selected state is different from that of the specification attribute information in the unselected state; or, a border color of the specification attribute information in the selected state is different from that of the specification attribute information in the unselected state. JP’072, in the same field of online shopping, teaches displaying different attributes of an item with different marked colors, see Abstract, “The online shopping management device includes: a search condition accepting means for accepting a search condition for a product from a user terminal; a search execution means for searching a product information database on the basis of the accepted search condition; a product attribute extracting and clustering means for extracting product attributes from a search result and clusters them; a color information assigning means for assigning color information different by at least cluster to display parts of clustered product attributes; and a search result page generating and transmitting means for generating a search result page on the basis of a color information assignment result and transmitting the search result page to the user terminal”. Therefore, in view of the teachings of JP’072, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combined teachings of CN’031 in view of Jiang to incorporate the concept of a background color of the specification attribute information in the selected state is different from that of the specification attribute information in the unselected state; or, a text color of the specification attribute information in the selected state is different from that of the specification attribute information in the unselected state; or, a border color of the specification attribute information in the selected state is different from that of the specification attribute information in the unselected state, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
4.4. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’031 in view of Jiang and in view of Alba [US 20190180789 A1].
Regarding claim 8, the combined teachings of CN’031 and Jiang teach and render obvious the limitations of claim 1, as analyzed above but fail to disclose that wherein the summary information comprises an information display area, and the specification attribute information is located in the information display area; if the number of pieces of the specification attribute information that can be accommodated in the information display area is less than the number of pieces of the specification attribute information that need to be displayed, the method further comprises: switching the pieces of specification attribute information displayed in the information display area in response to a trigger operation on the information display area. Alba, in the same field of managing data in a specified display area teaches providing a triggering operation by sliding new or additional data in place of existing data, which is operated by a button so that the existing data slides to accommodate new data. ”. Therefore, in view of the teachings of Alba, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combined teachings of CN’031 in view of Jiang to incorporate the concept of wherein the summary information comprises an information display area, and the specification attribute information is located in the information display area; if the number of pieces of the specification attribute information that can be accommodated in the information display area is less than the number of pieces of the specification attribute information that need to be displayed, the method further comprises: switching the pieces of specification attribute information displayed in the information display area in response to a trigger operation on the information display area. Alba, in the same field of managing data in a specified display area teaches providing a triggering operation by sliding new or additional data in place of existing data, which is operated by a button so that the existing data slides to accommodate new data, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
4.5. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’031 in view of Jiang and in view of Khoo [US 20080059571 A1]
Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings of CN’031 and Jiang teach and render obvious the limitations of claim 1, as analyzed above but fail to disclose that wherein the summary information comprises an information display area, and the specification attribute information is located in the information display area; if the number of pieces of the specification attribute information that can be accommodated in the information display area is less than the number of pieces of the specification attribute information that need to be displayed, a portion of the pieces of the specification attribute information and an omit control are displayed in the information display area; the method further comprises: displaying a specification attribute selection page in response to a trigger operation on the omit control, wherein the specification attribute selection page comprises all the specification attribute information of the target to-be-displayed object. Khoo , in the same field f endeavor of using a switch action to display another web page for displaying content, teaches, see claims 12-14 “ 12. A method of displaying an intermediate message in an active display area of a network client computer, comprising the steps of: identifying an unused display space within the active display area, …… monitoring the state of the active display area to determine if there is a context switch of the active display area to display new content in the active display area; ….. displaying an intermediate message as a full page display during the idle time if there is a context switch of the active display area; and displaying an intermediate message of appropriate size in the unused display space if there is not a context switch of the active display area. …… 14. The method of claim 12 wherein the context switch is due to one of scrolling entire display area from a first page to a second page, or loading a new web page from a first network address to second network address.”. Therefore, in view of the teachings of Khoo, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combined teachings of CN’031 in view of Jiang to incorporate the concept of wherein the summary information comprises an information display area, and the specification attribute information is located in the information display area; if the number of pieces of the specification attribute information that can be accommodated in the information display area is less than the number of pieces of the specification attribute information that need to be displayed, a portion of the pieces of the specification attribute information and an omit control are displayed in the information display area; the method further comprises: displaying a specification attribute selection page in response to a trigger operation on the omit control, wherein the specification attribute selection page comprises all the specification attribute information of the target to-be-displayed object, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
NPL reference:
(i) Y. Sakurai, T. Kawabe, T. Sakai, K. Takada, S. Tsuruta and M. Yoshiyuki, "A sale-oriented product management method for e-commerce," 2010 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Istanbul, Turkey, 2010, pp. 646-653 retrieved from IP. Com on 04022026 describes” a sale management web page, the automatic construction and interactive modifications of sale pages as well as the automatic/interactive update of DB for each sale product group can be done simultaneously and dynamically, synchronized with the sales”, such that on these sales web pages information comprising discount rate, point rate, conditions of delivery), etc. and product design templates can be selected. Each of sales products is managed individually and using an interactive function, if necessary a shortage of stock can be automatically displayed on the sales screen.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOGESH C GARG whose telephone number is (571)272-6756. The examiner can normally be reached Max-Flex.
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, Jeffrey A. Smith can be reached at 571-272-6763. 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.
YOGESH C. GARG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3688
/YOGESH C GARG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3688