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 .
Claims Status
Claims 1-14 were initially pending.
Claims 11 and 14 have been canceled via preliminary amendment.
Claims 12-13 were amended via preliminary amendment.
Claims 15-22 were newly added via preliminary amendment.
Claims 1-10, 12-13 and 15-22 are pending and rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/9/2024 and 2/3/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
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 1-10, 12-13 and 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claims 1-10 are directed to a method, which is a process. Claims 12 and 15-22 are directed to a device, which is a machine. Claim 13 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium, which is an apparatus. Therefore, claims 1-10, 12-13 and 15-22 are directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A (Prong 1):
Representative claim 1 sets forth the following limitations which recite the abstract idea of providing product recommendations:
presenting an object presentation page, wherein the object presentation page comprises a first information presentation region;
after receiving a selection operation for a target object in the first information presentation region, when it is determined that a preset presentation condition is reached according to resource value characterization data of the target object and description information of a discount to be used, presenting a second information presentation region in the object presentation page; wherein the second information presentation region comprises an add-on object to be used; resource value characterization data of the add-on object to be used satisfies a resource condition to be used; the resource condition to be used is determined according to the resource value characterization data of the target object and the description information of the discount to be used; and
adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation in response to a trigger operation for the add-on object to be used, wherein the add-on object to be used is in a selected state within the first information presentation region.
The recited limitations above set forth steps to provide product recommendations. These limitations amount to certain methods of organizing human activity, including commercial or legal interactions (e.g. advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors).
Such concepts have been identified by the courts as abstract ideas (see: MPEP 2106).
Step 2A (Prong 2):
Examiner notes that representative claim 1 fails to recite any additional elements such as a processor, computer, etc. However, even if claim were to recite additional features such as these, the claims would fail to integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. The claims would merely include instruction to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or to merely use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, while the additional elements would do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular field of technological environment or field of use.
Furthermore, this is also because the claim fails to (i) reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, (ii) implement a judicial exception with a particular machine, (iii) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or (iv) apply the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
In view of the above, under Step 2A (Prong 2), claim 1 does not integrate the recited exception into a practical application (see again: MPEP 2106).
Step 2B:
When taken individually or as a whole, the lack of additional elements of claim 1 do not provide an inventive concept (i.e. whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, even including an additional element of a processor or computer to perform the steps would amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Certain additional elements also recite well-understood, routine, and conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(d)).
Even if considered as an ordered combination, any additional elements of claim 1 would not add anything further than when they are considered individually.
In view of the above, claim 1 does not provide an inventive concept under step 2B, and is ineligible for patenting.
Dependent claims 2-10 recite further complexity to the judicial exception (abstract idea) of claim 1, such as by further defining the steps for providing product recommendations. Thus, each of claims 2-10 are held to recite a judicial exception under Step 2A (Prong 1) for at least similar reasons as discussed above.
Therefore, dependent claims 2-10 do not add “significantly more” to the abstract idea. The dependent claims recite additional functions that describe the abstract idea and only generally link the abstract idea to a particularly technological environment, and applied on a generic computer. Further, the additional limitations fail to provide an improvement to the functioning of the computer, another technology, or a technical field.
Even when viewed as an ordered combination, the dependent claims simply convey the abstract idea itself applied on a generic computer and are held to be ineligible under Steps 2A/2B for at least similar rationale as discussed above regarding claim 1.
The analysis above applies to all statutory categories of invention. Regarding independent claims 12 (device) and 13 (medium), the claims recite substantially similar limitations as set forth in claim 1. As such, claims 12 and 13 and their dependent claims 15-22 are rejected for at least similar rationale as discussed above.
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 of this title, 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 1-10, 12-13 and 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boehle (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2012/0084122 A1), in view of Hughes et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2021/0233155 A1) (“Hughes”).
Regarding claims 1, 12 and 13, Boehle teaches an information presentation method (and related device and medium) (para [0035], the application identifies a plurality of items required for eligibility for the selected coupon offer), wherein the method comprises:
presenting an object presentation page, wherein the object presentation page comprises a first information presentation region (Fig. 2; para [0062], interface 200 is but an example of an interface suitable for viewing and manipulating shopping lists...interface 200 includes a shopping cart, into which items 220 are moved upon being marked via checkbox);
after receiving a selection operation for a target object in the first information presentation region, when it is determined that a preset presentation condition is reached according to resource value characterization data of the target object and description information of a discount to be used, presenting a second information presentation region in the object presentation page; wherein the second information presentation region comprises an add-on object to be used; resource value characterization data of the add-on object to be used satisfies a resource condition to be used; the resource condition to be used is determined according to the resource value characterization data of the target object and the description information of the discount to be used (para [0116], in an embodiment, when a user marks an item as being in the user's shopping cart, the application may highlight or otherwise remind the user of other items that must be purchased in order to satisfy the requirements of a coupon offer that the user has selected; para [0112], certain coupon offers may require a user to purchase more than one product. For example, a coupon offer may specify that if the user buys two packages of a certain product, the user is entitled to another package of that product free. Or, the coupon may specify that to receive a discount on a purchase, the user must purchase product A and product B); and
adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation in response to a trigger operation for the add-on object to be used (para [0117], The user may then be given the option to select the coupon offer and add the additional items to the user's shopping list.).
Although Boehle teaches the above method (and related device and medium), Boehle does not explicitly teach wherein the add-on object to be used is in a selected state within the first information presentation region.
In a similar field of endeavor, Hughes teaches:
wherein the add-on object to be used is in a selected state within the first information presentation region (Fig. 10; para [0079], checkout plus display 1000 may further include an indication of the selected item, such as shown at purchase summary pane 1008. In some embodiments, purchase summary pane 1008 may be updated for each additional item 1004 selected by the consumer within offered items pane).
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the noted limitations as taught by Hughes in the method of Boehle, 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. Namely, an improved system to provide promotions and/or other items (e.g., products, services, and/or experiences) associated with merchants to consumer devices (See Hughes: para [0003]).
Regarding claims 2 and 15, Boehle and Hughes teach the above method and device of claims 1 and 12. Hughes also teaches wherein the adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation in response to a trigger operation for the add-on object to be used comprises:
in response to the trigger operation for the add-on object to be used, adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation, and canceling the presenting of the second information presentation region in the object presentation page (Fig. 10; para [0079]).
Regarding claims 3 and 16, Boehle and Hughes teach the above method and device of claims 1 and 12. Hughes also teaches wherein the object presentation page further comprises a third information presentation region;
the adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation in response to the trigger operation for the add-on object to be used comprises:
in response to the trigger operation for the add-on object to be used, adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation and updating a presentation content of the third information presentation region; wherein the presentation content comprises a target resource value; and the target resource value is updated according to the resource value characterization data of the target object, the resource value characterization data of the add-on object to be used, and the description information of the discount to be used (Fig. 10; para [0079]).
Regarding claims 4 and 17, Boehle and Hughes teach the above method and device of claims 1 and 12. Hughes also teaches wherein the adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation in response to a trigger operation for the add-on object to be used comprises:
in response to the trigger operation for the add-on object to be used, adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation, and presenting first prompt information on the object presentation page; wherein the first prompt information is used for prompting that a sum value of the resource value characterization data of the target object and the resource value characterization data of the add-on object to be used has reached a discount threshold resource value in the description information of the discount to be used and/or resource discount description content in the description information of the discount to be used (Fig. 10; para [0079]); and
when a preset disappearance condition is satisfied, canceling the presenting of the first prompt information on the object presentation page (Fig. 10; para [0079]).
Regarding claims 5 and 18, Boehle and Hughes teach the above method and device of claims 1 and 12. Hughes also teaches wherein the second information presentation region further comprises a first control corresponding to the add-on object to be used;
the adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation in response to the trigger operation for the add-on object to be used comprises:
in response to a trigger operation for the first control corresponding to the add-on object to be used, adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation (Fig. 10; para [0079]).
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Boehle and Hughes teach the above method and device of claims 1 and 12. Hughes also teaches wherein the second information presentation region comprises at least one candidate add-on object; the candidate add-on object is determined according to the resource value characterization data of the target object and the description information of the discount to be used; and the at least one candidate add-on object comprises the add-on object to be used (para [0079], [0090]-[0092]).
Regarding claims 7 and 20, Boehle and Hughes teach the above method and device of claims 1 and 12. Hughes also teaches wherein the second information presentation region further comprises a second control; and
after presenting the second information presentation region in the object presentation page, the method further comprises:
in response to a trigger operation for the second control, presenting an add-on object aggregation page on the object presentation page; wherein the add-on object aggregation page comprises at least one candidate add-on object; the at least one candidate add-on object comprises the add-on object to be used; and
in response to a selection operation for a target add-on object in the at least one candidate add-on object, canceling the presenting of the add-on object aggregation page on the object presentation page, canceling the presenting of the second information presentation region on the object presentation page, and adding the target add-on object to the first information presentation region for presentation; wherein the target add-on object is in a selected state within the first information presentation region (para [0079]).
Regarding claims 8 and 21, Boehle and Hughes teach the above method and device of claims 1 and 12. Hughes also teaches wherein historical operation information of the add-on object to be used satisfies a first information condition; the first information condition is that the historical operation information indicates that a total number of operations on the add-on object to be used reaches a preset number of times threshold; or
interaction description information of the add-on object to be used satisfies a second information condition; and the second information condition is that the interaction description information indicates that a ratio of a total number of times of ordering operations for the add-on object to be used to a total number of times of operations for the add-on object to be used reaches a preset ratio threshold (Fig. 10; para [0079]).
Regarding claims 9 and 22, Boehle and Hughes teach the above method and device of claims 1 and 12. Hughes also teaches wherein the object presentation page further comprises a third control; and
after the adding the add-on object to be used to the first information presentation region for presentation, the method further comprises:
generating and presenting an object order in response to a trigger operation for the third control (Fig. 10; para [0079]).
Regarding claim 10, Boehle and Hughes teach the above method of claim 1. Boehle also teaches wherein the object presentation page is a page to be ordered; and the first information presentation region is used for presenting at least one object to be ordered (para [0062]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANAND LOHARIKAR whose telephone number is 571-272-8756. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9am – 5pm.
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, Marissa Thein can be reached at 571-272-6764. 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.
/ANAND LOHARIKAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689