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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Pub. 2013/0253963 to Harris in view of U.S. Patent Pub. 20070273558 to Smith.
Regarding independent claims 1, 21 and 22, Harris teaches a method comprising:
causing display of a map to a first computing device associated with a first account; (Harris [0002] and [0056] “The interactive mapping system 500 of FIG. 5 also includes a client-side 420 graphical user interface 421” and [00 43] “… In this context the term flash card includes a set of data which is assembled and presented to a user so to communicate information relevant to the POI.”
receiving a selection of a geographical area defined by spatial boundaries for the geographical area to create a custom user map; ( Harris [0006] “…selecting predetermined locations on the first mapping display to define vertices of the point-of-interest area, communicating the vertices to the means for interfacing with the mapping engine, receiving geographic coordinates corresponding thereto from the mapping engine, recording the geographic coordinates in the at least one database and displaying indicia representing the vertices on the first mapping display” see also ([0032, 0046 and Claim 1].
receiving a selection of one or more points of interests within the selected geographical area; (Harris [0006] “…receive and record customer-provided data records and user input data records, the database containing at least one point-of-interest …” ). Also see [0015-0020] and [0032-0035].
generating display data illustrating the spatial boundaries of the custom user map and the one or more points of interest; ( Harris [0018] “… at least one displayed map in the client side map display area comprises a custom-drawn map of at least one point-of-interest area containing at least one point-of-interest, the custom-drawn map overlaying a map generated by the mapping engine, wherein the custom-drawn map is scaled and aligned to match the scale and alignment of the underlying map.”) Also see [Fig 6, 0006, 0015-0020 and 0059]
receiving a request to access the custom user map created by the first computing device from a plurality of users, the plurality of users including a second user of a second computing device and a third user of a third computing device; (Harris [0058] “According to this embodiment, a GUI 421 can include a map display 422 comprising a visually perceptible interactive map, and a set of user controls including a POI display control 423, POIA display control 424, POI route display control 425, POI itinerary builder tool 426, an itinerary sharing tool 427, and a map display parameter control 428. One or more of these controls may be in data communication with the interactive map area 422.”).
Regarding the other features of claim 1, Smith is added. In an analogous art, Smith also teaches a device which allows users to create and access maps and communicate messages related to locations (see sections [0066] to [0068]) and [0077]. Regarding the other claimed limitations as shown below, citations within Smith are provided to teach these features.
accepting the request to connect with the plurality of users (Smith [0008] “…allowing the user to create a customized map that can remain private (e.g., not viewable to other users that are viewing a similar map display area) or that can be published allowing other users to view the information. The user can also view information relating to one or more individuals (e.g., contact, buddy, and so forth), provided the individual has authorized the viewing of such personal information.”) and
enabling access to the custom user map and the one or more points of interest by the plurality of users in response to the acceptance of the request to connect. (Smith [100] “…embodiments, users can authorize system 400 to share or distribute their personalized annotations with others. For example, a user can add text to a map area such as "this is my favorite breakfast place." See also sections [101] and [0008] “Viewed information can include the individual's name, address, or other information that has been authorized or published. Global positioning tracking can also be provided within the detailed map area, through displaying the actual location of the user and individuals.”)
Therefore, as both Harris and Smith teach creation of maps and messaging, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mapping system of Harris with the multiple user enabling/access of Smith, for the reasons described in the above cited sections of Harris, which are that users desire to share their maps and points of interest with other users, as is conventional.
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the references as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. 2009/0156190 to Fischer.
Regarding claim 2, which recites “further comprising: determining that the second computing device has not registered for a second account with second computing device registration information and the third computing device has registered for a third account; and in response to determining that the second computing device has not registered for the second account and the third computing device has registered for the third account: disabling access to the custom user map and the one or more points of interest for the second computing device; and enabling access to the custom user map and the one or more points of interest to the third computing device”, Fisher is added.
In an analogous art Fischer teaches a wireless mobile system which provides specific content to users within teh special interest groups (SIGs). Regarding the features of claim 2 below, see the following cited portions of Fischer, (Fisher [0044] “…advertising and/or coupons can be sent to a mobile application based on one or more special interest groups (SIGs) that a user is affiliated with. In one implementation, an end user registers affiliation with a special interest group (SIG) through a web portal (e.g., user portal 406). The management system 406 can validate the affiliation out-of-band. The end user logs into mobile application, and the mobile application queries the management server 404 for any advertisements or coupons by providing a screenID (a unique screen identifier). The management server 404 determines that the user has an affiliation to a special interest group (SIG) and appends the SIGID (a unique SIG identifier) to the target parameters. A query including the targeting parameters is forwarded to an advertising engine (or 3rdParty). The advertising engine responds with the appropriate URL to the advertising object that best meets the advertising criteria (e.g., age, gender, geographic location, proximity to retail store, shopping list, transaction history, etc).” further in [0046] where based on validating by the server the special interest groups (SIGs) that a user is affiliated with, a campus map is displayed on the end user device). An end user device, i.e. user of a second computing device, who have not registered group affiliation as disclosed in [0042 and 0044], will not be able to validate by the server to receive coupons, alerts, campus map, as disclosed in [0044 -0046].
Therefore, as both Harris and Smith teach creation of maps and messaging, and as Fischer teaches maps and messaging between registered mobile users, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mapping system of Harris with the registrations of multiple users enabling/access of Fischer, for the reasons described in the above cited sections of Fischer, which are that only registered users should be enabled to share their maps and points of interest with other registered users, as is conventional.
Regarding claim 3, which recites “wherein the enabling of access to the custom user map and the one or more points of interest comprises causing the first computing device to transmit the custom user map and the one or more points of interest to the third computing device”, see Fisher [0046] receiving campus map, i.e. point of interest map, to the end user).
Regarding claim 4, which recites “further comprising: in response to determining that the second computing device has not registered for the second account and the third computing device has registered for the third account: disabling the second computing device access to options or coupons for transaction activities with a business entity located within the geographical area; and enabling the third computing device access to the options or coupons for transaction activities with a business entity located within the geographical area”, see Fisher [0042] “An end user registers an affiliation with a special interest group (SIG) on a web portal (e.g., user portal 406) (step 502).”, [0044] “…advertising and/or coupons can be sent to a mobile application based on one or more special interest groups (SIGs) that a user is affiliated with. In one implementation, an end user registers affiliation with a special interest group (SIG) through a web portal (e.g., user portal 406). The management system 406 can validate the affiliation out-of-band. The end user logs into mobile application, and the mobile application queries the management server 404 for any advertisements or coupons by providing a screenID (a unique screen identifier). The management server 404 determines that the user has an affiliation to a special interest group (SIG) and appends the SIGID (a unique SIG identifier) to the target parameters. A query including the targeting parameters is forwarded to an advertising engine (or 3rdParty). The advertising engine responds with the appropriate URL to the advertising object that best meets the advertising criteria (e.g., age, gender, geographic location, proximity to retail store, shopping list, transaction history, etc).”, where the advertisements or coupons are only based on registered affiliation group, therefore, non-registered end user will not be validated by the server, as further disclosed in [0046]).
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the references as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. 2008/0200189 to Lagerstedt.
Regarding claim 5, which recites “wherein the method further comprises: determining that a location of the second and third computing device is within the geographical area, wherein disabling and enabling access to the custom user map and the one or more points of interest is in response to determining that the location of the second and third computing device is within the geographical area”, Lagerstedt is added.
In an analogous art Lagerstedt teaches a wireless mobile system which provides specific content to users within a travelling group. Regarding the features of claim 5, see the following cited portions of Lagerstedt, (Lagerstedt Figure 6 (620) [0066-0067] “one or more of mobile terminals 110-130 may automatically send the messages to other mobile terminals in the group at predetermined intervals or may automatically send a message when two mobile terminals are within a predetermined distance of one another.” , where the determination and sending the messages to the other terminal decided are based in predetermined distance, i.e. beyond this predetermined distance, no sending a message or access to a map disclosed in [0070].
Therefore, as both Harris and Smith teach creation of maps and messaging, and as Lagerstedt teaches enabling and disabling access to maps and messages based on location, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mapping system of Harris with the multiple user enabling/access of Lagerstedt, for the reasons described in the above cited sections of Lagerstedt, which are that users within the designated area should have the ability to share their maps and points of interest with other users, as is conventional.
Claims 6, 8-9 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the references as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. 2011/0238762 to Soni.
Regarding claim 6, which recites “further comprising: responsive to selection of an icon on a map interface of the second computing device, transmitting the one or more points of interest to the second computing device, wherein the one or more points of interest comprises a sending identifier value identifying a sending user and sending message content”, Soni is added.
In an analogous art Soni teaches a wireless mobile system which provides specific content to users within a travelling group. Regarding the features of claim 6 below, see the following cited portions of Soni, Soni [0029] “…the user may select one of the elements in the buddle 20 to be presented with the profile page 22 for the restaurant…” also see Fig 1A, and Claim 3 “The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising receiving a user input of a selection of one of the posted message icons to present information associated with the posted message associated with the posted message icon, and obtaining the information about the posted message from a server system” Also, see [0025-27] wherein the one or more points of interest comprises a sending identifier value identifying a sending user and sending message content (Soni [0008] “…The information for the posted message can include a user text message, a user identification (ID), and at least one of a time of the posting of the message or a day of the posting of the message. The information for the posted message can include a picture corresponding to the user identification (ID). The information for the posted message can include a user-provided picture…” the retuned information includes a user identification (ID) , Also see claim 5 “The computer-implemented method of claim 4, further comprising accessing the information for the posted message comprising a user text message, a user identification (ID), and at least one of a time of the posting of the message or a day of the posting of the message.” The returned information includes a user text message and optionally a picture.
Therefore, as both Harris and Smith teach creation of maps and messaging, and as Soni teaches selecting icons on maps and messages based on location, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mapping system of Harris with the icons and enabling/access of Soni, for the reasons described in the above cited sections of Soni, which are that selecting icons on a map is easy for users within the designated to share comments with other users, as is conventional.
Regarding claim 8, which recites “further comprising: setting an expiration time period for expiration of the one or more points of interest, wherein the expiration time period of the one or more points of interest is a time period after an opening of the one or more points of interest by a receiving user” (see Soni, Abstract “…In a system, the one or more posted messages may not appear on mobile devices after a predetermined amount of time from their respective postings…” , also Claim 8 and 9 “The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the predetermined time period comprises 24 hours, and the method further comprises removing the one or more posted message icons from the layer over the map after the predetermined time period expires.” and see [0008] and [0085]).
Regarding claim 9, which recites “comprising: receiving a pulse message indicating a predetermined range associated with a delivery area; determining a set of the one or more points of interest associated with the delivery area; and causing presentation, on a map interface of the third computing device, of a digital marker representative of the set”, see the POIs in the maps of Soni and se section [0075] for teh range which is the “pulse message”.
Regarding claim 14, which recites “further comprising: receiving location-based comments identifying businesses and service providers in the geographical area; and adding the location-based comments to the one or more points of interest”, see sections [0038] to [0045] of Soni, which teach leaving location-based comments about businesses at POIs, as recited.
Regarding claim 15, which recites “further comprising: receiving a comment from the second computing device, the comment related to the one or more points of interest; and adding the comment to the one or more points of interest”, see sections [0038] to [0045] of Soni, which teach another device leaving location-based comments about businesses at POIs, as recited.
Regarding claim 16, which recites “further comprising: receiving a request from a third computing device to receive the one or more points of interest including comments to the custom user map added by a creator of the custom user map; enabling access to the custom user map and the one or more points of interest including the comments to the third computing device, and including a third user of the third computing device in a group of followers of the creator of the custom user map; and sending a new location-based communication to the group of followers”, as described above, Sonit teaches the ability for a number of users to comment on a POI and sending teh message to other users, as recited.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the references as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. 2008/0200189 to Lagerstedt.
Regarding claim 7, which recites “further comprising: notifying a group of followers to access the custom user map; enabling access to the custom user map to the group of followers; and sending to each of the group of followers a communication related to the custom user map”, Lagerstedt is added.
See (Lagerstedt [0067] “one or more of mobile terminals 110-130 may automatically send the messages” (i.e. notification) to other mobile terminals in the group at predetermined intervals or may automatically send a message when two mobile terminals are within a predetermined distance of one another. Where the determination and sending the message to the terminal devices is based in a predetermined distance, i.e. beyond this predetermined distance, no sending a message or access to a map disclosed in [0070]).
Therefore, as both Harris and Smith teach creation of maps and messaging, and as Lagerstedt teaches access to a map and communications between a group of followers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mapping system of Harris with the multiple user enabling/access of Lagerstedt, for the reasons described in the above cited sections of Lagerstedt, which are that users desire to share their maps and messages with other users, as is conventional.
Claims 10-13, 17-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the references as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view U.S. Patent Pub. 2011/0269479 to Ledlie.
Regarding claim 10, which recites “further comprising: displaying settings information that enables a receiving user to set settings related to a map interface, the settings information specifying that icons representative of the one or more points of interest that have been opened by the receiving user be displayed on map interface on the second computing device”, as Harris and Smith do not teach using icons as recited, Ledlie is added.
In an analogous art, Ledie teaches a system of mobile messaging. See Fig. 12 and section [0078] of Ledlie, which teaches read and unread markings for messages.
Therefore, as both Harris and Smith teach creation of maps and messaging, and as Ledlie teaches using icons as recited, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mapping system of Harris with the icons of Ledlie, for the reasons described in Ledlie, which are that icons used as recited convey read/unread information to the other users, as is conventional.
Regarding claim 11, which recites “further comprising: displaying setting options that enable a receiving user to set settings related to a map interface, the setting options specifying that icons representative of one or more points of interest that have been sent by the receiving user be displayed on the map interface”, See Figs. 10-12 and sections [0077]-[0081] of Ledlie, which teach the display options which allow for icons to be displayed as recited.
Regarding claim 12, which recites “further comprising: presenting, on a map interface, a radius visual indicator, the radius visual indicator presenting a plurality of radii relative to the geographic location; and enabling one of the plurality of radii as a message radius associated with the one or more points of interest”, see Figs. 10-12 and sections [0077]-[0081] of Ledlie, which teach the display options which allow for icons to be displayed as recited.
Regarding claim 13, which recites “wherein the one or more points of interest includes points of interest in the geographical area”, see Figs. 10-12 and sections [0077]-[0081] of Ledlie, which teach the displaying the POI icons, as recited.
Regarding claim 17, which recites “wherein the geographical area is based on a current location of the first computing device”, see sections [0080] of Ledlie, which teaches the current location.
Regarding claim 18, which recites “wherein the geographical area is based on a previous location of the first computing device, the previous location being the location of the first computing device at a previous time period”, see section [0080] of Ledlie, which teaches displaying the previous location at a pervious time, as recited.
Regarding claim 20, which recites “wherein the method further comprises: displaying a user interface element, the user interface element configured to toggle between (1) enabling display of the custom user map and the one or more points of interest to the second computing device regardless of a current location of the second computing device and (2) enabling display of the custom user map and the one or more points of interest to the second computing device based on the current location of the second computing device”, see section [0080] of Ledlie, which teaches when launching the mapping application the previous location is displayed and then it is updated to display the current location, which renders obvious “toggling between 1 and 2”, as recited.
Claims 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the references as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. 2010/0113066 to Dingler.
Regarding claim 19, which recites “wherein enabling access to the custom user map and the one or more points is further in response to a lapse of a time frame established by the first computing device, the time frame indicating the enablement of the viewing of the customer user map and the one or more points of interest after the time frame has elapsed”, Dingler is added.
In an analogous art, Dingler teaches a location based messaging system which allows messages to be displayed and/or read after a certain time period. For example, see sections [0049]-[0051], which teach displaying messages after time periods.
Therefore, as both Harris and Smith teach displaying maps and messages, and as Dingler teaches displaying/delivery of messages after a time period has elapsed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mapping system of Harris with the time periods of Dingler, for the reasons described in the above cited sections of Dingler, which are that users desire to share their maps and messages at specifically given times, as is conventional.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN SHAUN KELLEY whose telephone number is (571) 272-5652. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays to Fridays.
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, Jeanette Parker can be reached at 571 (270)-3647. 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.
/STEVEN S KELLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
