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 .
This communication is in response to the application filed on 10/28/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending and are rejected.
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 (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.
Claims 1-8 and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeremias (US 20150319203 A1) in view of Paskiewicz et al. (US 11368501 B1, hereafter Paskiewicz.
Regarding claim 1, Jeremias teaches A computer-implemented method, comprising:
receiving a request to establish a communication session, from a device ([0061] The user may first provide a search query to a search engine via an interface; [0147] receiving a search query for a user to determine a matching for a communication [0174] The computer system may be configured to provide search results and communication between one or more users);
determining, for the device, a device location ([0262] identify and determine at least one other user that falls within a predefined distance relative to the initiating user's location);
determining, based at least on the device location, a communication area for the device ([0150] The user chat option may be location-based. For example, an initiating user may choose to chat only with other users in their location or in a location they select. );
providing, for display on the device, one or more session options associated with the request, each session options of the one or more session options corresponding to a communication session ([01501] the initiating user may select which user to initiate a chat session with from a list of users provided in the indication);
receiving, from the device, a selected option from the one or more session options ([0151] A response to the user chat option is received from the initiating user. The response includes which user chat option to utilize and with which other users);
establishing a connection between the device and the selected option; receiving, from the device, a message associated with the connection and the selected option; causing the message to be displayed for users of the selected option ([0152] a user chat interface is generated. The user chat interface is configured as a chat session that appears on the initiating user's graphical user interface and other graphical user interfaces of other users included with the user chat);
receiving, from the device, an ending indication for the communication session; and
deleting the message from the selected option for the device and associated devices of the users of the selected option.
Paskiewicz teaches
receiving, from the device, an ending indication for the communication session (col. 11, lines 9-12, the synchronized mesh server endpoint 150 can receive an indication of end-of-session (e.g., from a user of the control compute device 101 or from a user of the presenter compute device 111)); and
deleting the message from the selected option for the device and associated devices of the users of the selected option (col. 11, lines 22-27, the control compute device 101, the presenter compute device 111, and/or the set of audience compute devices 121 can also erase (clear) all messages, all references, and all files received during the chat session from their respective browser cache).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Jeremias disclosure, messages after the end session are deleted, as taught by Paskiewicz. One would be motivated to do so for a reliable and secure presentation to the compute devices.
Regarding claim 2, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein Jeremias further teaches the ending indication is one or more of a request to end the communication session or a determination that the communication area for the device disqualifies the device from participating in the selected option ([0095] if the vendor is providing inappropriate content (e.g., content not related to the search result or a client question or comment) or if the vendor or client is being disruptive (e.g., using foul language), interactive chat module may terminate the chat or alert the client or vendor that the other party in the chat is being inappropriate).
Regarding claim 3, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein Jeremias further teaches the communication area comprises an area associated with a radius extending from the device ([0261] a predefined threshold may be to identify the ten (10) closest users (based on geographical proximity) from the initiating user).
Regarding claim 4, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein Jeremias further teaches the users of the selected option are within the communication area ([0264] “luxury cars-San Francisco” refers to an interactive chat session regarding “luxury cars” relevant to San Francisco, where relevant to San Francisco (or, more generally, “relevant to location X”) may refer to the notion that the participants of the “luxury cars-San Francisco” chat session are within the San Francisco region, have identified a region of interest of San Francisco).
Regarding claim 5, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein Jeremias further teaches respective communication areas for the users of the selected option overlap the communication area of the device ([0260] the predefined distance may refer to the same actual location, where the same actual location may be interpreted to mean having the ability to generate an actual conversation with little to no effort, such as two users in the same office of the same building as compared to two users who are in the same city where they may not readily initiate a physical conversation even though the chat session is interactive).
Regarding claim 6, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein Jeremias further teaches the selected option is at least one of a public group chat or a private chat ([0192] When a listed user in the user list is clicked, the graphical user interface displays an option to initiate a private chat with the selected user).
Regarding claim 7, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein Jeremias further teaches the request is provided to an application executed on the device ([0064] potential client may provide a search request to search engine, and receives search results).
Regarding claim 8, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein Jeremias further teaches the selected option corresponds to a chat established by an anchor user of the users and an anchor user communication area is greater than the communication area for the device ([0277] a list of other users falling within a predefined distance relative to the initiating user's location is generated by pooling module. In another embodiment, profile information for other users logged onto or otherwise using the computer system may be used by pooling module 4002 to identify and determine each user's particular location or location(s)).
Regarding claim 10, Jeremias teaches a method, comprising:
determining a device location for a device participating in a proximity-based communication session ([0262] identify and determine at least one other user that falls within a predefined distance relative to the initiating user's location);
determining, for the communication session, a connection parameter for participants of the communication session ([0221] facilitate the identification and connection of two or more users who are interested in the same or similar topics);
determining the device location fails a condition associated with the connection parameter; disconnecting the device from the communication session ([0095] if during a chat, the vendor is spamming the chat window with messages not related to a client query, interactive chat module may terminate the chat);
Jeremias does not explicitly teach
deleting messages associated with the device from the communication session.
Paskiewicz teaches
deleting messages associated with the device from the communication session (col. 11, lines 22-27, the control compute device 101, the presenter compute device 111, and/or the set of audience compute devices 121 can also erase (clear) all messages, all references, and all files received during the chat session from their respective browser cache).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Jeremias disclosure, messages after the end session are deleted, as taught by Paskiewicz. One would be motivated to do so for a reliable and secure presentation to the compute devices.
Regarding claim 11, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the method of claim 10, wherein Jeremias further teaches the connection parameter includes at least one of a distance between participants of the communication session, a geographic location, or an indicator ([0005] identify other users within a predefined distance of the initiating user).
Regarding claim 12, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the method of claim 10, wherein Jeremias further teaches the condition corresponds to the device being within a threshold distance of other participants in the communication session ([0261] the predefined distance may be on a population density threshold (e.g., to include the nearest area from which to identify other users from that has a population density above a certain threshold, etc.)).
Regarding claim 13, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the method of claim 12, wherein Jeremias further teaches a participant of the other participant is an anchor participant and the threshold is based on an anchor participant location ([0277] a list of other users falling within a predefined distance relative to the initiating user's location is generated by pooling module. In another embodiment, profile information for other users logged onto or otherwise using the computer system may be used by pooling module 4002 to identify and determine each user's particular location or location(s)).
Regarding claim 14, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the method of claim 10, Jeremias further teaches:
determining the device satisfies the condition ([0264] [The pooling module may also identify previously generated location-based chat sessions that fall within or substantially within a predefined distance relative to the initiating user's location); and
maintaining a connection for the device within the communication session ([0269] The location based chat module may be configured to establish a location-based interactive chat session by providing a chat interface to the graphical user interface in response to the pooling module receiving the selection).
Claims 9 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeremias in view of Paskiewicz and further in view of Jung et al. (US 20200366509 A1), hereafter Jung.
Regarding claim 9, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, Jeremias does not explicitly teach
wherein the selected option corresponds to a managed chat created by an administrator.
Jung teaches
wherein the selected option corresponds to a managed chat created by an administrator ([0096] when creating the chatroom, the administrator or host may designate an accessible location and a keyword together as a joining condition for the chatroom).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Jeremias disclosure, chat room is created by a specific user, such as administrator, as taught by Jung. One would be motivated to do so for controlling joining a chatroom based on a location.
Regarding claim 16, Jeremias teaches a system, comprising:
one or more processors ([0006] a processor communicably coupled to a memory device) to:
receive a first request to establish a communication session from a device ([0147] receiving a search query for a user to determine a matching for a communication [0174] The computer system may be configured to provide search results and communication between one or more users);
determine, for the device, a device location ([0262] identify and determine at least one other user that falls within a predefined distance relative to the initiating user's location);
determine, based at least on the device location, a communication area for the device ([0150] The user chat option may be location-based. For example, an initiating user may choose to chat only with other users in their location or in a location they select);
establish, for the device, a session option to be used by additional devices within the communication area ([0150] the initiating user may select more than other users in the list of users to initiate a chat session with);
receive, from a first additional device, a second request to connect to the session option ([0192] hen a listed user in the user list 2533 is clicked, the graphical user interface displays an option to initiate a private chat with the selected user);
establish a first connection to the first additional device ([0192] When this option is selected (e.g., clicked) the user device sends a request to the computer system which transmits a request for a private chat to the user device associated with the second user with whom the first user wants to chat);
receive from a second additional device, a third request to connect to the session option; and establish a second connection to the second additional device ([0192] the option for initiating a private chat is displayed when a user mouses over the listed user in user list);
wherein a first additional device communication area is within the communication area, a second additional device communication area is within the communication area ([0190] This location based chat may be further restricted to users searching for the same or similar keywords. Alternatively, this location based chat session may include nearby users irrespective of the keywords being searched by these users. Advantageously, this allows users to easily identify other users in the same area with which to chat),
Jeremias does not explicitly teach
the first additional device communication area and the second additional device communication area do not overlap.
Jung
the first additional device communication area and the second additional device communication area do not overlap ([0095] the chatroom provider may display a chatroom present within a predetermined or preset distance from the user of the client device using a blue icon and may display a chatroom outside the distance (not overlap) from the user using a red icon).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Jeremias disclosure, chat room is created for the users outside the designate area, such as administrator, as taught by Jung. One would be motivated to do so for controlling joining a chatroom based on a location.
Regarding claim 17, Jeremias and Jung teach the system of claim 16, wherein Jeremias further teaches the communication area comprises an area associated with a radius extending from the device ([0261] a predefined threshold may be to identify the ten (10) closest users (based on geographical proximity) from the initiating user).
Regarding claim 18, Jeremias and Jung teach the system of claim 16, wherein Jung further teaches the one or more processors are further to:
determine, based on a first additional device location, that the first additional device is outside communication area; and end the first connection ([0097] if a location of the client device 210 at a point in time at which the join request is input is outside a predetermined or preset distance from an accessible location designated for a chatroom requested by the user to join, the joining controller 720 may determine that the user is not allowed to join the chatroom and may output a reject message indicating the join request).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Jeremias disclosure, no connection is made for the join request that outside a predetermined distance, such as administrator, as taught by Jung. One would be motivated to do so for controlling joining a chatroom based on a location.
Regarding claim 19, Jeremias and Jung teach the system of claim 16, wherein Jeremias further teaches the session option is at least one of a public group chat or a private chat ([0192] When a listed user in the user list is clicked, the graphical user interface displays an option to initiate a private chat with the selected user).
Regarding claim 20, Jeremias and Jung teach the system of claim 16, wherein Jeremias further teaches the session option corresponds to an anonymous communication area for each of the device, the first additional device, and the second additional device ([0198] Clicking the filter button causes the graphical user interface to display a filter command bar with options to filter the messages/comments in the chat session by whether the message/comment contains a picture or video, whether the message/comment has a rating higher than a certain value, the source of the message (non-friend users, friend users, anonymous users, all users, etc.), the date of the message, and/or by other characteristics of the message).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeremias in view of Paskiewicz and further in view of Alam et al. (US 20240064490 A1), hereafter Alam.
Regarding claim 15, Jeremias and Paskiewicz teach the method of claim 10, Jeremias does not explicitly teach
wherein the device location is based, at least in part, on one or more proximity-based machine learning algorithms.
wherein the device location is based, at least in part, on one or more proximity-based machine learning algorithms ([0030] the meeting software application pulls or determines a list of meeting locations based on user preferences and/or device locations. The meeting software application ranks the list of meeting locations utilizing machine learning models).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Jeremias disclosure, location is determined using machine learning algorithms, such as administrator, as taught by Alam. One would be motivated to do so to identify meeting locations based on locations of communication devices participating in a communication session.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Palantir (US 10558339 B1) and Simkhai (US 8606297 B1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0657. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 5712703037. 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.
/ANH NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458