DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
Claims 2-21 have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/24/2025; was filed with this application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner
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 .
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
This action is a Non-Final Action on the merits in response to the application filed on 01/24/2025.
Claim 1 has been cancelled.
Claims 2-21 remain pending in this application.
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 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claims are directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Claims 2-8 are directed towards a method, claims 9-15 are directed towards an apparatus, and claims 16-21 are directed towards a computer-readable medium all of which are among the statutory categories of invention.
Step 1: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim falls within any statutory category. See MPEP 2106.03. The claim recites at least one step or act. Thus, the claim is to a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A, Prong One: 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.
With respect to claims 2-21, the independent claims (claims 2, 9, and 16) are directed to managing orders and service providers, In independent claim 2, the bolded limitations emphasized below correspond to the abstract ideas of the claimed invention:
Claim 2. A method for configuring a journey, comprising:
providing, via a first user interface (UI), a representation of the journey having a plurality of steps;
receiving, via the first UI, an interaction associated with a first step of the plurality of steps;
these steps fall within and recite an abstract ideas because they are directed to a method of organizing human activity which includes commercial interaction such as business relations; managing personal behavior (including teaching, and following rules or instructions). (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II).
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers commercial interaction; managing personal behavior, then it falls within the “method of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Therefore, If the identified limitation(s) falls within any of the groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in the MPEP 2106, the analysis should proceed to Prong Two. (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Step 2A, Prong Two: 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). The claim recites the additional elements of UI, API. The claims recite the steps are performed by the UI, API (Claim 9 apparatus, processor, memory, UI, API; Claim 16 computer-readable medium, UI, API).
The limitations of
displaying, in response to the interaction, a second UI configured for receiving a definition of an expression for choosing a next step of the plurality of steps for a user, wherein the expression evaluates one or more real time data values of one or more parameters associated with web behavior via one or more Boolean operators;
ingesting, via an application programming interface (API), real time data values of the one or more parameters associated with a web behavior event of the user;
advancing the user to the next step of the plurality of steps of the journey based at least in part on the real time data values and the expression; and
executing an action of the next step based at least in part on advancing the user.
are displaying, ingesting, and advancing user and executing user steps 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 displaying, ingesting, and advancing user and executing user steps, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary displaying, ingesting, and advancing user and executing user steps. See MPEP 2106.05.
Further, the limitations are recited as being performed by UI, API. The UI, API are recited at a high level of generality. In limitation (a), UI, API are used as a tool to perform the generic computer function of receiving and outputting data. See MPEP 2106.05(f). The UI, API are used to perform an abstract idea, as discussed above in Step 2A, Prong One, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements 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).
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim recites the additional elements of UI, API. The claims recite the steps are performed by the UI, API.
The limitations of
displaying, in response to the interaction, a second UI configured for receiving a definition of an expression for choosing a next step of the plurality of steps for a user, wherein the expression evaluates one or more real time data values of one or more parameters associated with web behavior via one or more Boolean operators;
ingesting, via an application programming interface (API), real time data values of the one or more parameters associated with a web behavior event of the user;
advancing the user to the next step of the plurality of steps of the journey based at least in part on the real time data values and the expression; and
executing an action of the next step based at least in part on advancing the user.
The additional elements in the claims other than the abstract idea per se, including UI, API amount to no more than a recitation of generic computer elements utilized to perform generic computer functions, such as receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); performing repetitive calculations, Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, 687 F.3d 1266, 1278, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ("The computer required by some of Bancorp’s claims is employed only for its most basic function, the performance of repetitive calculations, and as such does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of those claims."); electronic recordkeeping, Ultramercial, 772 F.3d at 716, 112 USPQ2d at 1755 (updating an activity log) and storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93; see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II). Viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the recitation of a UI, API to perform limitations amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Even when considered in combination, these additional elements 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).
Dependent claims 3-8, 10-15, and 17-21 are not directed to any additional claim elements. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims. In this case, the claims are rejected for the same reasons at step 2a, prong one; step 2a, prong 2; and step 2b. Thus, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding the dependent claims, dependent claim 10-14 recites processor, apparatus; claims 17-21 recites processor. The dependent claims 3-8, 10-15, and 17-21 recite limitations that are not technological in nature and merely limits the abstract idea to a particular environment. Claims 3-8, 10-15, and 17-21 recites processor, memory, apparatus which are considered an insignificant extra-solution activities of collecting and analyzing data; see MPEP 2106.05(g). Claims 3-8, 10-15, and 17-21 recites servers and communication, which merely recites an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer component; MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, claims 3-8, 10-15, and 17-21 recite steps that further narrow the abstract idea. No additional elements are disclosed in the dependent claims that were not considered in independent claims 2, 9, and 16. Therefore claims 3-8, 10-15, and 17-21 do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
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 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 2, 3, 5-10, 12-17, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Publication US 20190065588, Lin, et al. to hereinafter Lin in view of United States Patent Publication US 20180007150, Deopura.
Referring to Claim 2, Lin teaches A method for configuring a journey. comprising:
providing, via a first user interface (UI), a representation of the journey having a plurality of steps (
Lin teaches that “Analysis may also include aggregating sets of page paths to create page journeys.” See paragraphs [0008]. “Page journey information may also include graphical representations of the data log, relations between elements of the data log, or other information that may be presented graphically.” See paragraphs [0036]. “A page path identifies an ordered set of page states that a user encounters while using a website.” See paragraphs [0045].Thus, Lin’s page states and ordered page path teach a journey having plural sequential steps.);
displaying, in response to the interaction, a second UI configured for receiving a definition of an expression for choosing a next step of the plurality of steps for a user,
Lin teaches that: “Data logs 120A and 120B contain lists of attributes related to a set of web resources and values associated with those attributes.” See paragraphs [0032]. “Attributes may also include … the type of event resulting from a click of the user [and] the context of the click of the user.” See paragraphs [0051].);
wherein the expression evaluates one or more real time data values of one or more parameters associated with web behavior via one or more Boolean operators (
Lin teaches that web-behavior parameters and real-time data values. “Data logs 120A and 120B contain lists of attributes related to a set of web resources and values associated with those attributes.” Lin further teaches that website-interaction data may include “the URLs that are visited or the amount of time spent viewing a page.” See paragraphs [0032–0033].);
ingesting, via an application programming interface (API), real time data values of the one or more parameters associated with a web behavior event of the user (
Lin teaches real-time data ingestion. “data log analyzer 130 may process a single data log, multiple data logs, concatenated data logs, data streaming in as it is generated, or other forms of information.” See paragraph [0033].);
advancing the user to the next step of the plurality of steps of the journey based at least in part on the real time data values and the expression (
Lin teaches real time advancing “Some page paths may proceed from page state B to page state C, while others may proceed from page state B to page state D.” See paragraphs [0046]. “page journey information may be used to modify, in real time, a user experience of a user interacting with the set of web resources by changing user options at a particular page state. Real time may be understood to mean processes happening with a small enough lag so as to be unnoticed by a user or fast enough to not be detrimental to a user experience” See paragraphs [0104].);
executing an action of the next step based at least in part on advancing the user (
Lin teaches the execution of a responsive action. “page journey information may be used to modify, in real time, a user experience of a user interacting with the set of web resources by changing user options at a particular page state.” See paragraph [0008].).
Lin does not explicitly teach receiving, via the first UI, an interaction associated with a first step of the plurality of steps.
However, Deopura teaches receiving, via the first UI, an interaction associated with a first step of the plurality of steps. (
Deopura teaches UI interaction and page navigation: “the user can select a page navigation control element 410 that opens a new page.” See paragraphs [0058–0059].);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to expose Lin’s stream-based web-interaction ingestion through Deopura’s known API infrastructure. The motivation would have been to permit external clients, developers, or related system processes to submit or access the behavioral event stream programmatically. Lin teaches processing of streaming web-interaction data, and Deopura teaches an API that provides application-programmer access to system processes. See paragraph [0033] of Lin and paragraph [0107] of Deopura.
Referring to Claim 3, Lin teaches the method of claim 2, further comprising:
advancing a second user from the first step to another step that is different from the next step based at least in part on second real time data values of the one or more parameters associated with a second web behavior event of the second user (
Lin teaches multiple users and multiple sessions. “Data logs include information not only from multiple users, but also from the same users at different points in time.” See paragraph [0041]. Then, Lin teaches different users/users paths take different branches. “some page paths may proceed from page state B to page state C, while others may proceed from page state B to page state D.” See paragraph [0046]. Next, Lin teaches different user paths derive from page states and user sessions, the page paths are identified for individual user sessions and that page journeys aggregate such paths. See paragraphs [0041–0046].).
Referring to Claim 5, Lin teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the first step is associated with a first action that defines an entry source into the journey (
Lin teaches start/beginning of a path. “A page state that does not include information about a previous page state may indicate the beginning of a path.” See paragraph [0067]. ),
the-method further comprising:
advancing the user into the journey in accordance with the first action based at least in part on the real time data values of the one or more parameters associated with the web behavior event satisfying the expression (
Lin teaches the start/beginning of a path. “A page state that does not include information about a previous page state may indicate the beginning of a path.” See paragraph [0067].
Lin teaches web-event/session data that identifies user behavior, that a user session includes “the set of page states associated with a particular user during a substantially continuous interaction with a portion of a website over some time frame.” See paragraph [0041].).
Referring to Claim 6, Lin teaches the method of claim 5, further comprising:
determining that third real time data values of the one or more parameters associated with a third web behavior event of the second user satisfy the expression (
Lin teaches different paths/data for users at different times. “Data logs include information not only from multiple users, but also from the same users at different points in time.” See paragraph [0041].);
advancing the second user into the journey and to the next step in accordance with the expression being satisfied based at least in part on the third real time data values of the one or more parameters(
Lin teaches different possible state transitions for advancing forwarding “some page paths may proceed from page state B to page state C, while others may proceed from page state B to page state D.” See paragraph [0046].).
Lin does not explicitly teach determining that second real time data values of the one or more parameters associated with a second web behavior event of a second user fails to satisfy the expression; determining to not transmit an electronic communication to the second user in accordance with the next step based at least in part on determining that the second real time data values of the one or more parameters fail to satisfy the expression
However, Deopura teaches the following limitations.
determining that second real time data values of the one or more parameters associated with a second web behavior event of a second user fails to satisfy the expression (
Deopura teaches processing later events because they did satisfy. “continue to process any other interaction messages and/or feedback messages … and continue updating the current value of the engagement metric for this user each time a new interaction message and/or feedback message is received.” See paragraph [0085].);
determining to not transmit an electronic communication to the second user in accordance with the next step based at least in part on determining that the second real time data values of the one or more parameters fail to satisfy the expression (
Deopura teaches a failed condition that when a feedback message has not been received and “the timer has expired, the method proceeds to 710, where the server system 116 decreases the value of the engagement metric.” See paragraphs [0080–0082]. Deopura teaches conditionally sending notices only at defined thresholds. See paragraphs [0052–0054].);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to expose Lin’s stream-based web-interaction ingestion through Deopura’s known API infrastructure. The motivation would have been to permit external clients, developers, or related system processes to submit or access the behavioral event stream programmatically. Lin teaches processing of streaming web-interaction data, and Deopura teaches an API that provides application-programmer access to system processes. See paragraph [0033] of Lin and paragraph [0107] of Deopura.
Referring to Claim 7, Lin teaches the method of claim 2, wherein ingesting the real time data values of the one or more parameters associated with the web behavior event comprises:
receiving a data stream including data corresponding to interaction with a web platform by the user (
Lin teaches data-stream ingestion. “data log analyzer 130 may process a single data log, multiple data logs, concatenated data logs, data streaming in as it is generated, or other forms of information.” See paragraph [0033].
Lin teaches web-platform interaction data. The data corresponding to website interactions includes “the URLs that are visited or the amount of time spent viewing a page.” See paragraph [0032].).
Referring to Claim 8, Lin teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the interaction comprises engagement with one or more images on the web platform, scrolling behavior of the user on the web platform, interaction with a product page on the web platform by the user, interaction with one or more pages within a category on the web platform by the user, or a combination thereof (
Lin teaches click/context interaction data and that web-behavior attributes include “the type of event resulting from a click of the user” and “the context of the click of the user.” See paragraph [0051].
Lin teaches product-page interaction and that a page state may show product information: “a page state may display information about a pair of shoes.” See paragraph [0080].
Lin teaches e-commerce journey/action data. An online-commerce example where a user browses items, adds an item to a shopping cart, and checks out. See paragraph [0079].).
Claims 9,10, and 12-15 recite limitations that stand rejected via the art citations and rationale applied to claims 2, 3, and 5-8. Regarding to an apparatus for configuring a journey, comprising:
one or more processors (
See paragraph [0161], processor 1520 includes bus interface unit (BIU) 1525, cache 1530, and cores 1535 and 1540. In various embodiments, processor 1520 may include various numbers of processors, processor cores and/or caches. For example, processor 1520 may include 1, 2, or 4 processor cores, or any other suitable number. In one embodiment, cache 1530 is a set associative L2 cache. In some embodiments, cores 1535 and/or 1540 may include internal instruction and/or data caches. );
one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors; instructions stored in the one or more memories and executable by the one or more processors (
See paragraph [0163], In the illustrated embodiment, cache/memory 1546 contains code 1548. In some embodiments, code 1548 may be used to configure the computing system 1500. In other embodiments, code 1548 may include instructions for processor 1520 to execute, such as instructions relating to the control of any of the systems or devices discussed above, or code 1548 may include information directing the usage of I/O Bridge 1550.)
Claims 16, 17, and 19-21 recite limitations that stand rejected via the art citations and rationale applied to claims 2, 3, and 5-8. Regarding a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing code for data processing, the code comprising instructions executable by one or more processors (
See paragraph [0033], Data log analyzer module 130, in turn, receives data logs 120A and/or 120B as inputs, as generates page journey information 140 as output. As used herein, a “module” is a structural term that may refer either to hardware that is configured to perform a particular task, or to software instructions stored on or in a non-transitory computer-readable medium that, when executed by one or more processors, perform a particular task. In various embodiments, data log analyzer 130 may process a single data log, multiple data logs, concatenated data logs, data streaming in as it is generated, or other forms of information.)
Claims 4, 11, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Publication US 20190065588, Lin, et al. to hereinafter Lin in view of United States Patent Publication US 20180007150, Deopura. to hereinafter Deopura in view of United States Patent Publication US 20110066692, Ciancio-Bunch, et al.
Referring to Claim 4, Lin teaches the method of claim 2, further comprising:
Lin in view of Deopura does not explicitly teach transmitting, to one or more users including the user, an electronic communication comprising a content field in accordance with the journey; receiving, from at least one user of the one or more users, an indication that the at least one user has opened the electronic communication; selecting, based at least in part on the real time data values of the one or more parameters, a content item of a plurality of content items associated with a second action of a set of actions.
However, Ciancio-Bunch teaches these limitations
transmitting, to one or more users including the user, an electronic communication comprising a content field in accordance with the journey (
Ciancio-Bunch teaches transmitting email with a dynamic content field. “The first remote device creates an e-mail message comprising at least one dynamic live content area.”; “The e-mail provider system … [is] configured to … send the e-mail message to the plurality of recipients.” See paragraphs [0012].);
receiving, from at least one user of the one or more users, an indication that the at least one user has opened the electronic communication (
Ciancio-Bunch teaches open indication. “The click manager receives an indication of the opening of the message by a recipient.” See paragraph [0011].);
selecting, based at least in part on the real time data values of the one or more parameters, a content item of a plurality of content items associated with a second action of a set of actions (
Ciancio-Bunch teaches selecting content from content items according to recipient data. “The selection of the one or more items of appropriate live content for rendering in the live dynamic content area 1006 of the e-mail message at the time it is opened may also be based on demographic information of the recipient.” Ciancio-Bunch further teaches that “The live content may be selected from one or more dynamic content items uploaded for storage in an ad server 20.” See paragraph [0044].);
causing the selected content item to be displayed in the content field of the electronic communication based at least in part on the second action of the set of actions (
Ciancio-Bunch teaches rendering the selected content in the dynamic content field. The click manager “accesses the memory to retrieve live content and send the retrieved live content for rendering in the dynamic live content area of the e-mail message.” See paragraph [0011].).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Ciancio-Bunch’s dynamic-email delivery and rendering system to the behavior-based recommendations of Lin. The motivation would have been to communicate Lin’s real-time clickstream-derived recommendation or selected content item in a targeted email, to recognize the opening of the message as an actionable event, and to render selected current content in the email’s dynamic content field. Ciancio-Bunch expressly identifies that its content is selected from plural content items according to recipient attributes and rendered in a dynamic content area when the email is opened. See paragraphs [0011–0013], [0043–0044], [0052–0053].
Claims 11 and 18 recite limitations that stand rejected via the art citations and rationale applied to claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Force.com Multitenant Architecture, Understanding the Design of Salesforce.com Internet Application, whitepaper developerforce.com, archives org, Feb 25, 2021
EP3454281A1 Viral marketing service providing system for distributing advertisement costs for each marketer by analyzing behavior of content receiver, and method therefor
US 20220366459 A1 System and method for a professional services marketplace
US 20040249497 A1 System, method and process for order and delivery of classified goods and services through an amalgamated drive-thru complex
US 20150026604 A1 Enhanced chat features for an enterprise level business information networking environment
US 20220293107 A1 Multi-service business platform system having conversation intelligence systems and methods
US 20080175222 A1 URL patterns for multitenant systems
US 6873968 B2 System, method and computer program product for on-line real-time price comparison and adjustment within a detachable virtual shopping cart
US 9075687 B1 System and methods for declaration-based extension management for multi-tenant environments
US 9509571 B1 First-class component extensions for multi-tenant environments
US 8204799 B1 System and method for combining fulfillment of customer orders from merchants in computer-facilitated marketplaces
US 10885551 B2 System and methods for defining and determining eligibility for promotion for users of multitenant platform
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UCHE BYRD whose telephone number is (571)272-3113. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri..
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, Patricia Munson can be reached at (571) 270-5396. 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.
/UCHE BYRD/Examiner, Art Unit 3624
Prosecution Insights