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 . 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.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention (i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) (step 1). If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea) (step 2A), and if so, it must additionally be determined whether the claim is a patent-eligible application of the exception (step 2B). Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 189 L. Ed. 2d 296, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 4303, 110 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1976, 82 U.S.L.W. 4508, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 870, 2014 WL 2765283 (U.S. 2014); MPEP 2106.
Step 1:
In the instant case claims 2-8 are directed to a machine, claims 9-15 are directed to a process, and claims 16-21 are directed to a manufacture. All claims are therefore within statutory categories. See MPEP 2106.03, Eligibility Step 1.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
These claims also recite, inter alia,
“analyze, by an application associated with a web browser … content included in a first webpage rendered by the web browser…; determine that the content includes a representation of a product based on analyzing the content; in response to determining that the content includes the representation of the product, generate, by the application, enriched content associated with the product based on data obtained from a plurality of webpages…; present, by the application and on a user interface …, an actuatable element associated with the enriched content; and in response to detecting an interaction with the actuatable element, cause, by the application, a window to be overlaid on top of the first webpage, wherein the window includes the enriched content.” Claim 2.
“analyzing … content included in a first webpage associated with a first entity and accessed by a web browser…; identifying… from a plurality of products, a particular product shown in the first webpage based on the content; accessing … additional content associated with the particular product and generated based on data obtained from a plurality of webpages associated with a plurality of entities different from the first entity; presenting an actuatable element associated with the additional content on the first webpage; and in response to detecting a user interaction with the actuatable element, causing … a user interface to be displayed on top of the first webpage, wherein the user interface includes the additional content.” Claim 9.
“analyzing, by an application associated with a web application … content included in a first webpage presented by the web application …; determining that the content includes a representation of a product based on analyzing the content; generating, by the application, displayable content associated with the product based on data obtained from a plurality of webpages…; presenting, by the application and on a user interface of the web application, an actuatable element associated with the displayable content; and in response to detecting an interaction with the actuatable element, displaying, by the application, the displayable content on a user interface….” Claim 16.
With recited additional elements reserved for consideration under step 2A prong two, an analysis of the remaining limitations above, each on its own and all together combined, concludes that each on its own recites an abstract idea and in combination they recite a more detailed abstract idea. The recited abstract idea falls within the grouping of abstract ideas described as certain methods of organizing human activity, for example commercial interactions (including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors). See MPEP 2106.04(a); Eligibility Step 2A1. The claims must therefore be analyzed under the second prong of Eligibility Step 2 (Step 2A2; MPEP 2106.04(d)).
Step 2A, Prong 2:
In order to address prong 2 (MPEP 2106.04(d), Eligibility Step2A2) we must identify whether there are any additional elements beyond the abstract ideas and determine whether those additional elements (if there are any) integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. MPEP 2106.04(d), Eligibility Step 2A2. The additional elements in present claims 2-8 are a non-transitory memory storing instructions, one or more hardware processors coupled to the non-transitory memory, a device, a first server, and a plurality of servers different from the first server. The additional elements in present claims 9-15 are a computer system and a device, and the additional elements in claims 16-20 are a non-transitory machine-readable medium, a computer device, a first server, a plurality of servers different from the first server. These additional elements have been considered individually and in combination as a whole together with the functions they perform, e.g., in independent claim 2 the device includes a web browser “associated with” an application that generates enriched content, and presents an actuatable element that displays a window on top of the webpage in response to an interaction. The server hosts the web browser and the content is “obtained from” the plurality of different servers. Claim 16 has only minor variations from claim 2 with the exception that the entire operation is performed by a single computer device based on instructions stored on the medium, while in claim two the one or more processors perform the operation. Claim 9 recites a lone computer system performing the entire operation with no other additional elements beyond a device with a web browser to access a webpage.
Careful consideration concludes that there does not appear to be any practical application recited. The claim is directed only to the gathering and display of information by generic computer components in response to a basic action that may or may not be performed by a user. The additional elements do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because they amount to no more than instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The additional elements do not improve the functioning of any computer or other technology or technical field, they do not apply the judicial exception with or by use of a particular machine, they do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing, and they fail to apply or use the judicial exception beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. See MPEP 2106.05.
If the disclosure describes any improvements to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field this improvement would need to be identifiable as the subject matter appearing in the claims. An indication that the claimed invention provides an improvement can include a discussion in the specification that identifies technical improvements realized by the claim over the prior art. The disclosure must provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. MPEP 2106.05(a).
Claim limitations can integrate a judicial exception into a practical application by implementing the judicial exception with or using it in conjunction with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim. A general purpose computer that applies a judicial exception by use of generic computer functions does not qualify as a particular machine. Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, (Fed. Cir. 2014); MPEP 2106.05(b),(f). There are no particular machines or manufactures identified in the present claims. Claim elements that are not abstract are identified above and they broadly apply a method described only by way of its intended results, without reference to any particular acts or functions performed by any particularly identified machines, and without reference to a use in conjunction with any particular item of manufacture.
The claims do not affect the transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing. Changing to a different state or thing means more than simply using an article or changing the location of an article. A new or different function or use can be evidence that an article has been transformed. Purely mental processes in which data, thoughts, impressions, or human based actions are "changed" are not considered a transformation. MPEP 2106.05(c).
The claims do not apply or use the judicial exception in any other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. As a result the claim as a whole appears to be a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. MPEP 2106.05(e),(h).
The additional elements have not been found to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B:
Although the additional elements have not been found to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application the claims could still be eligible if they recite additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (“significantly more” than the judicial exception). MPEP 2106.05, Eligibility Step 2B.
These claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements of the claim merely support instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. MPEP 2106.05(f). Simply adding general purpose computer components to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. MPEP 2106.05(f)(2); see also OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 9721, 115 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1090 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“relying on a computer to perform routine tasks more quickly or more accurately is insufficient to render a claim patent eligible.”). The elements are recited at a high level of generality, implement abstract ideas using generic computers, and fail to present a technical solution to a technical problem created by the use of the surrounding technology. See Ret. Capital Access Mgmt. Co. v. U.S. Bancorp, 611 Fed. Appx. 1007, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14351 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“It may be very clever; it may be very useful in a commercial context, but they are still abstract ideas,” said Circuit Judge Alan Lourie.). MPEP 2106.05(h). No technical problem is indicated and the claims are not directed to a technical solution to any such problem.
Finally, it is reiterated that the remaining dependent claims 3-8, 10-15, and 17-21, do not contribute any additional elements other than those already discussed and do not add "significantly more" to establish eligibility because they merely recite additional abstract ideas that further describe the data and manipulation of data used in implementing the abstract idea. A more detailed abstract idea is still abstract. PricePlay.com, Inc. v. AOL Adver., Inc., 627 Fed. Appx. 925, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 611, 2016 WL 80002 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 7, 2016) (in addressing a bundle of abstract ideas stacked together during oral argument, U.S. Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore said, "All of these ideas are abstract…. It’s like you want a patent because you combined two abstract ideas and say two is better than one.").
All of the above leads to the conclusion that additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the claimed subject matter into significantly more than an abstract idea. MPEP 2106.05; Eligibility Step 2B. As a result the claims are rejected under 35 USC 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter because they recite an abstract idea without being directed to a practical application, and they do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. MPEP 2106.05, supra..
The preceding analysis applies to all statutory categories of invention. Accordingly, claims 2-21 are rejected as ineligible for patenting under 35 USC 101 based upon the same analysis.
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 2-7, 9-14, and 16-21, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morris et al. (Patent No.: US 9,805,124 B2) in view of Cope (CANADIAN PATENT APPLICATION Pub. CA 2694372 A1).
Morris teaches with regard to
Claim 2. A system comprising: ● a non-transitory memory storing instructions (see at least Morris figs. 5, 11, c2:46-54, c3:4-10); and ● one or more hardware processors coupled to the non-transitory memory and configured to execute the instructions (see at least Morris figs. 5, 11, c2:46-54, c3:4-10) to cause the system to: ● analyze, by an application associated with a web browser of a device, content included in a first webpage rendered by the web browser, wherein the first webpage is hosted by a first server (see at least Morris abstract, figs. 1-2, 3A-1, 11, c1:50-55 “content collection system receives a natural language input and identifies a type of content to be collected,” c11:10-15 “cloud computing providers deliver applications over a wide area network and they can be accessed through a web browser or any other computing component. Software or components of architecture 100 as well as the corresponding data, can be stored on servers at a remote location…. components and functions described herein … can be provided from a conventional server, or they can be installed on client devices directly”).
Morris teaches all of the above, and all of the below, as noted. It teaches, a) displaying content in a webpage, b) analyzing displayed content, c) identifying content items, d) generating enriched content associated with identified content items, and determine that the content includes representations of products based on analyzing the content (see at least Morris c4:17-22 “These are all processed by NLU component 164 to obtain an interpretation that can be used to identify relevant items of content,” c5:16-22 “content for the stack can be items of multiple different digital media types. For instance, they can be documents, videos, websites or website addresses, images, digital books, periodicals, free content, links to paid content, or overviews of paid content, etc.”), but does not explicitly disclose determine that the content includes a representation of a product based on analyzing the content, and a window to be overlaid on top of the first webpage, wherein the window includes the enriched content.
Cope also teaches a) displaying content in a webpage, b) analyzing displayed content, c) identifying content items, and d) generating enriched content associated with identified content items, and further discloses
● determine that the content includes a representation of a product based on analyzing the content (see at least Cope p.2¶4 “associating product identifiers to the product images, … relating each of selected product images to respective information within the collective product information; … displaying selected product information corresponding to a subset of the product images,” p.3¶2 “tracking specific product images appearing in a display of a video recording to produce a tracking record; and accessing the global product directory to obtain product information relevant to the specific product images. The authoring computer produces an overlay directory for the video recording combining the tracking record and the particular product information”).
Morris in view of Cope further teaches
● in response to determining that the content includes the representation of the product, generate, by the application, enriched content associated with the product based on data obtained from a plurality of webpages hosted by a plurality of servers different from the first server (Morris discloses the entire limitation except as it is directed to a single identified product as noted above, and Cope discloses the entire limitation. See at least Morris abstract “identifies a type of content to be collected based on the natural language input. Items of content from multiple different digital media types are collected from a plurality of different sources,” fig. 1, c2:13-22 “content collection system 102 to collect content from sites to be searched 108, public databases 110, digital marketplaces 112, various other websites 114, social network sites 116 and other areas,” in view of Cope abstract “authoring computers connect to the advertising engine of the present invention as well as streaming video sources and advertising databases to generate content of the information depot,” p.2¶4 and p.3¶2 as cited above for “determining that the content includes the representation of the product,” p.3¶4 “information extraction tool … for extracting product information, for a set of products, from a plurality of product servers and assembling the product information,” p.4¶5-p.5 “acquiring network addresses of product servers, each product server providing information relevant to at least one of the set of products”); ● present, by the application and on a user interface of the device, an actuatable element associated with the enriched content (see at least Morris fig.2A, c2:23-46 “user interface displays 122 with user input mechanisms 124 for interaction by user 104. User 104 illustratively interacts with the user input mechanisms 124 in order to control and manipulate content collection…. links, buttons, icons, tiles (which not only operate as links to content but dynamically display information about the underlying content as well), text boxes, dropdown menus, check boxes, or any of a wide variety of different user input mechanisms. In addition, the user input mechanisms 124 can be actuated in a wide variety of different ways”); and ● in response to detecting an interaction with the actuatable element, cause, by the application, a window to be overlaid on top of the first webpage, wherein the window includes the enriched content (see Morris, disclosing the limitation except for a window overlaid on top of the first webpage, wherein the window includes the enriched content, which is disclosed by Cope, see at least Morris fig.2A-3R, 6, 10, c2:29-46 “links, buttons, icons, tiles (which not only operate as links to content but dynamically display information about the underlying content as well), text boxes, dropdown menus, check boxes, or any of a wide variety of different user input mechanisms. In addition, the user input mechanisms 124 can be actuated in a wide variety of different ways” in view of Cope p.2¶4 “producing an overlay directory relating each of selected product images to respective information within the collective product information,” p.47¶4 “user drags a product image and drops it onto the location of where the product is on the screen. When the object is dropped, a selection window sized to match the size of the product thumbnail is shown on the video”).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention (for pre-AIA applications) or filing (for applications filed under the AIA ) to modify the method of Morris to include determine that the content includes a representation of a product based on analyzing the content, and a window to be overlaid on top of the first webpage, wherein the window includes the enriched content, as taught by Cope 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. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable and would result in an improvement. This is because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such features even from a variety of technical fields into methods and systems implemented using similar technological structures (i.e., generic computer and/or network hardware such as processors, servers, etc.). In this case the areas of technical endeavor are nonetheless similar and overlapping.
Applicant has not disclosed that the added feature solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose beyond the performance of the functions they performed separately and since each element and its function are shown in the prior art 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 therefore have been an obvious matter of design choice to include the feature from Cope in the method of Morris. Furthermore the combination solved no long felt need. Incorporating cumulative known features is additionally obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art because doing so increases commercial use of a method by attracting users that previously might have chosen between one of the previously known methods.
Morris in view of Cope further teaches
Claim 3. The system of claim 2, wherein the window further includes one or more links associated with one or more merchant websites (see at least Morris figs.3N-3R, c3:34-43 “The stacks can be output simply as a list of links or tiles 143, each link or tile representing an item in the stack,” c5:16-22 “content for the stack can be … links to paid content, or overviews of paid content,” in view of Cope p.35¶1 “product advertising by linking content of video recordings to product information sources”).Claim 4. The system of claim 2, wherein generating the enriched content is further based on at least one of a user preference of a user of the device, past purchases associated with the user, a location associated with the device, or a price of the product (see at least Morris figs.2B, 3A-1, c5:4-15 “stack generator 146 then accesses user information 136 in data store 132 in order to enhance the natural language query. For instance user information 136 may include profile information indicative of a user's interests. It may include lists of items the user has already reviewed, etc”).Claim 5. The system of claim 2, wherein the content comprises multimedia data (see at least Morris abstract “Items of content from multiple different digital media types are collected from a plurality of different sources and organized in an order”).Claim 6. The system of claim 2, wherein determining that the content includes the representation of the product comprises comparing one or more portions of the content against one or more entries in a product database (see at least Morris figs. 3A2-3C, 6, 10, Cope abstract “relating product images appearing in a display of a video recording to respective product information. The information depot comprises a global product directory”).Claim 7. The system of claim 2, wherein the application is a plug-in associated with the web browser (see at least Cope p.42¶1).
Pertaining to method claims 9-14
Rejection of claims 9-14 is based on the same rationale detailed above in addressing claims 2-7. In addition Morris in view of Cope further teaches, pertaining toClaim 9. A method comprising: ● analyzing, by a computer system, content included in a first webpage associated with a first entity and accessed by a web browser of a device (see at least Morris abstract, figs. 1-2, 3A-1, 11, c1:50-55 “content collection system receives a natural language input and identifies a type of content to be collected,” c11:10-15 “cloud computing providers deliver applications over a wide area network and they can be accessed through a web browser or any other computing component. Software or components of architecture 100 as well as the corresponding data, can be stored on servers at a remote location…. components and functions described herein … can be provided from a conventional server, or they can be installed on client devices directly”); ● identifying, by the computer system and from a plurality of products, a particular product shown in the first webpage based on the content (see at least Cope p.2¶4 “associating product identifiers to the product images, … relating each of selected product images to respective information within the collective product information; … displaying selected product information corresponding to a subset of the product images,” p.3¶2 “tracking specific product images appearing in a display of a video recording to produce a tracking record; and accessing the global product directory to obtain product information relevant to the specific product images. The authoring computer produces an overlay directory for the video recording combining the tracking record and the particular product information”); ● accessing, by the computer system, additional content associated with the particular product and generated based on data obtained from a plurality of webpages associated with a plurality of entities different from the first entity (see at least Morris abstract “identifies a type of content to be collected based on the natural language input. Items of content from multiple different digital media types are collected from a plurality of different sources,” fig. 1, c2:13-22 “content collection system 102 to collect content from sites to be searched 108, public databases 110, digital marketplaces 112, various other websites 114, social network sites 116 and other areas,” in view of Cope abstract “authoring computers connect to the advertising engine of the present invention as well as streaming video sources and advertising databases to generate content of the information depot,” p.2¶4 and p.3¶2 as cited above for “determining that the content includes the representation of the product,” p.3¶4 “information extraction tool … for extracting product information, for a set of products, from a plurality of product servers and assembling the product information,” p.4¶5-p.5 “acquiring network addresses of product servers, each product server providing information relevant to at least one of the set of products”); ● presenting an actuatable element associated with the additional content on the first webpage (see at least Morris fig.2A, c2:23-46 “user interface displays 122 with user input mechanisms 124 for interaction by user 104. User 104 illustratively interacts with the user input mechanisms 124 in order to control and manipulate content collection…. links, buttons, icons, tiles (which not only operate as links to content but dynamically display information about the underlying content as well), text boxes, dropdown menus, check boxes, or any of a wide variety of different user input mechanisms. In addition, the user input mechanisms 124 can be actuated in a wide variety of different ways”); and ● in response to detecting a user interaction with the actuatable element, causing, by the computer system, a user interface to be displayed on top of the first webpage, wherein the user interface includes the additional content (see at least Morris fig.2A-3R, 6, 10, c2:29-46 “links, buttons, icons, tiles (which not only operate as links to content but dynamically display information about the underlying content as well), text boxes, dropdown menus, check boxes, or any of a wide variety of different user input mechanisms. In addition, the user input mechanisms 124 can be actuated in a wide variety of different ways” in view of Cope p.2¶4 “producing an overlay directory relating each of selected product images to respective information within the collective product information,” p.47¶4 “user drags a product image and drops it onto the location of where the product is on the screen. When the object is dropped, a selection window sized to match the size of the product thumbnail is shown on the video”).Claim 10. The method of claim 9, further comprising: ● generating programming code based on the additional content (see at least Morris figs. 1-2A, 3N-3O, 3Q-3R, 4, 11); and ● causing the web browser to execute the programming code, wherein the user interface is caused to be displayed based on the web browser executing the programming code (see at least Morris figs. 1-2A, 3N-3O, 3Q-3R, 4, 11).Claim 11. The method of claim 9, wherein the analyzing the content comprises parsing text content included in the first webpage (see at least Cope fig. 36, p.44§11 “Product Extraction Server receives the product POST request, parses and validates all product attributes and ensures that all are well-formed and that all mandatory attributes are included”).Claim 12. The method of claim 9, further comprising: ● obtaining price data associated with the particular product from the plurality of webpages, wherein the additional content is generated further based on the price data (see at least Morris fig. 2B, Cope p.18¶1 “The viewer may get further information regarding a displayed object in the displayed video signal, by accessing search engine 114, to get general information, … and an object server 116 which may provide product pricing and ordering information,” p.43§4 “HTML including product information such as title, description, price and product image for example, is returned to the browser. The browser renders the HTML page according to the layout included in it and shows the product information in the page”).Claim 13. The method of claim 9, wherein the user interface further includes one or more links associated with the plurality of webpages, wherein a selection of a link from the one or more links enables a user of the device to purchase the product from one of the plurality of webpages (see at least Morris figs.3N-3R, c3:34-43 “The stacks can be output simply as a list of links or tiles 143, each link or tile representing an item in the stack,” c5:16-22 “content for the stack can be … links to paid content, or overviews of paid content,” in view of Cope p.35¶1 “product advertising by linking content of video recordings to product information sources”).Claim 14. The method of claim 9, further comprising: ● comparing at least a portion of the content against one or more entries in a database storing product information associated with the plurality of products, wherein the identifying the particular product is further based on the comparing (see at least Morris figs. 3A2-3C, 6, 10, Cope abstract “relating product images appearing in a display of a video recording to respective product information. The information depot comprises a global product directory”).
Pertaining to machine-readable medium claims 16-20
Rejection of claims 16-20 is based on the same rationale detailed above in addressing claims 2-7. In addition Morris in view of Cope further teaches, pertaining toClaim 16. A non-transitory machine-readable medium having stored thereon machine-readable instructions executable to cause a computer device to perform operations (see at least Morris figs. 5, 11, c2:46-54, c3:4-10) comprising: ● analyzing, by an application associated with a web application of the computer device, content included in a first webpage presented by the web application on the computer device, wherein the first webpage is hosted by a first server (see at least Morris abstract, figs. 1-2, 3A-1, 11, c1:50-55 “content collection system receives a natural language input and identifies a type of content to be collected,” c11:10-15 “cloud computing providers deliver applications over a wide area network and they can be accessed through a web browser or any other computing component. Software or components of architecture 100 as well as the corresponding data, can be stored on servers at a remote location…. components and functions described herein … can be provided from a conventional server, or they can be installed on client devices directly”); ● determining that the content includes a representation of a product based on analyzing the content (see at least Cope p.2¶4 “associating product identifiers to the product images, … relating each of selected product images to respective information within the collective product information; … displaying selected product information corresponding to a subset of the product images,” p.3¶2 “tracking specific product images appearing in a display of a video recording to produce a tracking record; and accessing the global product directory to obtain product information relevant to the specific product images. The authoring computer produces an overlay directory for the video recording combining the tracking record and the particular product information”); ● generating, by the application, displayable content associated with the product based on data obtained from a plurality of webpages hosted by a plurality of servers different from the first server (see at least Morris abstract “identifies a type of content to be collected based on the natural language input. Items of content from multiple different digital media types are collected from a plurality of different sources,” fig. 1, c2:13-22 “content collection system 102 to collect content from sites to be searched 108, public databases 110, digital marketplaces 112, various other websites 114, social network sites 116 and other areas,” in view of Cope abstract “authoring computers connect to the advertising engine of the present invention as well as streaming video sources and advertising databases to generate content of the information depot,” p.2¶4 and p.3¶2 as cited above for “determining that the content includes the representation of the product,” p.3¶4 “information extraction tool … for extracting product information, for a set of products, from a plurality of product servers and assembling the product information,” p.4¶5-p.5 “acquiring network addresses of product servers, each product server providing information relevant to at least one of the set of products”); ● presenting, by the application and on a user interface of the web application, an actuatable element associated with the displayable content (see at least Morris fig.2A, c2:23-46 “user interface displays 122 with user input mechanisms 124 for interaction by user 104. User 104 illustratively interacts with the user input mechanisms 124 in order to control and manipulate content collection…. links, buttons, icons, tiles (which not only operate as links to content but dynamically display information about the underlying content as well), text boxes, dropdown menus, check boxes, or any of a wide variety of different user input mechanisms. In addition, the user input mechanisms 124 can be actuated in a wide variety of different ways”); and ● in response to detecting an interaction with the actuatable element, displaying, by the application, the displayable content on a user interface of the computer device (see at least Morris fig.2A-3R, 6, 10, c2:29-46 “links, buttons, icons, tiles (which not only operate as links to content but dynamically display information about the underlying content as well), text boxes, dropdown menus, check boxes, or any of a wide variety of different user input mechanisms. In addition, the user input mechanisms 124 can be actuated in a wide variety of different ways” in view of Cope p.2¶4 “producing an overlay directory relating each of selected product images to respective information within the collective product information,” p.47¶4 “user drags a product image and drops it onto the location of where the product is on the screen. When the object is dropped, a selection window sized to match the size of the product thumbnail is shown on the video”).Claim 17. The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the operations further comprise presenting one or more links associated with one or more merchant websites (see at least Morris figs.3N-3R, c3:34-43 “The stacks can be output simply as a list of links or tiles 143, each link or tile representing an item in the stack,” c5:16-22 “content for the stack can be … links to paid content, or overviews of paid content,” in view of Cope p.35¶1 “product advertising by linking content of video recordings to product information sources”).Claim 18. The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the generating the displayable content is further based on at least one of a user preference of a user of the computer device, past purchases associated with the user, a location associated with the computer device, or a price of the product (see at least Morris figs.2B, 3A-1, c5:4-15 “stack generator 146 then accesses user information 136 in data store 132 in order to enhance the natural language query. For instance user information 136 may include profile information indicative of a user's interests. It may include lists of items the user has already reviewed, etc”).Claim 19. The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the content comprises text data and multimedia data (see at least Morris abstract “Items of content from multiple different digital media types are collected from a plurality of different sources and organized in an order,” fig.3A-3R, 6, c2:29-46 “links, buttons, icons, tiles (which not only operate as links to content but dynamically display information about the underlying content as well), text boxes, dropdown menus, check boxes, or any of a wide variety of different user input mechanisms. In addition, the user input mechanisms 124 can be actuated in a wide variety of different ways”).Claim 20. The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the determining that the content includes the representation of the product comprises comparing one or more portions of the content against one or more entries in a product database (see at least Morris figs. 3A2-3C, 6, 10, Cope abstract “relating product images appearing in a display of a video recording to respective product information. The information depot comprises a global product directory”).
Claims 8, 15, and 21, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morris et al. (Patent No.: US 9,805,124 B2) in view of Cope (CANADIAN PATENT APPLICATION Pub. CA 2694372 A1) as applied to claims 2, 9, and 16, above, and further in view of Rathod (Pub. No.: US 2014/0067702 A1).
Morris in view of Cope teaches all of the above as noted. It teaches, a) determining that content includes a representation of a product, b) generating enriched content associated with the product, c) wherein the enriched content includes a link to a merchant website, and d) purchasing the product, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the enriched content comprises a coupon usable for purchasing the product.
Rathod also teaches a) determining that content includes a representation of a product, b) generating enriched content associated with the product, c) wherein the enriched content includes a link to a merchant website, and d) purchasing the product, and further discloses wherein the enriched content comprises a coupon usable for purchasing the product, wherein the method further comprises, pertaining to
Claim 8. The system of claim 2, wherein the enriched content comprises a coupon usable for purchasing the product (see at least Morris fig.9 in view of Rathod figs. 4-7, ¶0181 “active note specific response with active links, wherein active links enables users to … make deal, … receives discount vouchers, … negotiate with advertiser,” ¶0230 “user can receives deals related messages from publisher "GroupOn™"”).Claim 15. The method of claim 9, wherein the additional content comprises a coupon usable for purchasing the particular product (see at least Morris fig.9 in view of Rathod figs. 4-7, ¶0181 “active note specific response with active links, wherein active links enables users to … make deal, … receives discount vouchers, … negotiate with advertiser,” ¶0230 “user can receives deals related messages from publisher "GroupOn™"”).Claim 21. The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the displayable content comprises a coupon usable for purchasing the product (see at least Morris fig.9 in view of Rathod figs. 4-7, ¶0181 “active note specific response with active links, wherein active links enables users to … make deal, … receives discount vouchers, … negotiate with advertiser,” ¶0230 “user can receives deals related messages from publisher "GroupOn™"”).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention (for pre-AIA applications) or filing (for applications filed under the AIA ) to modify the method of Morris in view of Cope to include wherein the enriched content comprises a coupon usable for purchasing the product, as taught by Rathod 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. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable and would result in an improvement. This is because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such features even from a variety of technical fields into methods and systems implemented using similar technological structures (i.e., generic computer and/or network hardware such as processors, servers, etc.). In this case the areas of technical endeavor are nonetheless similar and overlapping.
Applicant has not disclosed that the added feature solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose beyond the performance of the functions they performed separately and since each element and its function are shown in the prior art 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 therefore have been an obvious matter of design choice to include the feature from Rathod in the method of Morris in view of Cope. Furthermore the combination solved no long felt need. Incorporating cumulative known features is additionally obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art because doing so increases commercial use of a method by attracting users that previously might have chosen between one of the previously known methods.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
● Venkatasubramanian et al., Patent No.: US 9,674,259 B1: teaches overlaid information display.
● Kirovski et al., Patent No.: US 9,836,774 B2: teaches a browser plugin that shows the user comparable items from different merchants upon determining they are visiting an item purchasing page.
● Freishtat et al., Pub. No.: US 2011/0202827 A1: teaches curating media content for display. Gathers content from variety of websites and aggregates them for display, including interactive elements and overlays.
● Feinstein, Patent No.: US 8,682,739 B1: teaches identifying a product in video and generating hyperlinks in a user interface to allow a user to purchase the product and/or retrieve additional information about the product. Teaches generating an actuatable element for the displayable content and overlaying interactive layers for obtaining additional product information.
● D 'Auria et al., Pub. No.: US 2013/0332318 A1: teaches the interface, interaction, overlay, and product information.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM LEVINE whose telephone number is (571)272-8122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9am-7:30pm.
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.
/ADAM L LEVINE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689 March 4, 2026