DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
2. This is a non-final rejection in response to claims filed 12/11/2024. Claims 7-14, and 22-28 are elected without traverse, are pending and are examined herein. Claims 1-6, 15-21, 29-37 are not elected and are not pending.
Election/Restrictions
3. Applicant’s election without traverse of 7-14 and 22-28 in the reply filed on 12/08/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-6, 15-21, and 29-37 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/08/2025.
Priority
4. The present application has a provisional application #63/609,078, which was filed on 12/12/2023, which is the earliest filing date.
Claim Objections
5. Claims 7-14 and 22-28 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 7:
- Line 5 states, “to create spontaneous interactions. The method comprising the steps of:”. According to MPEP 608.01(m), “Each claim begins with a capital letter and ends with a period. Periods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations.” Therefore, the applicant is advised to replacement the period after interactions with a semicolon, or amend the claims such that they follow the form guidelines of MPEP 608.01(m).
-Lines 8 and 11 state “the user.” If the applicant intended for this to be the same individual as the “registered user,” for clarity, the applicant should state, “the registered user” in each mention of the user instead.
- Lines 9-10 state “through an UI on a computational device.” If the applicant intends for this UI to be on the same computational device as in the preamble, the applicant should amend the claims to read “through said UI on said computational device.” The applicant may also use “the” in place of “said”. This also applies to each mention of the UI on their computational device in lines 9 and 17.
-Line 12 states, “remote computational resources run a process...” If the applicant intends for the mentioned remote computational resources to be the same remote computational resources mentioned in line 4, the applicant should amend the claim such that it reads “said remote computational resources run a process.” The applicant may also use “the” in place of “said”
-Lines 12-13 state, “locate friends nearby, are interested in the same activity.” This seems to be a typographical error. The applicant may have intended to write “who are interested in the same activity.”
-Lines 13-14 states, “sends alerts or notifications to users on their computational devices.” If the applicant intended for these users to specifically be the friends that were located, then the applicant should amend the claim so that it reads “to said users on their computational devices.” If the user intended for the alerts and notifications to be sent to bother the original registered user AND the friends, then the claims should state, “sends alerts or notifications to the registered users and friends on their computational devices.
Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding Claims 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14:
In the first line of each of claims 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, the claim recites “a registered user.” If the applicant intended for this to be the same registered user as in claim 7, then the claims such state “said registered user” or “the registered user” instead.
Regarding Claim 22:
- Line 5 states, “to keep old friends connected. The method comprising the steps of:”. According to MPEP 608.01(m), “Each claim begins with a capital letter and ends with a period. Periods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations.” Therefore, the applicant is advised to replacement the period after “connected” with a semicolon, or amend the claims such that they follow the form guidelines of MPEP 608.01(m).
-Line 8 states “the user.” If the applicant intended for this to be the same individual as the “registered user,” for clarity, the applicant should state, “the registered user” in each mention of the user instead. This also applies to subsequent mentions of a user.
-Lines 7-8 state “through an UI on a computational device.” If the applicant intends for this UI to be on the same computational device as in the preamble, the applicant should amend the claims to read “through said UI on said computational device.” The applicant may also use “the” in place of “said”. This also applies to each mention of the UI on their computational device in lines 9 and 17.
-Line 11 states, “remote computational resources run a process...” If the applicant intends for the mentioned remote computational resources to be the same remote computational resources mentioned in line 4, the applicant should amend the claim such that it reads “said remote computational resources run a process.” The applicant may also use “the” in place of “said”
-Line 11 states, “locate friends nearby, are looking for missed connections as well.” This seems to be a typographical error. The applicant may have intended to write “who are looking for missed connections as well.”
-Lines 13-14 states, “sends alerts or notifications to users on their computational devices.” If the applicant intended for these users to specifically be the friends that were located, then the applicant should amend the claim so that it reads “to said users on their computational devices.” If the user intended for the alerts and notifications to be sent to bother the original registered user AND the friends, then the claims should state, “sends alerts or notifications to the registered users and friends on their computational devices.
Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding Claims 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28:
In the first line of each of claims 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, the claim recites “a registered user.” If the applicant intended for this to be the same registered user as in claim 22, then the claims such state “said registered user” or “the registered user” instead.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112
6. Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 25, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). If the applicant intends for the claim specifically require time based criteria, the claim should be amended to specify such criteria. However, if “such as those not seen within the past two years” is merely an example of criteria, and the claims are not restricted to time based criteria then “such as...” should be omitted. For purposes of compact prosecution the limitation “configurable criteria” is interpreted to include any criteria, and is not restricted to the “such as those not seen within the past two years” language.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 101
7. 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.
8. Claims 7-14, and 22-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Is the claim to a Process, Machine, Manufacture, or Composition of Matter?
Claims 7-14: One or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which, when executed by one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices with or without a display that supports a user interface for interacting with a device, and one or more remote computational resources, implement a method to create spontaneous interactions. The method comprising the steps of:
Claims 22-28: One or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which, when executed by one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices with or without a display that supports a user interface for interacting with a device, and one or more remote computational resources, implement a method to keep old friends connected. The method comprising the steps of:
Claims 7-14 and 22-28 recite at least one eligible subject matter category, in this case by reciting computing components which fall under machine. Therefore, the claims are to be further analyzed under step 2a Prong 1.
Step 2a Prong 1: Is the claim directed to a Judicial Exception(A Law of Nature, a Natural Phenomenon (Product of Nature), or An Abstract Idea?)
The claims under the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification are analyzed herein. Representative claims 7, and 22 are marked up, isolating the abstract idea from additional elements, wherein the abstract idea is in bold and the additional elements have been italicized as follows:
Claim 7- One or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which, when executed by one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices with or without a display that supports a user interface for interacting with a device, and one or more remote computational resources, implement a method to create spontaneous interactions. The method comprising the steps of:
A registered user updates their location if moved away from their last updated location through an UI on a computational device;
the user chooses a specific activity to enjoy with a selected group of friends within a specified distance through an UI on a computational device;
the user chooses whether to interact with one friend or multiple friends; remote computational resources run a process to locate friends nearby, are interested in the same activity, and sends alerts or notifications to users on their computational devices;
and
users decide on the meetup location and time through an UI on their computational devices.
Claim 22 – One or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which, when executed by one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices with or without a display that supports a user interface for interacting with a device, and one or more remote computational resources, implement a method to keep old friends connected. The method comprising the steps of:
a registered user updates their location if moved away from their last updated location through an UI on a computational device;
the user selects friends they’ve lost touch with, along with specifying search distance through an UI on a computational device;
remote computational resources run a process to locate friends nearby, are looking for missed connections as well, and sends alerts or notifications to users on their computational devices; and
users decide on the meetup location and time through an UI on their computational devices.
When evaluating the bolded limitations of the claims under the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, it is clear that representative claims 7, and 22 recite an abstract idea within the category of “certain methods of organizing human activity.” More specifically, the present invention falls under the sub-grouping “managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people” include social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions as outlined in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C). The claims recite the process of facilitating social activities with such generality that it is no more than an abstract idea. The scope of the claim limitations in bold above, when interpreted in their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, are merely steps or instructions to facilitate a user’s personal behavior or interactions between people, such as “a registered user updates their location if moved away from their last updated location,” “the user chooses a specific activity to enjoy with a selected group of friends within a specified distance,” “the user chooses whether to interact with one friend or multiple friends,” “locate friends nearby, are interested in the same activity,” and “users decide on the meetup location and time.” These limitations can only be described as nothing more than managing personal behavior or interactions between people.
Therefore, these claims recite an abstract idea and are to be further analyzed under Step 2A Prong 2.
Step 2A Prong 2: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
Claims 7 and 22 recite the following additional elements:
- One or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which, when executed by in claims 7 and 22
- one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices with or without in claims 7 and 22
- a display that supports in claims 7 and 22
- a user interface for interacting with a device, and in claims 7 and 22
- one or more remote computational resources, in claims 7 and 22
-- through an UI on a computational device; in claims 7 and 22
The additional elements listed above, when considered individually and in combination with the claim as a whole, no more than a recitation of the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on generic computing components as outlined in MPEP 2106.05(f). For example, the preamble of claim 7 recites, “one or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which, when executed by one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices with or without a display that supports a user interface for interacting with a device, and one or more remote computational resources, implement a method to create spontaneous interactions” is an example of generic computing components being programmed to execute an abstract idea, where the abstract idea is recited with such generality that it is no more than a set of instructions to “manage interactions between people.” Furthermore, the additional elements of “a display that supports a user interface for interacting with a device,” and “through an UI on a computational device” are no more than using devices in their ordinary capacity to perform economic tasks related to the abstract idea (using a display to output information or an interface to receive inputs). Therefore, the additional elements even when considered in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they are no more than a generic computer performing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
Claims 7 and 22 recite the following additional elements:
- One or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which, when executed by in claims 7 and 22
- one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices with or without in claims 7 and 22
- a display that supports in claims 7 and 22
- a user interface for interacting with a device, and in claims 7 and 22
- one or more remote computational resources, in claims 7 and 22
-- through an UI on a computational device; in claims 7 and 22
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using an electronic device, or specialized computer network to perform the steps associated with matchmaking, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Accordingly, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. Thus claims 7 and 22 are not patent eligible because the claims are directed to an abstract without significantly more.
Regarding dependent claims 8-14 and 23-28, the claims are further analyzed under the full two-step eligibility analysis but are still found ineligible for the following reasons:
Claims 8 and 23 recite more of the same abstract idea by adding the additional steps of randomizing the user’s location by up to one mile before being transmitted to remote computational resources. Randomizing the user’s location is also merely managing personal behavior, interactions or relationships between people as it is generic data manipulation in order to carry out the facilitation of personal behavior. The additional element of the randomized location being transmitted to remote computational resources is still an example of “apply it” or mere instructions to perform the abstract idea on a generic computing device because it merely recites using the device in its ordinary capacity to perform an economic task related to carrying out the abstract idea (transmitting information to computational resources). Therefore, whether considering the additional elements individually or in combination, the additional elements fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Even when considering the claims as a whole, nothing meaningfully limits the claims such that they are significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, claims 8 and 23 remain patent ineligible for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 9, 10, 11, 24, 25, and 26 merely further limit the abstract idea by specifying the type of configurations that the user can make, such as the list of the friends for interactions, configurable criteria for the friends, the activities being selected, or the search radius of the friends. This is merely part of the same abstract idea of “managing personal behavior” because it facilitates the user’s behavior and their choices and are claimed in a way that it is no more than rules or instructions for a user. Furthermore, there are no additional elements to consider, and even when considering the claims as a whole, nothing meaningfully limits the claims such that they are significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, claims 9, 10, 11, 24, 25, and 26 remain patent ineligible for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 12 and 27 further limit the abstract idea by adding the features of allowing the user to choose the duration of their search, or start and stop the search at any time. This is more of the same management of personal behavior, interactions, or relationships between people as it is merely allowing a user to select the duration of a social activity such as a search for friends. Furthermore, there are no additional elements to consider, and even when considering the claims as a whole, nothing meaningfully limits the claims such that they are significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, claims 12 and 27 remain patent ineligible for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 13, 14, and 28 merely add negative limitations to the abstract idea, such as that the desired activity and current location is not required to be shown to their friends. This is more of the same abstract of “managing personal behavior” because it is another set of rules or instructions to facilitate the social activity at hand. Furthermore, there are no additional elements to consider, and even when considering the claims as a whole, nothing meaningfully limits the claims such that they are significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, claims 13, 14 and 28 remain patent ineligible for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
10. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
11. Claims 7, 9-11, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levine et al. (US 20120204112 A1) hereinafter Levine, in view of Amitay et al. (US 20200120170 A1) hereinafter Amitay.
Regarding Claim 7:
Levine teaches:
- computational devices (Levine [0003] The present invention relates to a website and/or an “app” in general, and to a website and/or an “app” for facilitating the introduction of users with similar or complementary interests in a given locale within a given timeframe in particular. [0005] Websites and “apps” (i.e., application software that may be downloaded onto a user’s mobile phone or other device) exist for a number of social utilities.)
- with or without a display that supports a user interface for interacting with a device, (Levine [0032] This dynamic list would be useful to guide the user to select criteria that would return a manageable number of results, and/or guide the user to broaden his selected criteria (e.g., increase time range he is willing to meet, change interest category from astronomy to physical sciences) to find a greater number of matches. This feature would be particularly desirable on mobile computing devices where a smaller number of quality matches is often more useful than a very large number of matches. The user may choose to display the matches to his search only after the number of matches fell between pre-determined numerical parameters. [0038] The clear, direct simplicity of the interface of the website will allow the users to easily find what they desire (whether social interaction, durable goods, or service) at any given moment. [0030] Referring now to FIG. 3, the second interactive graphic feature is a representation of a monthly calendar page with each square in the grid representing a day. The interface works with a second or multiple users to select and confirm meeting times in the manner described above.)
- implement a method to create spontaneous interactions. The method comprising the steps of: (Levine [0019] The present invention describes a method that may be utilized on a website and or an app that is designed to function both as a web portal and a social utility, (hereinafter referred to as “the website”). The primary function of the social utility part of website is to match two or more users who are interested in participating in a selected activity at a selected time at a selected location. The user is also able to select the desired characteristics of the matches (such as age, gender, education, marital status, etc.) that they are initially shown. This social utility differs from dating sites in that: 1) it is designed to match users who are interested in engaging in a very specific activity (selected from an extensive nested menu as described below); 2) it is designed to match users who would like to engage in the activity in the present moment or at a time in the not too distant future (though it also allows users to select meeting times in the future).)
- A registered user updates their location if moved away from their last updated location through an UI on a computational device; (Levine [0027] If a user is in a public venue (e.g., a restaurant, a coffee house, a nightclub, neighborhood pub, etc.) and would like to know which men or women are interested in meeting someone new for a drink, the user would type in his location (name of establishment, address (or allow GPS device to reveal their current location)), [0028] If he selects “yes”, a box appears within the screen providing a map and directions. He may also choose to allow or disallow a GPS tracking program that, based on his present location and mode of transport (e.g., driving, biking, walking, etc.), periodically notifies the second user of his estimated time of arrival at the selected location. [0031] Referring now to FIG. 4, the third interactive feature, designating the locale of the meeting, most likely would be integrated with another mapping and direction website (e.g., Google maps). When a map appears on the user’s page (as described above), his current location is marked with a point on the map. ) The broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the limitation is any instance in which a registered user’s location is updated when their location changes. Since Levine’s system provides a live location, the limitation is satisfied because a live location updates when moved away from the previous location. “Through an UI on a computational device” is satisfied by Levine because Levin describes that the current location is marked on the interface, and also that a user can type in their location manually.
- the user chooses a specific activity to enjoy with a selected group of friends within a specified distance through an UI on a computational device; (Levine [0033] It should be appreciated that this method of matching activities and people and times and locations can be used for any chosen activity in the realm of human activity (e.g., discussions of a particular book, bike rides in the country, playing cards, meeting others to play music together, etc.). The website and app are designed with broad categories of activities and within them, nesting menus that allow users to easily navigate to their particular interest. Users may define their particular social interest as broadly or narrowly as they like. The user may choose whether she would like to meet with a friend/previously confirmed match (friends may be imported from other social networking sites) or with someone new, or choose ”either”. The user can also select a desired number of participants for a given activity (e.g., five people for moving a heavy piece of furniture, three people or more for a dog playgroup at a given park at a given time, etc.). [0031] A bar with one sliding pointer indicating marked-off distance (in either miles or time units) is manipulated to select the radial distance the user would be willing to travel in order to meet. Alternatively, two interactive toggle boxes, one with an arrow pointing up, one with an arrow pointing down, may be tapped to increase or decrease the radial distance the user wishes to travel.)
- the user chooses whether to interact with one friend or multiple friends; (Levine [0027] The user may tap the screen profile (names and/or profile images) of the users he would like to meet. [0033] The user can also select a desired number of participants for a given activity (e.g., five people for moving a heavy piece of furniture, three people or more for a dog playgroup at a given park at a given time, etc.).)
- run a process to locate friends nearby, are interested in the same activity, (Levine [0036] FIGS. 5-8 illustrate the nested activity levels on the website. Upon entering the website, the page shows the level one search categories... The user may choose to search for all matches in a broad level one category, a narrower level two category, or if he is only interested in a very specific activity (e.g. “a walk in the park”), he may choose a level three selection. [0037] As shown in FIG. 8, the user may have the choice of getting matches from a previously complied “friends” database, from new people, or both. Also as shown in FIG. 8, the user could select desired gender and age criteria to search. In additional search menus the user may also be able to further select from a number of other search criteria (e.g., educational background, smoking preference, etc.).)
-and sends alerts or notifications to users on their computational devices; and (Levine [0027] They may both be notified of the match via text and/or email and/or numerical counting badge and an IM box pops up next to the matching profile picture for them to arrange to meet. [0032] An additional feature is that the user may select to turn on or off an audio or vibration alert or receipt of an email or text that notifies the user that a designated number of potential matches have been achieved.)
- users decide on the meetup location and time through an UI on their computational devices. (Levine [0007] According to another aspect of the present invention, a method of determining and confirming a mutually agreeable activity wherein two or more users on a social utility website or app interact using real-time text-based communication is provided. [0028] One user could select his preference for meeting, which in turn, causes that establishment to be highlighted on the second user’s screen. The second user may accept the meeting place by clicking the highlighted establishment, or suggest another place by clicking a different selection on the list. Clicks on the same listing by both users confirm the selection. Suggested meeting times then appear on both users’ screens. As with place, times clicked by one user are highlighted on the second user’s screen, who can then click the highlighted time to confirm, or click another time that they would prefer. A click by both users on a given time confirms. Next, a query asking if the user would like directions to the selected location appears. If he selects “yes”, a box appears within the screen providing a map and directions. He may also choose to allow or disallow a GPS tracking program that, based on his present location and mode of transport (e.g., driving, biking, walking, etc.), periodically notifies the second user of his estimated time of arrival at the selected location. )
However, Levine fails to teach:
- One or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which,
- when executed by one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices
- and one or more remote computational resources, and that the remote computational resources run the process to locate friends nearby
Alternatively, Amitay discloses filtering of social media items such as user profiles and posts within a map-based graphical user interface on a social media platform. Amitay teaches:
- One or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which, (Amitay [0397] A computer readable storage medium having stored thereon instructions for causing a machine, when executing the instructions, to perform operations comprising the method of any one of claims 21-29.)
- when executed by one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices (Amitay [0344] A system comprising: [0345] one or more computer processor devices; and [0346] one or more memories having stored thereon machine-readable instructions that, when executed, configure the one or more computer processor devices to perform operations comprising:)
- and one or more remote computational resources, and that the remote computational resources run the process to locate friends nearby (Amitay [0347] at a server system for a social media platform, assigning an availability parameter to a defined geographical area, the assigned availability parameter being different from a default availability parameter that is by default associated with multiple geographical areas managed by the server system; [0348] causing generation of a map-based graphical user interface (GUI) on a user device, the map-based GUI having an interactive map providing access to geo-tagged social media items, each geo-tagged social media item having an associated geographical location; and [0349] based at least in part on the assigned availability parameter, making available for viewing via the map-based GUI social media content uploaded to the social media platform, such that availability of each social media item having an associated geographic location corresponding to the defined geographical area is restricted based on the assigned availability parameter.) The BRI of “remote computational resource” is any server running the process to locate nearby friends. Since Amitay teaches a server system running the social media platform and users can use the map to locate their friends, the limitation has been satisfied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify Levine by running Levine’s website on Amitay’s computer-readable storage medium, system processors, and servers to arrive at the claim above. One would have been motivated to combine by the benefit of expanding the capabilities of Levine’s website through Amitay’s improved computer systems. (Amitay [0037] The social media application server system 108 provides server-side functionality via the network 106 to a particular social media client application 104. While certain functions of the social media platform system 100 are described herein as being performed by either a social media client application 104 or by the social media application server system 108, it will be appreciated that the location of certain functionality either within the social media client application 104 or the social media application server system 108 is a design choice. For example, it may be technically expedient to initially deploy certain technology and functionality within the social media application server system 108, but to later migrate this technology and functionality to the social media client application 104 where a client device 102 has a sufficient processing capacity.)
Regarding Claim 9:
The combination of Levine and Amitay teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 7,
Furthermore, Levine teaches:
- wherein a registered user configures a list of friends for interaction.(Levine [0025] According to another aspect of the method, a dynamic polling tally of “hits” in list or table form is provided that indicates the matches based on criteria selected by the user, the dynamic list being useful to guide the user to select criteria that return an acceptable and manageable number of results. [0027] The user may tap the screen profile (names and/or profile images) of the users he would like to meet. As shown, e.g., in FIG. 1, this action causes user 1’s profile to become to become highlighted in a differentiating color and move to a prioritized position on user 2’s search screen to indicate user 1’s interest in matching with user 2. If-user 2 then taps user 1’s screen profile, a confirmed match is made, and both user 1 and user 2’s profiles are highlighted in new color and moved to the top on each of each other’s screens.) In Levine, selecting the screen profiles of the users they would like to meet, from a dynamic list of hits satisfies the limitation above.
Regarding Claim 10:
The combination of Levine and Amitay teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 7,
Furthermore, Levine teaches:
- wherein a registered user selects an activity from a standard set of default options or from custom activities previously agreed upon with their friends.(Levine [0036] FIGS. 5-8 illustrate the nested activity levels on the website. Upon entering the website, the page shows the level one search categories. There is a box to enter the user’s current locations and option to allow GPS. There is a box that contains the dynamic polling “hit” list, along with a toggle to turn real-time result counting on or off. As shown in FIG. 5, the header reads “What do you want to do now?” There are the following categories listed below: “Socialize”, “Get Help”, “Get Work”, “Play”, “Create”, “Shop”, etc. Upon clicking on one of these “level one” categories, the “level two” categories appear. As shown in FIG. 6, under the level one category “Socialize”, there are the following level two categories: “Get a meal”, “Get a drink”, “Go outdoors”, “Go to a movie”, etc. Upon clicking on one of these level two categories, “level three” categories appear... The user may choose to search for all matches in a broad level one category, a narrower level two category, or if he is only interested in a very specific activity (e.g. “a walk in the park”), he may choose a level three selection.) Since the limitation only requires one of a standard set of default options OR a from custom activities, and Levine teaches the standard set of default options, the limitation has been satisfied because at least one of the conditions have been met.
Regarding Claim 11:
The combination of Levine and Amitay teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 7,
Furthermore, Levine teaches:
- wherein a registered user configures the search area for friends to a radius of up to ten miles.(Levine [0028] If the users are still at work or at home, and are interested in meeting someone for a social engagement (e.g., meet for a coffee, or a drink), they can specify the radius in miles they are willing to travel, or a particular town, and also the time they would like meet (e.g., within 1 hour to 2 hours.) Also see Fig. 4.0 which shows a radius of 4.0 miles, which falls within the claimed range up to 10 miles.)
Regarding Claim 13:
The combination of Levine and Amitay teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 7,
Furthermore, Levine teaches:
- wherein a registered user is not required to share their location with their friends.(Levine [0031] The point expands to a circle when it is dragged, delineating the desired (radial) distance the user would like to travel. The second user’s current location may or may not be shown (depending on privacy settings), but the overlapping selection of the two geographical areas selected (intersection of the two circles) may be shown in a second color on the map of the first user and vice-versa.) Since Levine allows the user’s current location to be hidden based on privacy settings, the limitation above has been satisfied.
Regarding Claim 14:
The combination of Levine and Amitay teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 7,
Furthermore, Levine teaches:
- wherein a registered user is not required to share their activity of interest with their friends when submitting a search request. (Levine [0036] FIGS. 5-8 illustrate the nested activity levels on the website. Upon entering the website, the page shows the level one search categories.) The BRI of the limitation above is that the user is not required to specify the activity of interest when submitting a search request. Since Levine teaches the ability to “select all” in Fig. 5, the limitation has been satisfied.
12 Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levine et al. (US 20120204112 A1) hereinafter Levine,
in view of Amitay et al. (US 20200120170 A1) hereinafter Amitay,
further in view of Adam Doud (NPL, “How to grant approximate location access to apps in Android 12”, Pub. By androidcentral on Aug 15 2021, https://web.archive.org/web/20210815210812/https://www.androidcentral.com/how-grant-approximate-location-access-apps-android-12”) hereinafter Doud.
Regarding Claim 8:
The combination of Levine and Amitay teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 7,
However, Levine fails to teach:
- wherein a registered user’s location is randomized by up to one mile before being transmitted to remote computational resources.
However, Amitay teaches or suggests:
- wherein a registered user’s location is randomized at the neighborhood level before being transmitted to remote computational resources. (Amitay [0147] FIG. 8C shows an example of display of a user bitmoji 640 in the interactive map 618 of the map GUI 612 at such a city-level display granularity, in which the user bitmoji 640 is shown at the random location in the city, together with an associated label 860 specifying, broadly, the city in which the user is located (in the illustrated example embodiment being Santa Monica). [0148] Note that the features related to intentionally inaccurate display of the user’s location has the effect that the user’s location is displayed differently on, the one hand, an instance of the map GUI 612 generated on their own device 102 (e.g., FIG. 8A, in which the display location of the user bitmoji 640 corresponds to the actual location of the user) and, on the other hand, instances of the map GUI 612 generated on the user devices 102 of friend users having a non-precise viewing permission (e.g., labeled city-level display such as that illustrated in FIG. 8C, in which the display location of the user bitmoji 640 differs from the user’s actual location). In this example embodiment, the display location of the user bitmoji 640 at a non-precise regional level (e.g., at city-level) is the same across different friend user devices 102, so that different friends see the user bitmoji 640 as being displayed at the same random location. In other embodiments, the display location can be different for different friend users. [0150] The defined geographic region is in the example embodiment of FIG. 8B as being available only at city level. In other embodiments, different or additional levels of display granularity can be provided, for example identifying different levels of cartographically and/or politically defined geographical regions, such as county-, city-, town-, or neighborhood level... In some embodiments, the displayed user location remains fixed at the randomly selected display position until the user device 102 leaves the defined geographic area. Thus, a new display location is in some embodiments determined each time the user enters the relevant area.) The broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the limitation is that the user’s location is randomized to show as any location within a mile of the real location, before being transmitted. However, Amitay only randomizes the location to a level of granularity within the neighborhood, not specifically a mile.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify Levine by adding the feature in Amitay in which the user’s location is displayed as a random location within a certain precision level. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated by the benefit of randomizing the user’s location to provide privacy to the user by offering different levels of location precision. (Amitay [0149] determining a location of a user device associated with the user of a social media application; determining a user-selected location display setting that specifies a manner in which the user location is to be displayed on a map-based GUI displayed to other users of the social media application, the location display setting being selected from a predetermined set of location display settings that correspond to display of the user location at different respective levels of precision on the map-based GUI; and representing the user on the map-based GUI of the friend user by rendering a UI element associated with the user at a location on the map-based GUI in accordance with the selected location display setting.)
However, neither Levine nor Amitay teach or suggest:
- wherein a registered user’s location is randomized by up to one mile.
Alternatively, Doud discloses an article teaching how to grant approximate location access to apps in Android 12, wherein a user’s location is approximated by up to a few hundred meters. Doud teaches:
- wherein a registered user’s location is randomized by up to one mile.(Doud [Page 2] Generally, the difference is a precise location that puts you within a few meters of your actual location, while a coarse location is more like within a few hundred meters. [Page 4] How to grant approximate location access for apps already downloaded...That’s it. Once you set that, that app will only narrow down your location to a few hundred meters. That’s close enough to tell you the weather in your area, but not close enough to figure out where you live.) Since a few hundred meters is less than a mile (1 mile = 1609.34 meters), then the limitation has been satisfied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify the combination of Levine and Amitay, by substituting Amitay’s randomization level from within the neighborhood, to within a few hundred meters as taught by Dood. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated by the benefit increasing privacy while still using location features of popular apps. (Dood [Page 3] The ability to set your location precision is important because not all apps need to know where you are down to the meter. [Page 4]Privacy is becoming an increasingly important part of smartphone conversation. This setting allows you to use the location features of popular apps without giving away your location to advertisers and other third parties. We really appreciate this ability to fine-tune your location settings and enhance your privacy just a little bit more.)
13. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levine(US 20120204112 A1), in view of Amitay (US 20200120170 A1), further in view of Henry et al. (US 9681255 A1) hereinafter Henry.
The combination of Levine, and Amitay teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 7,
However, neither Levine nor Amitay teach or suggest:
- wherein a registered user can keep the search open for a duration ranging from fifteen minutes to one hour, or until they choose to cancel it.
Alternatively, Henry discloses a system for automatically facilitating spontaneous introduction with a nearby stranger of interest in the vicinity. Henry teaches:
- wherein a registered user can keep the search open for a duration ranging from fifteen minutes to one hour, or until they choose to cancel it.(Henry [Col. 4 Lines 50-64] Next, when phone A’s user is logged into the KuikBond™ app, she may spot someone in her vicinity, and search for nearby KuikBond™ users by touching “Search” on the home screen shown in FIG. 2, to see whether the person she spotted also has the KuikBond™ app, and if so, to potentially initiate an introduction. A Bluetooth® signal is sent from phone A to all devices within range having Bluetooth® functionality and the KuikBond™ app enabled, and an automatic and relatively immediate response to the searching user provides her with a list of people found, identified by information preferably including a photo. The list will be populated with identified users while the search is in progress, allowing phone A's user the option of stopping the search once a user of interest has appeared in the list, as illustrated in FIG. 3.) Since the limitation requires only one out of the list (until they choose to cancel it), and Henry teaches an option to stop the search, then the limitation has been satisfied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify the combination of Levine and Amitay by adding the ability of stopping the search as taught by Henry. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated by the benefit of increasing the amount of options and settings for the user in terms of privacy. (Henry [Col. 9 Lines 15-29] In the preferred embodiment illustrated in FIGS. 1-11, the alternative embodiment illustrated in FIGS. 12-21, and other embodiments within the scope and spirit of the invention, in the event that any user decides to refuse or terminate the communication process with another user, the app should include automatic measures to protect the privacy and security of both users. For example, the search signal or ping of the preferred embodiment, and the initial invitation of the alternative embodiment, should in any event convey no information to detected users or recipients identifying the sender or the sender’s user account or device. Additionally, upon either person/phone terminating the interaction, all record of previous interaction between the users’ devices will be erased, ceasing to exist in any form, as an added privacy and security precaution.)
14. Claims 22, 24-26 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levine(US 20120204112 A1), in view of Amitay (US 20200120170 A1), further in view of Masala et al. (US 20170060951 A1) hereinafter Masala.
Regarding Claim 22:
Levine teaches:
- computational devices (Levine [0003] The present invention relates to a website and/or an “app” in general, and to a website and/or an “app” for facilitating the introduction of users with similar or complementary interests in a given locale within a given timeframe in particular. [0005] Websites and “apps” (i.e., application software that may be downloaded onto a user’s mobile phone or other device) exist for a number of social utilities.)
- with or without a display that supports a user interface for interacting with a device, (Levine [0032] This dynamic list would be useful to guide the user to select criteria that would return a manageable number of results, and/or guide the user to broaden his selected criteria (e.g., increase time range he is willing to meet, change interest category from astronomy to physical sciences) to find a greater number of matches. This feature would be particularly desirable on mobile computing devices where a smaller number of quality matches is often more useful than a very large number of matches. The user may choose to display the matches to his search only after the number of matches fell between pre-determined numerical parameters. [0038] The clear, direct simplicity of the interface of the website will allow the users to easily find what they desire (whether social interaction, durable goods, or service) at any given moment. [0030] Referring now to FIG. 3, the second interactive graphic feature is a representation of a monthly calendar page with each square in the grid representing a day. The interface works with a second or multiple users to select and confirm meeting times in the manner described above.)
-and sends alerts or notifications to users on their computational devices; and (Levine [0027] They may both be notified of the match via text and/or email and/or numerical counting badge and an IM box pops up next to the matching profile picture for them to arrange to meet. [0032] An additional feature is that the user may select to turn on or off an audio or vibration alert or receipt of an email or text that notifies the user that a designated number of potential matches have been achieved.)
- users decide on the meetup location and time through an UI on their computational devices. (Levine [0007] According to another aspect of the present invention, a method of determining and confirming a mutually agreeable activity wherein two or more users on a social utility website or app interact using real-time text-based communication is provided. [0028] One user could select his preference for meeting, which in turn, causes that establishment to be highlighted on the second user’s screen. The second user may accept the meeting place by clicking the highlighted establishment, or suggest another place by clicking a different selection on the list. Clicks on the same listing by both users confirm the selection. Suggested meeting times then appear on both users’ screens. As with place, times clicked by one user are highlighted on the second user’s screen, who can then click the highlighted time to confirm, or click another time that they would prefer. A click by both users on a given time confirms. Next, a query asking if the user would like directions to the selected location appears. If he selects “yes”, a box appears within the screen providing a map and directions. He may also choose to allow or disallow a GPS tracking program that, based on his present location and mode of transport (e.g., driving, biking, walking, etc.), periodically notifies the second user of his estimated time of arrival at the selected location. )
However, Levine fails to teach:
- One or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which,
- when executed by one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices
- implement a method to keep old friends connected. The method comprising the steps of:
- and one or more remote computational resources, and that the remote computational resources run the process to locate friends nearby are looking for missed connections as well
- the user selects friends they’ve lost touch with, along with specifying search distance through an UI on a computational device;
Alternatively, Amitay teaches:
- One or more computer-readable memories storing instructions which, (Amitay [0397] A computer readable storage medium having stored thereon instructions for causing a machine, when executing the instructions, to perform operations comprising the method of any one of claims 21-29.)
- when executed by one or more processors disposed in one or more computational devices (Amitay [0344] A system comprising: [0345] one or more computer processor devices; and [0346] one or more memories having stored thereon machine-readable instructions that, when executed, configure the one or more computer processor devices to perform operations comprising:)
- and one or more remote computational resources, and that the remote computational resources run the process to locate friends nearby (Amitay [0347] at a server system for a social media platform, assigning an availability parameter to a defined geographical area, the assigned availability parameter being different from a default availability parameter that is by default associated with multiple geographical areas managed by the server system; [0348] causing generation of a map-based graphical user interface (GUI) on a user device, the map-based GUI having an interactive map providing access to geo-tagged social media items, each geo-tagged social media item having an associated geographical location; and [0349] based at least in part on the assigned availability parameter, making available for viewing via the map-based GUI social media content uploaded to the social media platform, such that availability of each social media item having an associated geographic location corresponding to the defined geographical area is restricted based on the assigned availability parameter.) The BRI of “remote computational resource” is any server running the process to locate nearby friends. Since Amitay teaches a server system running the social media platform and users can use the map to locate their friends, the limitation has been satisfied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify Levine by running Levine’s website on Amitay’s computer-readable storage medium, system processors, and servers to arrive at the claim above. One would have been motivated to combine by the benefit of expanding the capabilities of Levine’s website through Amitay’s improved computer systems. (Amitay [0037] The social media application server system 108 provides server-side functionality via the network 106 to a particular social media client application 104. While certain functions of the social media platform system 100 are described herein as being performed by either a social media client application 104 or by the social media application server system 108, it will be appreciated that the location of certain functionality either within the social media client application 104 or the social media application server system 108 is a design choice. For example, it may be technically expedient to initially deploy certain technology and functionality within the social media application server system 108, but to later migrate this technology and functionality to the social media client application 104 where a client device 102 has a sufficient processing capacity.)
However, neither Levine nor Amitay teach or suggest:
- implement a method to keep old friends connected. The method comprising the steps of:...
-that the remote computational resources run the process to locate friends nearby that are looking for missed connections as well
- the user selects friends they’ve lost touch with, along with specifying search distance through an UI on a computational device;
Alternatively, Masala discloses a social search system in which currently disconnected people can get in contact by making a search on a common circumstance, location, and event, including people that had a strong relationship of any kind, at any time in the past. Masala teaches:
- implement a method to keep old friends connected. The method comprising the steps of:(Masala [0030] In this embodiment of the Point Search method, herein called Find You, two related people that shared a common particular circumstance for a definite closed period of time in the past that resulted in a strong mutual relationship of any kind, but which people completely disconnected after that past circumstance up to the present moment, decide to search for each other, not necessarily concurrently. The Find You embodiment also applies to momentary present encounters between the two related people, as well as to continuing present encounters, as it will be described in the following sections.)
-that the remote computational resources run the process to locate friends nearby that are looking for missed connections as well (Masala [0005] In a particular embodiment of the Point Search method, hereafter called Find You, two people that shared a common particular circumstance for a definite closed period of time in the past that resulted in a strong mutual relationship of any kind, but which people completely disconnected after that past circumstance ended, up to the present moment, decide to search for each other, not necessarily concurrently... The search request may include more particular characteristics of the circumstances in order to support the searching algorithm for a more precise match. In the process, one of the two users makes a first search request for the other user, which request is sent to the social network server where it is stored and awaits a similar search request from the other user, on common characteristics such as date, location and name among others. At this point, the user being searched for is not aware that a search request has been performed for him/her. At the subsequent time when the second user decides to perform a search request for the first user, based on the same common circumstances, this search request is sent to the server, where the searching algorithm, while comparing all search requests stored from all other users using the Find You embodiment, can match the search requests from both users, based on the common searching characteristics, at which point both users are notified of the match and the connection between the two users is easily established. The described process of the Find You embodiment of the Point Search method requires a mutual desire from both users to find each other in order to complete the connection. [0034] Step 103: Upon receiving the search request from User 1, the server executes the searching algorithm to compare the submitted search request from User 1 against all the existing search requests already sent by other users of the Find You embodiment and awaiting a connection. Pre-set search fields, such as both user names (if known for the sought user), as well as date and location of the encounter between the users (with specified precision), as entered by the searching users of the Find You embodiment, are compared against each other.)
- the user selects friends they’ve lost touch with, along with specifying search distance through an UI on a computational device; (Masala[0036] Step 107: User 1, upon receiving the matching list returned by the server algorithm, reviews this list and should easily realize that none of the matches is the sought User 2. However, if the search requests are too vague and do not contain enough details, there may be cases where User 1 could interpret some of the matches in the matching list as possible true connection to the sought User 2. In these cases, User 1 can send an anonymous message to the matching user and the connection can be clarified upon this message contact if true or not (at this point of the searching process as presented in FIG. 1, the connection is not the true one). [0129] Each user sets his Location Point Search to receive or send messages within a specified radius around him.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to further modify the combination of Levine and Amitay by adding a feature in which users are able to reconnect with nearby friends they lost touch with who are also looking for the missed connection as taught by Masala. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated by the benefit of allowing users to reconnect with their missed connections whilst respecting the privacy of both users. (Masala [0150] For PSfA searches, identity will be kept private so the users can interact without exchanging their identities, although their activity is carried out within the hosting social network accounts. Users will be assigned default generic usernames automatically for PsfA purposes, such as User324. Anonymity will facilitate communication without the concern that a user’s identity is revealed. Unless users enter close one-to-one communication, they are not interested in other users’ identity.)
Regarding Claim 24:
The combination of Levine, Amitay, and Masala teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 22,
Furthermore, Levine teaches:
- wherein a registered user configures a list of friends for interaction.(Levine [0025] According to another aspect of the method, a dynamic polling tally of “hits” in list or table form is provided that indicates the matches based on criteria selected by the user, the dynamic list being useful to guide the user to select criteria that return an acceptable and manageable number of results. [0027] The user may tap the screen profile (names and/or profile images) of the users he would like to meet. As shown, e.g., in FIG. 1, this action causes user 1’s profile to become to become highlighted in a differentiating color and move to a prioritized position on user 2’s search screen to indicate user 1’s interest in matching with user 2. If-user 2 then taps user 1’s screen profile, a confirmed match is made, and both user 1 and user 2’s profiles are highlighted in new color and moved to the top on each of each other’s screens.) In Levine, selecting the screen profiles of the users they would like to meet, from a dynamic list of hits satisfies the limitation above.
Regarding Claim 25:
The combination of Levine, Amitay, and Masala teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 22,
Furthermore, Levine teaches:
- wherein a registered user initializes a list of friends based on configurable criteria, such as those not seen within the past two years.(Levine [0032] An additional interactive feature displays a dynamic list or table of numerical tallies of matches based on the criteria selected by the user. For example, as the user decreased the geographical distance he was willing to travel from his current location to meet someone new for a drink, the numbers of “hits” listed in each of the categories/criteria he had selected (e.g., meeting time between 1 and 3 PM, interest in astronomy, college graduate, etc.) also decreases. This dynamic list would be useful to guide the user to select criteria that would return a manageable number of results, and/or guide the user to broaden his selected criteria (e.g., increase time range he is willing to meet, change interest category from astronomy to physical sciences) to find a greater number of matches. [0037] As shown in FIG. 8, the user may have the choice of getting matches from a previously complied “friends” database, from new people, or both. Also as shown in FIG. 8, the user could select desired gender and age criteria to search. In additional search menus the user may also be able to further select from a number of other search criteria (e.g., educational background, smoking preference, etc.).) Since the limitation “such as those not seen within the past two years” is indefinite, for purposes of compact prosecution it is interpreted to be an example of configurable criteria, but not a specific requirement to the scope of the claims.
Regarding Claim 26:
The combination of Levine, Amitay, and Masala teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 22,
Furthermore, Levine teaches:
- wherein a registered user configures the search area for friends to a radius of up to ten miles.(Levine [0028] If the users are still at work or at home, and are interested in meeting someone for a social engagement (e.g., meet for a coffee, or a drink), they can specify the radius in miles they are willing to travel, or a particular town, and also the time they would like meet (e.g., within 1 hour to 2 hours.) Also see Fig. 4.0 which shows a radius of 4.0 miles, which falls within the claimed range up to 10 miles.)
Regarding Claim 28:
The combination of Levine, Amitay, and Masala teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 22,
Furthermore, Levine teaches:
- wherein a registered user is not required to share their location with their friends.(Levine [0031] The point expands to a circle when it is dragged, delineating the desired (radial) distance the user would like to travel. The second user’s current location may or may not be shown (depending on privacy settings), but the overlapping selection of the two geographical areas selected (intersection of the two circles) may be shown in a second color on the map of the first user and vice-versa.) Since Levine allows the user’s current location to be hidden based on privacy settings, the limitation above has been satisfied.
15. Claims 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levine(US 20120204112 A1), in view of Amitay (US 20200120170 A1), further in view of Masala et al. (US 20170060951 A1) hereinafter Masala, further in view of Adam Doud (NPL, “How to grant approximate location access to apps in Android 12”, Pub. By androidcentral on Aug 15 2021, https://web.archive.org/web/20210815210812/https://www.androidcentral.com/how-grant-approximate-location-access-apps-android-12”) hereinafter Doud.
Regarding Claim 23:
The combination of Levine, Amitay, and Masala teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 22,
However, Levine fails to teach:
- wherein a registered user’s location is randomized by up to one mile before being transmitted to remote computational resources.
However, Amitay teaches or suggests:
- wherein a registered user’s location is randomized by up to one mile before being transmitted to remote computational resources.(Amitay [0147] FIG. 8C shows an example of display of a user bitmoji 640 in the interactive map 618 of the map GUI 612 at such a city-level display granularity, in which the user bitmoji 640 is shown at the random location in the city, together with an associated label 860 specifying, broadly, the city in which the user is located (in the illustrated example embodiment being Santa Monica). [0148] Note that the features related to intentionally inaccurate display of the user’s location has the effect that the user’s location is displayed differently on, the one hand, an instance of the map GUI 612 generated on their own device 102 (e.g., FIG. 8A, in which the display location of the user bitmoji 640 corresponds to the actual location of the user) and, on the other hand, instances of the map GUI 612 generated on the user devices 102 of friend users having a non-precise viewing permission (e.g., labeled city-level display such as that illustrated in FIG. 8C, in which the display location of the user bitmoji 640 differs from the user’s actual location). In this example embodiment, the display location of the user bitmoji 640 at a non-precise regional level (e.g., at city-level) is the same across different friend user devices 102, so that different friends see the user bitmoji 640 as being displayed at the same random location. In other embodiments, the display location can be different for different friend users. [0150] The defined geographic region is in the example embodiment of FIG. 8B as being available only at city level. In other embodiments, different or additional levels of display granularity can be provided, for example identifying different levels of cartographically and/or politically defined geographical regions, such as county-, city-, town-, or neighborhood level... In some embodiments, the displayed user location remains fixed at the randomly selected display position until the user device 102 leaves the defined geographic area. Thus, a new display location is in some embodiments determined each time the user enters the relevant area.) The broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the limitation is that the user’s location is randomized to show as any location within a mile of the real location, before being transmitted. However, Amitay only randomizes the location to a level of granularity within the neighborhood, not specifically a mile.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify Levine by adding the feature in Amitay in which the user’s location is displayed as a random location within a certain precision level. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated by the benefit of randomizing the user’s location to provide privacy to the user by offering different levels of location precision. (Amitay [0149] determining a location of a user device associated with the user of a social media application; determining a user-selected location display setting that specifies a manner in which the user location is to be displayed on a map-based GUI displayed to other users of the social media application, the location display setting being selected from a predetermined set of location display settings that correspond to display of the user location at different respective levels of precision on the map-based GUI; and representing the user on the map-based GUI of the friend user by rendering a UI element associated with the user at a location on the map-based GUI in accordance with the selected location display setting.)
However, neither Levine, Amitay, nor Masala teach or suggest:
- wherein a registered user’s location is randomized by up to one mile.
Alternatively, Doud discloses an article teaching how to grant approximate location access to apps in Android 12, wherein a user’s location is approximated by up to a few hundred meters. Doud teaches:
- wherein a registered user’s location is randomized by up to one mile.(Doud [Page 2] Generally, the difference is a precise location that puts you within a few meters of your actual location, while a coarse location is more like within a few hundred meters. [Page 4] How to grant approximate location access for apps already downloaded...That’s it. Once you set that, that app will only narrow down your location to a few hundred meters. That’s close enough to tell you the weather in your area, but not close enough to figure out where you live.) Since a few hundred meters is less than a mile (1 mile = 1609.34 meters), then the limitation has been satisfied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify the combination of Levine, Amitay and Masala, by substituting Amitay’s randomization level from within the neighborhood, to within a few hundred meters as taught by Dood. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated by the benefit increasing privacy while still using location features of popular apps. (Dood [Page 3] The ability to set your location precision is important because not all apps need to know where you are down to the meter. [Page 4]Privacy is becoming an increasingly important part of smartphone conversation. This setting allows you to use the location features of popular apps without giving away your location to advertisers and other third parties. We really appreciate this ability to fine-tune your location settings and enhance your privacy just a little bit more.)
16. Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levine(US 20120204112 A1), in view of Amitay (US 20200120170 A1), further in view of Masala (US 20170060951 A1), further in view of Henry et al. (US 9681255 A1) hereinafter Henry.
The combination of Levine, Amitay, and Masala teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 22,
However, neither Levine, Amitay, nor Masala teach or suggest:
- wherein a registered user can start or stop the search at any time.
Alternatively, Henry teaches:
- wherein a registered user can start or stop the search at any time. (Henry [Col. 4 Lines 50-64] Next, when phone A’s user is logged into the KuikBond™ app, she may spot someone in her vicinity, and search for nearby KuikBond™ users by touching “Search” on the home screen shown in FIG. 2, to see whether the person she spotted also has the KuikBond™ app, and if so, to potentially initiate an introduction. A Bluetooth® signal is sent from phone A to all devices within range having Bluetooth® functionality and the KuikBond™ app enabled, and an automatic and relatively immediate response to the searching user provides her with a list of people found, identified by information preferably including a photo. The list will be populated with identified users while the search is in progress, allowing phone A’s user the option of stopping the search once a user of interest has appeared in the list, as illustrated in FIG. 3.) Since the limitation requires only one out of the list (stop the search at any time), and Henry teaches an option to stop the search, then the limitation has been satisfied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify the combination of Levine, Amitay, and Masala by adding the ability of stopping the search as taught by Henry. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated by the benefit of increasing the amount of options and settings for the user in terms of privacy. (Henry [Col. 9 Lines 15-29] In the preferred embodiment illustrated in FIGS. 1-11, the alternative embodiment illustrated in FIGS. 12-21, and other embodiments within the scope and spirit of the invention, in the event that any user decides to refuse or terminate the communication process with another user, the app should include automatic measures to protect the privacy and security of both users. For example, the search signal or ping of the preferred embodiment, and the initial invitation of the alternative embodiment, should in any event convey no information to detected users or recipients identifying the sender or the sender’s user account or device. Additionally, upon either person/phone terminating the interaction, all record of previous interaction between the users’ devices will be erased, ceasing to exist in any form, as an added privacy and security precaution.)
Conclusion
17. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
- Saad, Hussein (US 20230421643 A1) discloses a method that assists users in connecting to their missed real life connections by employing privacy-centered technologies to facilitate communication between users who have expressed mutual interest and consent.
- Peters, Eve Caroline (US 20190110163 A1) discloses a system for generating and scheduling matches based on compatible preferences and mutual availability and geographic location.
- Kauwe, Joseph Gregory (US 20150058324 A1) discloses an interactive event-scheduling platform (ESP), enabling integrated activity scheduling with friends on a location sharing based platform.
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICO LAUREN PADUA whose telephone number is (703)756-1978. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Fri: 8:30 to 5:00pm.
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, Jessica Lemieux can be reached at (571) 270-3445. 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.
/NICO L PADUA/ Junior Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3626
/JESSICA LEMIEUX/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3626