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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claims Status
Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1,4-5,7-13,16-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,204,205 B1 Pasula in view US 2009/0199107 A1 to LEWIS et al, and further in view US 2012/0072270 A1 to Waylonis et al.
As to claims 1 and 13, Pasula discloses a system [a method] comprising: a memory device; and a processor coupled to the memory device and configured to (see fig.4; col.9,ll.42-60): receive an indication to dismiss a displayed content for later follow up, wherein a user interacted with the displayed content in a specific manner to dismiss the displayed content for later follow up (see col.6,ll.59-col.7,ll.6 and fig.3A-3B; col.8,ll.28-49); receive from a user device via a network an indication to display a follow up content associated with the previously dismissed (see fig.1,3B-3C; col.8,ll.54-col.9,ll.5), provide the follow up content to the user via the user device (see fig.1,3C; col.8,ll.58-62 and col.5,ll.28-32); track user engagement with the follow up content (see col.5,ll.44-57; col.8,ll.1-3).
Pasula fails to discloses determine, based at least in part on the tracked user engagement with the follow up content, to generate a sales lead with respect to the displayed content: and send the sales lead to an advertiser with which the displayed content is associated.
LWEIS discloses determine, based at least in part on the tracked user engagement with the follow up content, to generate a sales lead with respect to the displayed content: and send the sales lead to an advertiser with which the displayed content is associated (see page.5,¶0057,¶0059; discloses the mobile communication device 104 can report advertisement interaction activity (e.g., "click to clip" to save the advertisement for future review by the user)… based on the reported usage data, the marketplace platform can have an opportunity to perform a brokered sale with the advertising platform 102 based on certain kinds of user interactions with the advertisement).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pasula with the teaching as taught by LWEIS in order to monitoring user interaction another opportunity to present the selected advertisement to the user.
Pasula and LWEIS fail to explicitly discloses wherein user engagement with the follow up content is tracked across interactions with the follow up content and tracking information is accumulated across such interactions until a lead generation criteria is met.
Waylonis discloses wherein user engagement with the follow up content is tracked across interactions with the follow up content and tracking information is accumulated across such interactions until a lead generation criteria is met (see page.4,¶0059-¶0061).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pasula and LWEIS with the teaching as taught by Waylonis in order to measure or observe user behavior related to ads that have been stored, and thereby perform financial transactions in order to crediting the publishers and charging the advertisers based on the usage information.
As to claims 4 and 16, Pasula further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to provide a follow up request to a content provider associated with the displayed content(see col.7,ll.60-63).
As to claims 5 and 17, Pasula further discloses wherein the follow up request includes information associated with the displayed content (see col.7,ll.17-19).
As to claims 7 and 19, Pasula further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to infer user preferences and/or proclivities from the tracked user engagement with the follow up content (see col.5,ll.47-51).
As to claim 8 , Pasula further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to store the inferred user preferences and/or proclivities in a user profile database (see col.5,ll.47-51).
As to claim 9, Pasula further discloses wherein the follow up content is different content than the displayed content for later follow up (see fig.3A-3D; col.8,ll.28-38).
As to claim 10, Pasula further discloses wherein the follow up content is interactive (see fig.3A-3D; col.8,ll.28-38).
As to claim 11, Pasula further discloses wherein the follow up content is provided in a follow up queue (see fig.2; col.7,ll.12-16).
As to claim 12, Pasula further discloses wherein the indication is a selection of a hyperlink (see fig.3A-3D; col.8,ll.14-49).
As to claim 20, Pasula discloses a computer program product embodied in a non-transitory computer readable storage medium and comprising computer instructions for (see col.2,ll.1-22): receiving an indication to dismiss a displayed content for later follow up, wherein a user interacted with the displayed content in a specific manner to dismiss the displayed content for later follow up (see col.6,ll.59-col.7,ll.6 and fig.3A-3B; col.8,ll.28-49); receiving from a user device via a network an indication to display a follow up content associated with the previously dismissed content (see fig.1,3B-3C; col.8,ll.54-col.9,ll.5), providing the follow up content to the user via the user device (see fig.1,3C; col.8,ll.58-62 and col.5,ll.28-32); tracking user engagement with the follow up content (see col.5,ll.44-57; col.8,ll.1-3).
Pasula fails to discloses determine, based at least in part on the tracked user engagement with the follow up content, to generate a sales lead with respect to the displayed content: and send the sales lead to an advertiser with which the displayed content is associated.
LWEIS discloses determine, based at least in part on the tracked user engagement with the follow up content, to generate a sales lead with respect to the displayed content: and send the sales lead to an advertiser with which the displayed content is associated (see page.5,¶0057,¶0059; discloses the mobile communication device 104 can report advertisement interaction activity (e.g., "click to clip" to save the advertisement for future review by the user)… based on the reported usage data, the marketplace platform can have an opportunity to perform a brokered sale with the advertising platform 102 based on certain kinds of user interactions with the advertisement).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pasula with the teaching as taught by LWEIS in order to monitoring user interaction another opportunity to present the selected advertisement to the user.
Pasula and LWEIS fail to explicitly discloses wherein user engagement with the follow up content is tracked across interactions with the follow up content and tracking information is accumulated across such interactions until a lead generation criteria is met.
Waylonis discloses wherein user engagement with the follow up content is tracked across interactions with the follow up content and tracking information is accumulated across such interactions until a lead generation criteria is met (see page.4,¶0059-¶0061).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pasula and LWEIS with the teaching as taught by Waylonis in order to measure or observe user behavior related to ads that have been stored, and thereby perform financial transactions in order to crediting the publishers and charging the advertisers based on the usage information.
Claims 2-3 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,204,205 B1 Pasula in view US 2009/0199107 A1 to LEWIS et al, and further in view US 2012/0072270 A1 to Waylonis et al, and further in view of US 9,414,115 B1 to Mao et al.
As to claims 2 and 14, Pasula, LWEIS and Waylonis fail explicitly disclose wherein the specific manner includes a user gesture performed by the user via a touch screen comprising the user device.
Mao discloses wherein the specific manner includes a user gesture performed by the user via a touch screen comprising the user device (see fig.1A,1D and 8; col.14,ll.4-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pasula, LWEIS and Waylonis with the teaching as taught by Mao in order to receive and analyze a feedback to determine effectiveness of the just broadcast media ads.
As to claims 3 and 15, Mao further discloses wherein the user gesture includes one or more of clicking on the displayed content at a particular location, tapping on the displayed content at the particular location, and swiping the displayed content in a certain direction (see fig.1A,1D and 8; col.14,ll.4-23).
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,204,205 B1 Pasula in view US 2009/0199107 A1 to LEWIS et al, and further in view US 2012/0072270 A1 to Waylonis et al, and further in view of 2005/0149880 A1 to Postrel.
As to claims 6 and 18, Pasula, LWEIS and Waylonis fail explicitly disclose wherein the follow up request includes parameters about a preferred communication format associated with the user.
Postrel discloses wherein the follow up request includes parameters about a preferred communication format associated with the user (see fig.1,el.6; page.3, ¶0035-¶0038).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pasula, LWEIS and Waylonis with the teaching as taught by Mao in order to allow the user to make a desired selection for later viewing of the stored ads.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MULUGETA MENGESHA whose telephone number is (469)295-9212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:30PM ET.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
MULUGETA MENGESHA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2424
/Mulugeta Mengesha/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights