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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed on 10/15/25.
The applicant’s remarks and amendments to the claims were considered and results as
follow: THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL.
2. Claims 1, 3, 5-9, 11 and 13-18 have been amended. Claims 19-20 have been cancelled. Claims 21-22 have been added. As a result, claims 1-18 and 21-22 now pending in this office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. §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 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 of this
title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such
that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in
the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated
by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8-12, 14, 16-18 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton et al. (US Patent No. 10, 606, 872 B1) in view of Song et al. (US 2021/0004716 A1).
Regarding claim 1 Shelton teaches a method for generating an interface memorializing a time period associated with a subject, the method comprising, (See
See Shelton; Col. 14 lines 53-56, a time period, the user interface server 106 and/or the query generator 108 selects a subset of the supplemental data items from block 304 that correspond to the specified time period):
storing a plurality of data points in a data structure, wherein the plurality of data points is associated with a plurality of aspects of the subject; (See Shelton; Col. 5 lines 1-3, the stored data may comprise definitions for object types and property types for data in a database, and how objects and properties may be related),
wherein a first subset of the plurality of data points is associated with a first perspective corresponding to a first person, (See Shelton; Col. 3 lines 51-53, Determining a first efficacy indicator for the first subset can further comprise: determining a first metric for the first time period and an item), and wherein a second subset of the plurality of data points is associated with a second perspective corresponding to a second person, (See Shelton; Col. 3 lines 61-64, the second subset corresponding to a second time period; determine a first efficacy indicator for the first subset and a second efficacy indicator for the second subset);
receiving, through an interactive user interface, a query associated with the subject, (See Shelton; Col. 21 lines 41-44, the user interface server 106 and/or the query generator 108 may receive user input to generate a query for the query data storage);
filtering the data structure to retrieve the first subset of the plurality of data points associated with the time period and the first perspective, (See Shelton; Col. 21 lines 41-44, the data value pairs of the one or more results are filtered and/or a subset of the data value pairs are determined based on the user input, such as the time period indicated by the user selected cumulative option);
filtering the data structure to retrieve the second subset of the plurality of data points associated with the time period and the second perspective, (See Shelton; Col. 21 lines 141-44, the data value pairs of the one or more results are filtered and/or a subset of the data value pairs are determined based on the user input, such as the time period indicated by the user selected cumulative option);
Shelton does not explicitly disclose outputting, through the interactive user interface, an arrangement of an aggregation of the first subset of the plurality of data points, and the second subset of the plurality of data points along a timeline associated with the time period.
However, Song teaches outputting, through the interactive user interface, (See Song paragraph [0113], The data service platform UI software module 120 may provide any user interface code or elements enabling the client 132 to communicate with the data service computer 118), an arrangement of an aggregation of the first subset of the plurality of data points, (See Song paragraph [0026], The data processor computer can store all aggregated and ordered groups of data sets in an aggregated), and the second subset of the plurality of data points along a timeline associated with the time period, (See Song paragraph [0123], data sets are aggregated, it is possible to quickly calculate the total sales over the six month time period by subtracting the aggregated movie sales corresponding to the current time from the aggregated movie sales six months ago).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, to modify outputting, through the interactive user interface, an arrangement of an aggregation of the first subset of the plurality of data points, and the second subset of the plurality of data points along a timeline associated with the time period of Song in order to allow computer systems to quickly and accurately provide forecasts based on input data.
Claims 9 and 17 recite the same limitations as claim 1 above. Therefore, claims 9 and 17 are rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 2, Shelton taught the method of claim 1, as described above.
Shelton further teaches wherein the plurality of aspects includes at least one of a person, an object, a place, or an event that is associated with the subject, (See Shelton paragraph Col. 5 lines 36-39, a data object may represent an item such as a particular type of product, a food item, person, a place, an organization, an account, a computer).
Claim 10 recites the same limitations as claim 2 above. Therefore, claim 10 is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 3, Shelton taught the method of claim 1, as described above.
Shelton further teaches wherein the arrangement includes a visualization of the plurality of data points, plotted along at least one axis, (See Shelton Col. 21 lines 10-15, the graph 532 of FIG. 5 visually represents a series of data value pairs and/or coordinates corresponding to a point on a first axis (such as an x, horizontal, and/or time axis) and a point on a second axis (such as a y, vertical, unit, sales, and/or metric axis)).
Claim 11 recites the same limitations as claim 3 above. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 4, Shelton taught the method of claim 1, as described above.
Shelton further teaches wherein the subject is one of a person, an event, or a place, (See Shelton paragraph Col. 5 lines 36-39, a data object may represent an item such as a particular type of product, a food item, person, a place, an organization, an account, a computer).
Claim 12 recites the same limitations as claim 4 above. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 6, Shelton together with Song taught the method of claim 1, as described above. Shelton further teaches further comprising: identifying, based on a condition associated with the arrangement, that the condition is met, wherein outputting of the arrangement is based on the condition being met, (See Shelton Col. 21 lines 47-52, determines a current cumulative data value starting with the base condition by adding a starting value to the first data value of the one or more results. In the example, a first current cumulative value would be $100 where the base condition starts with an initial value of zero because $100 plus zero is $100).
Claims 14 and 18 recite the same limitations as claim 6 above. Therefore, claims 14 and 18 are rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 8, Shelton taught the method of claim 6, as described above.
Shelton further teaches wherein identifying that the condition is met is based on a comparison between a time of access of the arrangement, and a predetermined range of time, (See Shelton Col. 26 lines 66-67, and Col. 27 line 1-4, the time selector of the cumulative information option 708 enables a user to select a particular date or time, and/or date or time range. In the example, Apr. 1, 2016, has been selected that indicates a start date associated with the underlying data for the cumulative option. As illustrated, the forecast option 752 can also be selected).
Claim 16 recites the same limitations as claim 8 above. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 21, Shelton taught the method of claim 1, as described above.
Shelton further teaches further comprising: updating the arrangement based on a change to the plurality of data points in the data structure, (See Shelton Col. 2 lines 37-41, Arranging the first visual representation can further comprise: retrieving a start date and an end date for the first time period; and aligning the first visual representation on the timeline according to the start date and the end date).
Regarding claim 22, Shelton taught the method of claim 1, as described above.
Shelton further teaches wherein the first perspective corresponds to a first group that includes the first person, (See Shelton; Col. 3 lines 51-53, Determining a first efficacy indicator for the first subset can further comprise: determining a first metric for the first time period and an item), and wherein the second perspective corresponds to a second group that includes the second person, (See Shelton; Col. 21 lines 41-44, the data value pairs of the one or more results are filtered and/or a subset of the data value pairs are determined based on the user input, such as the time period indicated by the user selected cumulative option).
Claims 5, 7, 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton et al. (US Patent No. 10, 606, 872 B1) in view of Song et al. (US 2021/0004716 A1) and further in view of Khann et al. (US 2015/0006712 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Shelton together with Song taught the method of claim 1, as described above.
Shelton together with Song does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of data points include audio data and visual data.
However, Khann teaches wherein the plurality of data points include audio data and visual data, (See Khann paragraph [0038], The content or content items may include, e.g., text, characters, symbols, images, video, audio, or multimedia content).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, to modify wherein the plurality of data points include audio data and visual data of Song in order to generate succinct and uniform information about the subjects for a variety of purposes.
Claim 13 recites the same limitations as claim 5 above. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 7, Shelton together with Song taught the method of claim 6, as described above.
Shelton together with Song does not explicitly disclose, wherein identifying that the condition is met includes identifying a proximity between a user device and a predetermined location.
However, Khann teaches wherein identifying that the condition is met, (See Khann paragraph [0114], a plurality of parameters used for identifying location based conversions…the adjustable parameters can include a time parameter and a distance parameter), includes identifying a proximity between a user device and a predetermined location, (See Khann paragraph [0008], each of the plurality of location clusters with a duration threshold to identify a set of valid clusters that satisfy the duration threshold. The data processing system can filter the set of valid clusters based on a proximity to the location of the commercial entity to identify the valid cluster).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, to modify wherein identifying that the condition is met includes identifying a proximity between a user device and a predetermined location of Khann in order to provide information for display on web pages or other documents.
Claim 15 recites the same limitations as claim 7 above. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-18 and 21-22 have been
considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusions/Points of Contacts
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 MULUEMEBET GURMU whose telephone number is (571)270-7095. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm.
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, Tony Mahmoudi can be reached at 5712724078. 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.
/MULUEMEBET GURMU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163