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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Priority
Application 19005414 filed on December 30, 2024 is a continuation of 18521752, filed on November 28, 2023. 18521752 is a continuation of 18162404, filed on January 31, 2023. 18162404 is a continuation of 17035575, filed on September 28, 2020. 17035575 is a continuation of 16541919, filed on August 15, 2019. 16541919 is a continuation of 15074029, filed on March 18, 2016. 15074029 claims priority from provisional application 62134689, filed on March 18, 2015. Therefore, the effective filing date for the subject matter defined in the pending claims of this application is March 18, 2015.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berberat (US 20130325964 A1, hereinafter referred to as Berberat) in view of Kremen (US 20130013489 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kremen).
Regarding claim 1, Berberat discloses: A computer implemented method comprising: receiving a request to post content to an event gallery associated with an event (Berberat: Paragraph [0025] states, "The system according to the present teachings allows content creators to post and retrieve content such as comments/pictures/videos/etc. (e.g., social media content, generically referred to as "content") that is associated with a geographic location." Paragraph [0026] states, "A "location" can be an event (e.g., a parade), an establishment (e.g., a restaurant), or some other identifier of a geographic location, although not limited thereto."); performing a first authorization operation including determining that a particular location of a device is within a geo-location fence associated with the event (Berberat: Paragraph [0027] states, "a user has to be within a predetermined range of the geographic location (e.g., 500 ft, 1 mile, 5 miles) to view and/or create associated social media content." Paragraph [0034] states, "a user may be granted permission to upload content relating to a particular geographic location by the location's owner."); performing a second authorization operation including using identification data from the request to verify an attribute of a user of the device, the verifying the attribute of the user comprising comparing [a domain name portion of an e-mail address of] the user to [a domain name of] an entity associated with the event (Berberat: Paragraph [0034] states, "a user may be granted permission to upload content relating to a particular geographic location by the location's owner." Paragraph [0035] states, "the system may have area-specific "channels" targeting particular geographic locations or venues. These may be completely open, have posts monitored and approved before being posted, and/or allow only approved users to submit posts, although not limited thereto."), but fails to explicitly disclose: comparing a domain name portion of an e-mail address of the user to a domain name of an entity.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kremen discloses: comparing a domain name portion of an e-mail address of the user to a domain name of an entity (Kremin: Paragraph [0080] states, "the risk taker or verification server pings a database of existing company email domains and compares that the domain (right of the @ symbol) of the user-provided email address to a database of corporate-owned domain names, step 430.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching Berberat with the above limitation with the teaching of Kremen in order to verify that the user has the proper association with a given entity (Kremen: Paragraph [0011]).
Berberat further discloses: and based on the first and second authorization operations, posting the content to the event gallery (Berberat: Paragraph [0034] states, "a user may be granted permission to upload content relating to a particular geographic location by the location's owner." Paragraph [0035] states, "the system may have area-specific "channels" targeting particular geographic locations or venues. These may be completely open, have posts monitored and approved before being posted, and/or allow only approved users to submit posts, although not limited thereto.").
Regarding claim 5, Berberat as modified by Kremen discloses: The computer implemented method of claim 1.
Kremen further discloses: wherein the verifying the attribute of the user comprises identifying at least one communication with a further user, and wherein the further user having made at least one communications contribution to a further event gallery associated with a further event (Kremen: Paragraph [0396] states, "for an affinity group or special interest group, backgrounds of new members or potential members may be scrutinized before being considered for or extended membership. For example, an animal rights group may want to make sure that a new member or potential member is not a "spy" for a meat-packing lobbyist. In such a case, the rights group may check the social graph of the new member to see who the new member works for; check to see if the interest groups of the new member are related to animal-rights; check to see if friends of the new member have interests in animal-rights /environmental rights; or the like. If, for example, the new member is found to post pictures involving hunting; the new member is found to have many friends in the NRA; or the like, the animal rights group may decide to not accept the member or kick the member out.").
The same motivation to modify with Kremen, as in claim 1, applies.
Claims 9 and 17 recites features similar to those in claim 1, therefore they are rejected in a similar manner.
Claims 13 and 19 recites features similar to those in claim 5, therefore they are rejected in a similar manner.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 10, 11, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berberat (US 20130325964 A1, hereinafter referred to as Berberat) in view of Kremen (US 20130013489 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kremen) in further view of Bosworth (US 20130132477 A1, hereinafter referred to as Bosworth).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Berberat as modified by Kremen discloses: The computer implemented method of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the identification data comprises an IP address, and wherein the second authorization operation comprises verifying that the IP address relates to the entity.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Bosworth discloses: wherein the identification data comprises an IP address, and wherein the second authorization operation comprises verifying that the IP address relates to the entity (Bosworth: Paragraph [0013] states, "to become a registered user of a social networking system, an entity, either human or non-human, registers for an account with the social networking system." Paragraph [0029] states, "the location-triggered shared space may transmit a message to a creating user's mobile device, causing an application hosted by the mobile device to obtain location information of the mobile device (e.g., an IP address of an access point for the mobile device's network connection, one or more identifiers of cell towers that the mobile device is maintaining communication with, GPS coordinates of the mobile device) and transmitting the location information of the creating user's mobile device to the social networking system. The location-triggered shared space process can access one or more data stores of location information (e.g., location information for public wireless hot spots, location information for cell towers) and verify the location information of the creating user's mobile device.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching of Berberat as modified by Kremen and include the above limitation with the teaching of Bosworth in order to "provide users shared, interactive virtual spaces associated with locations" (Bosworth: Paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Berberat as modified by Kremen discloses: The computer implemented method of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose: further comprising: locating a user profile that is associated with the user and stored in a database, wherein the second authorization operation comprises extracting a history of user activities from the user profile in the database in order to verify the attribute of the user.
However, Bosworth discloses: further comprising: locating a user profile that is associated with the user and stored in a database, wherein the second authorization operation comprises extracting a history of user activities from the user profile in the database in order to verify the attribute of the user (Bosworth: Paragraph [0023] states, "location database 104 may store an information base of places, where each place includes a name, a geographic location and meta information (such as the user that initially created the place, reviews, comments, check-in activity data, and the like)." Paragraph [0028] states, "in response to a user's checking in to a place, a server-side process may construct a place web page including a selectable icon for creating a shared space (e.g., "Create your own shared space here."), and present the place web page in a graphical user interface of an application hosted by the user's computing device. The user may select the selectable icon, and select one or more content objects (e.g., a set of photos) stored in the user's computing device and one or more privacy settings, causing the application to transmit to the social networking system a request for creating a shared space, including the user's identifier for the social networking system, the one or more content objects, and the one or more privacy settings. In response to the creating user's request, the location-triggered shared space process may access location database 104 for a current location of the creating user (e.g., recorded GPS coordinates, a recent place check-in activity), and store the shared space including the creating user's current location, the one or more content objects, and the privacy setting in location database 104.").
The same motivation to modify with Bosworth, as in claim 2, applies.
Claims 10 and 20 recites features similar to those in claim 2, therefore they are rejected in a similar manner.
Claim 11 recites features similar to those in claim 3, therefore it is rejected in a similar manner.
Claim(s) 4, 12, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berberat (US 20130325964 A1, hereinafter referred to as Berberat) in view of Kremen (US 20130013489 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kremen) in further view of Zalewski (CN 102016877 A, hereinafter referred to as Zalewski).
Regarding claim 4, Berberat as modified by Kremen discloses: The computer implemented method of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the identification data comprises real-time visual data captured using the device, wherein the attribute of the user comprises a user visual attribute, wherein the verifying the attribute of the user comprises comparing visual data of user profile data with the real-time visual data, and wherein the user profile data is associated with the user.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zalewski discloses: wherein the identification data comprises real-time visual data captured using the device, wherein the attribute of the user comprises a user visual attribute, wherein the verifying the attribute of the user comprises comparing visual data of user profile data with the real-time visual data, and wherein the user profile data is associated with the user (Zalewski: Paragraph [0059] states, "In order to identify the user, the depth-sensing camera can be the outline of the face can be identified by comparing the real time image and the depth data of the frame and a wire-frame model. In one embodiment, a computer system analyzes the image data to determine the angle of in the real-time image and the similar position of face and head of wire-frame model data with the stored data is compared. operation 294 attempting to use upper the real-time user detected characteristic to verify the stored user profile depth and image data. If the depth and image data is verified, operation 295 determines the user has been verified and applying the stored user profile.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching of Berberat as modified by Kremen and include the above limitation with the teaching of Kalewski in order to "automatically apply predefined privileges for identified and tracked users" (Zalewski: abstract).
Claims 12 and 18 recites features similar to those in claim 4, therefore they are rejected in a similar manner.
Claim(s) 6 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berberat (US 20130325964 A1, hereinafter referred to as Berberat) in view of Kremen (US 20130013489 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kremen) in further view of Adayikkoth (US 20130339375 A1, hereinafter referred to as Adayikkoth).
Regarding claim 6, Berberat as modified by Kremen discloses: The computer implemented method of claim 5, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the event and the further event are both related to the entity.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Adayikkoth discloses: wherein the event and the further event are both related to the entity (Adayikkoth: Paragraph [0030] states, "The event processing engine 109 identifies an entity associated with each of the identified one or more events.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching of Berberat as modified by Kremen and include the above limitation with the teaching of Adayikkoth in order for "real time extraction of actionable insights, in an effective manner, from a plurality of events distributed spatially" (Adayikkoth: Paragraph [0002]).
Claim 14 recites features similar to those in claim 6, therefore it is rejected in a similar manner.
Claim(s) 7 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berberat (US 20130325964 A1, hereinafter referred to as Berberat) in view of Kremen (US 20130013489 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kremen) in further view of Metcalf (US 20120324018 A1, hereinafter referred to as Metcalf).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Berberat as modified by Kremen discloses: The computer implemented method of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the event gallery is available for a specified transitory period.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Metcalf discloses: wherein the event gallery is available for a specified transitory period (Metcalf: Paragraph [0029] states, "within the bubble 100, the users 110, 120 and 130 can communicate with one another via a social networking space associated with the bubble. When a user steps outside the radius of the bubble, the user is no longer able to communication with other users via the social networking space associated with the bubble. In one embodiment, the bubble 100 can be additionally be temporally constrained such that it has a start time and an end time.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching of Berberat as modified by Kremen and include the above limitation with the teaching of Metcalf in order to allow users to "interact with other users that are not on their social graph who are attending various events tied to a specific location, such as a conference or a concert" (Metcalf: Paragraph [0003]).
Claim 15 recites features similar to those in claim 7, therefore it is rejected in a similar manner.
Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berberat (US 20130325964 A1, hereinafter referred to as Berberat) in view of Kremen (US 20130013489 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kremen) in further view of Kujawa (US 8284663 B2, hereinafter referred to as Kujawa).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Berberat as modified by Kremen discloses: The computer implemented method of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the event gallery comprises individual ephemeral messages shown in sequence.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kujawa discloses: wherein the event gallery comprises individual ephemeral messages shown in sequence (Metcalf: Col 8 lines 24-26 states, "the messages include (chan, ord, eph) triples that are used to control ordering and ephemerality of inbound and outbound messages.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching of Berberat as modified by Kremen and include the above limitation with the teaching of Kujawa in order to "send incremental information that is used by" users to "track the state of the entity" (Col 9 lines 2-3).
Claim 16 recites features similar to those in claim 8, therefore it is rejected in a similar manner.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes: Joa (US 20120198570 A1) describes methods and systems that monitor mobile data processing devices used for remote access to a computer network or system, and allowing or preventing access to the computer system or network based at least in part on a determined geographical location of the mobile device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHREYAJ RAM BHANDARI whose telephone number is (571)272-0727. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:00.
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, Ali Shayanfar can be reached at (571) 270-1050. 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.
/SHREYAJ RAM BHANDARI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2434
/NOURA ZOUBAIR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2434
Prosecution Insights