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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in response amendment filed on 4 March 2026. Claims 1, 11 and 15 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 12,190,348 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
19/008,386
12,190,348
A method, comprising:
identifying a first email transmitted, by a first email account associated with a first entity, to a plurality of email accounts;
detecting first activity, performed using email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, associated with the first email, wherein the first activity comprises at least two of the first email being forwarded, the first email being deleted, the first email being marked as spam, the first email being marked as desirable, a first social media post, comprising content related to the first email, being posted, or a first query, associated with content of the first email, being used to perform a first search;
analyzing the first activity to generate a first set of activity information corresponding to the first activity;
storing the first set of activity information in an entity profile associated with the first entity, wherein:
the entity profile comprises a plurality of sets of activity information associated with a plurality of emails transmitted by one or more email accounts associated with the first entity;
the plurality of sets of activity information comprises the first set of activity information;
the plurality of emails comprises the first email; and
each set of activity information of the plurality of sets of activity information corresponds to activity associated with an email of the plurality of emails;
generating a quality score, corresponding to the first entity, based upon the entity profile associated with the first entity and indicative of the plurality of sets of activity information comprising the first set of activity information corresponding to the first activity performed using the email accounts to which the first email was transmitted;
comparing (i) the quality score generated based upon the entity profile associated with the first entity to (ii) a threshold quality score; and
responsive to determining that the quality score is less than the threshold quality score, generating and transmitting instructions for creating quality messages to at least one of an account associated with the first entity or a first client device associated with the first entity.
A method, comprising:
identifying a first email transmitted, by a first email account associated with a first entity, to a plurality of email accounts;
detecting first activity, performed using email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, associated with the first email, wherein the first activity comprises at least two of the first email being forwarded, the first email being deleted, the first email being marked as spam, the first email being marked as desirable, a first social media post, comprising content related to the first email, being posted, or a first query, associated with content of the first email, being used to perform a first search;
analyzing the first activity to generate a first set of activity information corresponding to the first activity;
storing the first set of activity information in an entity profile associated with the first entity, wherein:
the entity profile comprises a plurality of sets of activity information associated with a plurality of emails transmitted by one or more email accounts associated with the first entity;
the plurality of sets of activity information comprises the first set of activity information and a second set of activity information corresponding to second activity performed using second email accounts to which a second email was transmitted, wherein the second activity comprises at least two of the second email being forwarded, the second email being deleted, the second email being marked as spam, the second email being marked as desirable, a second social media post, comprising content related to the second email, being posted or a second query, associated with content of the second email, being used to perform a second search;
the plurality of emails comprises the first email and the second email; and
each set of activity information of the plurality of sets of activity information corresponds to activity associated with an email of the plurality of emails;
generating an entity quality score, for the first entity and representative of a quality of multiple emails transmitted to two or more recipients in association with the first entity, based upon the entity profile associated with the first entity and indicative of the plurality of sets of activity information comprising (i) the first set of activity information corresponding to the first activity performed using the email accounts to which the first email was transmitted and (ii) the second set of activity information corresponding to the second activity performed using the second email accounts to which the second email was transmitted, wherein at least two of a forwarding of an email impacts the entity quality score positively, a deletion of an email impacts the entity quality score negatively, a marking as spam of an email impacts the entity quality score negatively, a marking as desirable of an email impacts the entity quality score positively, the first social media post being posted impacts the entity quality score positively or the query being used to perform the search impacts the entity quality score positively; comparing (i) the entity quality score representative of the quality of the multiple emails transmitted to two or more recipients in association with the first entity to (ii) a threshold quality score; and
responsive to determining that the entity quality score representative of the quality of the multiple emails transmitted to two or more recipients in association with the first entity is less than the threshold quality score:
generating, by a server, an instructional email comprising instructions for creating quality emails based upon the entity quality score representative of the quality of the multiple emails transmitted to two or more recipients in association with the first entity; and
transmitting, from the server, the instructional email comprising instructions for creating quality emails to a first client device associated with the first entity.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: though the wording are different, the limitation carried are either inherently implied or would have been obvious to one or of ordinary skill in the art. 19/008,386’s major difference in the language by lacking of limitation “ a second set of activity information corresponding to second activity performed using second email accounts to which a second email was transmitted, wherein the second activity comprises at least two of the second email being forwarded, the second email being deleted, the second email being marked as spam, the second email being marked as desirable, a second social media post, comprising content related to the second email, being posted or a second query, associated with content of the second email, being used to perform a second search”, “for the first entity and representative of a quality of multiple emails transmitted to two or more recipients in association with the first entity” and “(ii) the second set of activity information corresponding to the second activity performed using the second email accounts to which the second email was transmitted, wherein at least two of a forwarding of an email impacts the entity quality score positively, a deletion of an email impacts the entity quality score negatively, a marking as spam of an email impacts the entity quality score negatively, a marking as desirable of an email impacts the entity quality score positively, the first social media post being posted impacts the entity quality score positively or the query being used to perform the search impacts the entity quality score positively; comparing (i) the entity quality score representative of the quality of the multiple emails transmitted to two or more recipients in association with the first entity to (ii) a threshold quality score;”, generating, by a server, an instructional email comprising instructions for creating quality emails based upon the entity quality score representative of the quality of the multiple emails transmitted to two or more recipients in association with the first entity”; and transmitting, from the server, the instructional email comprising instructions for creating quality emails to a first client device associated with the first entity”. These omitted limitations are irrelevant because it "does not participate and/or linked to other steps in a patentable manner" it omitted limitation suggests the applicant is trying to differentiate their current claims from a prior patent and does not affect the core "inventive concept" and thus the claims are the same, or that the omitted step was a non-essential, unpatentable part. 19/008,386 differs from the patent by stating: “responsive to determining that the quality score is less than the threshold quality score, generating and transmitting instructions for creating quality messages to at least one of an account associated with the first entity or a first client device associated with the first entity” vs “responsive to determining that the entity quality score representative of the quality of the multiple emails transmitted to two or more recipients in association with the first entity is less than the threshold quality score”. While the nature of the steps are different, however do not result in a patentable distinction, in either case, the quality score must be determined to transmitting quality message/email.
Furthermore, there is no apparent reason why applicant was prevented from presenting claims corresponding to those of the instant application during prosecution of the application which matured into a patent. See In re Schneller, 397 F.2d 350, 158 USPQ 210 (CCPA 1968). See also MPEP § 804.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Step 1: The claims 1-10 are a method, 11-14 are a system and 15-20 are medium. Thus, each independent claim, on its face, is directed to one of the statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. §101. However, the claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 2A-Prong 1: independent claims (1, 11 and 15) recite identifying and transmitting an email to multiple accounts, detecting user activity (forwarding, deleting, marking as spam, posting on social media, searching), analyzing this activity to generate a set of activity information, storing this information in an entity profile, generating a quality score for the entity based on the profile data and comparing the score to a threshold and, if below the threshold, generating instructions for improving "quality.” This entire process likely falls into the category of an abstract idea: a method of gathering, analyzing, and using data (specifically, user feedback on communications) to make a business decision (assessing an entity's "quality" or reputation). These limitations fall within “Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity” for commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations). Simply put, these limitation merely describe a process for assessing the quality or reputation of an entity based on how recipients interact with its emails, which is clearly a business arrangement in its purest form. Claims 2-10, 12-14 and 16-20 merely proved additional abstract concept and narrow the abstract idea of claims 1, 11 and 15. Further, claims 1-20 are recited at such a high level that the claimed steps amount to no more than managing communications and assessing business reputation, which the courts have often classified as fundamental economic practices or methods of organizing human activity that are abstract ideas. Claims 1-20, merely provide additional abstract concepts and narrow the abstract idea. Further, claims 1-20, 22 and 23 are recited at such a high level that the claimed steps amount to no more than a mental processes, such as concepts performed in the human mind(including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) because a human can analyze the detected activity of emails and generating score that meets a specified criteria. The claim is directed to the abstract idea.
Step 2A-Prong 2: The only additional elements is some form of computerized system, which is also recited in independent claims 1, 19 and 20. These computerized systems are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data and a generic memory storing data) such that it amounts no more adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f).
Futher, the generic computer performs the generic computer functions such as identifying, detecting, analyzing, storing, generating and comparing can be performed mentally or using general-purpose computer functions or can be performed by human mentally or with generic computer tools (email, database, simple algorithms).
The claim does not recite specific, non-generic technological improvements or implementations in the way these functions are performed or in the technology itself that would transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention or do not appear to recite a specific, innovative technological solution (e.g., a new type of email protocol, a novel sensor, or a specialized machine) that would transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of
the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using the claimed
computer systems amount to no more than “apply” a selection of content on the systems.
Futher, the recitation of "email accounts" and "email" are considered generic computer components/activities. The process steps, even in combination, are likely considered conventional, routine, and well-understood data processing activities. The claims as currently written lack specific, unconventional technical details about how the computer or network infrastructure is improved, or a specific, non-generic application that integrates the idea into a patent-eligible invention. Thus, the claims are ineligible.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sargent et al (US Pub., No., 2010/0115040 A1) in view of Steinbok et al. (US Pub., No., 2012/005282 A1)
With respect to claim 1, Sargent teaches a method(paragraph [0007], discloses a computer-implemented method ) , comprising:
identifying a first email transmitted, by a first email account associated with a first entity , to a plurality of email accounts (paragraph [0021], discloses email service provider (ESP) may monitoring electronic communications network through servers connected to the internet and/or plurality of email server);
analyzing the first activity to generate a first set of activity information corresponding to the first activity (paragraph [0027], discloses server 104, 106, 108, and 110 may be configured to receive, collect, analyze, evaluate report, display and, passing and/or filtering of electronic message based on reputation score.., electronic messages, reports from users, system activity, patterns of messaging.., filtering electronic message);
storing the first set of activity information in an entity profile associated with the first entity (paragraph 0032], discloses general reputation system [storage] may also support queries for providing historical events [activity information]…, (e.g., user name) entity profile assocted with entity ) wherein:
the entity profile (paragraph [0032], discloses (e.g., user name) entity profile) comprises a plurality of sets of activity information (paragraph [0032], discloses general reputation system 200 may also encrypts user names, attributed data, and event labeled in the output for the queries providing a history of user events [activity information] ) associated with a plurality of emails transmitted by one or more email accounts associated with the first entity (paragraph [0032] discloses aggerate and count .., paragraph [0037], discloses emailing sending behavior; sent email attribute (e.g., the number of recipients per email, per hour, per day, number of mails sent ..) email listing behavior , email reading behavior ; an instant message ..) ;
the plurality of sets of activity information comprises the first set of activity information(paragraph [0027], discloses the server may be configured to manage and track: electronic messages, reports from users, system activity, pattern of messaging, information regarding .., tracking and collection of electronic messages .., perform filtering of electronic messages and/or deteriming a level of confidence assocted with a suer report);
the plurality of emails comprises the first email(paragraph [0037], discloses number of emails sent .., email listing behavior and paragraph [0100], discloses email messages sent by an entity ) ; and
each set of activity information of the plurality of sets of activity information corresponds to activity associated with an email of the plurality of emails (paragraph [0022], dislcies an attributes assocted with one or more entities interacting with an electronic commucation network, such as an email system.., paragraph [0024], discloses determine whether a give user is spamming based on his reputation and behavior and take appropriate action on user account and paragraph [0028], discloses based on a plurlity of inputs, such as attributes [set of activity information]) ;
generating a quality score, corresponding to the first entity, based upon the entity profile associated with the first entity and indicative of the plurality of sets of activity information comprising the first set of activity information corresponding to the first activity performed using the email accounts to which the first email was transmitted (Fig. 6, 640 dislcies create a new reputation record including a default reputation score, Fig. 7, paragraph [0021] discloses the ESP may then calculate a reputation score assocted with one or more senders communication over the network and then filter a sender’s commucation if the sender’s reputation is below a predetermined threshold and paragraph [0102], discloses table containing a plurlity of reputation record ..)); and
comparing (i) the quality score generated based upon the entity profile associated with the first entity to (ii) a threshold quality score (paragraph [0021], discloses the ESP may then calculate a reputation score assocted with one or more senders[entity profile] communication over the network and then filter a sender’s commucation if the sender’s reputation is below a predetermined threshold, [threshold quality score], paragraph [0027], discloses detecting pattern, and paragraph [0047], dislcies each TDF may output a score value.., between 0 and 1 represent the higher score ..).
Sargent teaches the above elements including detecting first activity, performed using email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, associated with the first email (paragraphs [0027], discloses server may be configured to receive , collect, analyze, evaluate, report display and distribute data related…, tracking, and collection of electronic messages. The servers may also be configured to perform filtering of electronic messages and/or determine a level of confidence associated with a user report ) , the first email being marked as spam (paragraph [0005], discloses allow user to mark emails the consider spam and report them to their ESP.., spam filtering system and method , paragraph [0021], discloses identified as likely being spam base on a reputation of or trust level assocted with the sender of the commucation and paragraph [0058], discloses to delete spam reputation), responsive to determining that the quality score is less than the threshold quality score, (paragraph [0021], discloses the ESP may then calculate a reputation score assocted with one or more senders[entity profile] communication over the network and then filter a sender’s commucation if the sender’s reputation is below a predetermined threshold, [threshold quality score]). Sargent failed to teach wherein the first activity comprises at least two of the first email being forwarded, the first email being deleted, the first email being marked as desirable, a first social media post, comprising content related to the first email, being posted, or a first query, associated with content of the first email, being used to perform a first search; and responsive to determining that the quality score is less than the threshold quality score, generating and transmitting an instructional message comprising instructions for creating quality messages to at least one of an account associated with the first entity for which the quality score was generated or a first client device associated with the first entity for which the quality score was generated.
However, Steinbok teaches wherein the first activity comprises at least two of the first email being forwarded, the first email being deleted, the first email being marked as desirable, a first social media post, comprising content related to the first email, being posted, or a first query, associated with content of the first email, being used to perform a first search(paragraph [0016], discloses monitor user action (e.g., action such as reading, deleting, forwarding, moving, etc.) on an e-mail message or thread received form the sender computer, paragraph [0038], discloses monitor user actions on the e-mail message or thread, received form the sender computer .., user action are monitored my comprises a list of actions in the statistics .., monitor whether a positive or negative feedback rating is received which represents an opinion of the quality of the e-mail message or thread, and paragraph [0039], discloses generates statistics based on one or more of the monitored user actions); and
responsive to determining that the quality score is less than the threshold quality score(paragraphs [0010], [0013] [0016] discloses provide a quality ranking of the electronic mail message based on the generated statistics, paragraphs [0026],-[0036] discloses user actions which may be performed on e-mail message or thread…, provide a quality ranking for an e-mail message or thread, paragraph [0038], discloses utilizing a gesture-based rating system …, thumbs up or thumbs down button .., high quality email .., indicative low quality email, paragraph [0040], discloses the lowers quality ranging for an email message, paragraph [0041], dislcies utilized to filter e-mail messages or threads based on the quality ranking and paragraph [0042], dislcies disply the current quality ranking as a number score (or value) for each email message or thread ),
generating and transmitting an instructional message comprising instructions for creating quality messages to at least one of an account associated with the first entity for which the quality score was generated or a first client device associated with the first entity for which the quality score was generated (paragraph [0014], discloses the received feedback and quality ranking may be utilized by sender to improve quality of futher emails sent to recipients[creating quality message} .., paragraph [0017], discloses collect, aggregate and store the statistics and the quality ranking 42A-42N received from the recipient computer 2A-2N.., database futher congrued to generate a summary email which may be sent to sender computer via the web service. The summery e-mail may be utilized by a user of the sender computer to receive feedback from the recipients of e-mails sent to the recipient computer 2A-2N to improve the quality of future sent emails and paragraph [0038], discloses send a new electronic mail message to the sender computer with combined voting result from recipients of the e-mail messages or thread upon occurrence of the one or more the following…). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
With respect to claim
2, Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, Sargent teaches the method comprising: analyzing content of the plurality of emails, wherein the generating the quality score is performed based upon the content of the plurality of emails(paragraph [0021], discloses the ESP may then calculate a reputation score assocted with one or more senders[entity profile] communication over the network and then filter a sender’s commucation if the sender’s reputation is below a predetermined threshold, [threshold quality score], paragraph [0027], discloses detecting pattern, reputation score based on email messages and paragraph [0047], dislcies each TDF may output a score value.., between 0 and 1 represent the higher score .. ).
With respect to claim
3, Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, Sargent teaches the method wherein:
Sargent failed to teach the analyzing the first activity comprises determining a click through rate (CTR) associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the CTR; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of CTRs, comprising the CTR, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information.
However, Steinbok teaches the analyzing the first activity comprises determining a click through rate (CTR) associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the CTR; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of CTRs, comprising the CTR, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information(paragraph [0016], discloses monitor user action (e.g., action such as reading, deleting, forwarding, moving, etc.) on an e-mail message or thread received form the sender computer, paragraph [0038], discloses monitor user actions on the e-mail message or thread, received form the sender computer .., user action are monitored my comprises a list of actions in the statistics .., monitor whether a positive or negative feedback rating is received which represents an opinion of the quality of the e-mail message or thread, and paragraph [0039], discloses generates statistics based on one or more of the monitored user actions). T Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
With respect to claim
4, Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, Sargent teaches the method Sargent failed to teach wherein: the analyzing the first activity comprises determining a click-to-open rate associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the click-to-open rate; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of click-to-open rates, comprising the click-to-open rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information.
However, Sargent teaches wherein: the analyzing the first activity comprises determining a click-to-open rate associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the click-to-open rate; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of click-to-open rates, comprising the click-to-open rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information(paragraph [0016], discloses monitor user action (e.g., action such as reading, deleting, forwarding, moving, etc.) on an e-mail message or thread received form the sender computer, paragraph [0038], discloses monitor user actions on the e-mail message or thread, received form the sender computer .., user action are monitored my comprises a list of actions in the statistics .., monitor whether a positive or negative feedback rating is received which represents an opinion of the quality of the e-mail message or thread, and paragraph [0039], discloses generates statistics based on one or more of the monitored user actions). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
With respect to claim
5, Sargent in view Sargent teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, Sargent teaches the method Sargent failed to teach wherein:
the analyzing the first activity comprises determining an open rate associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the open rate; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of open rates, comprising the open rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information.
However, Sargent teaches wherein: the analyzing the first activity comprises determining an open rate associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the open rate; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of open rates, comprising the open rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information(paragraph [0016], discloses monitor user action (e.g., action such as reading, deleting, forwarding, moving, etc.) on an e-mail message or thread received form the sender computer, paragraph [0038], discloses monitor user actions on the e-mail message or thread, received form the sender computer .., user action are monitored my comprises a list of actions in the statistics .., monitor whether a positive or negative feedback rating is received which represents an opinion of the quality of the e-mail message or thread, and paragraph [0039], discloses generates statistics based on one or more of the monitored user actions). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
With respect to claim 6 , Sargent in view Sargent teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, Sargent teaches the method receiving, from one or more email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, one or more messages indicative of the first email being marked spam (paragraph [0005], discloses allow user to mark emails the consider spam and report them to their ESP.., spam filtering system and method , paragraph [0021], discloses identified as likely being spam base on a reputation of or trust level assocted with the sender of the commucation and paragraph [0058], discloses to delete spam reputation); and
determining a spam rate associated with the first email based upon the one or more messages, wherein: the first set of activity information is indicative of the spam rate; and
the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of spam rates, comprising the spam rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information (paragraph [0103], discloses methods may be used to perform any number or combination of spam fighting technique .., deteriming the likelihood that a five user will send spam .., identifying user that may be spamming or not spamming if a user has just sent 200 emails, which triggers rate limiting and a spam actioning event, the spam actioning system may check the user's reputation and determine this is a "trusted" user).
With respect to claim 7 , Sargent in view Sargent teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, Sargent teaches the method. Sargent filed to disclose
wherein the analyzing the first activity comprises determining time-lengths that the first email is displayed using client devices associated with email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, the method comprising: generating a measure of displaying activity based upon the time-lengths, wherein: the first set of activity information is indicative of the measure of displaying activity; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of measures of displaying activity, comprising the measure of displaying activity, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information.
However, Sargent teaches wherein the analyzing the first activity comprises determining time-lengths that the first email is displayed using client devices associated with email accounts of the plurality of email accounts (paragraph [0038], discloses determine (if the e-mail message 38 or thread was read) how long it to a suer to read the e-mail message or thread (I.e., it to a suer to read the e-mail message or thread *i.e., a time length prior to when the e-mail message was read), how much time did a user spend reading the e-mail message or thread( e.g., time length)…, ) , the method comprising: generating a measure of displaying activity based upon the time-lengths(paragraph [0038], discloses time length taken by a user while reding the e-mail message email ..), wherein: the first set of activity information is indicative of the measure of displaying activity(paragraph [0035], discloses average time that the recipient takes to act on an email ..); and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of measures of displaying activity comprising the measure of displaying activity, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information (paragraph [0040], discloses (1) an average of various quality ranking determine for each of the e-mail messages in the thread (2) the lowest or minimum quality ranking for an email message the thread; or (3) the highest to maximum quality ranked for an email message in the thread)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
With respect to claim 10 , Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, Sargent teaches the method wherein: the first activity comprises the first query, associated with content of the first email(paragraph [0027], discloses activity, pattern of messaging,) , being used to perform the first search (paragraph [0023], discloses attribute information reputation queries ..,) ; and the query being used to perform the search impacts the quality score positively (paragraph [0064], discloses querying reputation ).
With respect to claim 11, Sargent teaches a computing device (paragraph [0013], discloses an electronic communication and messaging system ) , comprising:
a processor; and memory comprising processor-executable instructions that when executed by the processor cause performance of operations, the operation (paragraph [0021], dislcies electronic communications network through server connected to the internet and/or a plurality of email server.., and paragraph [0047], discloses TDFs’ the multiple TDFs may be stored in memory ..) comprising:
identifying a first email transmitted, by a first email account associated with a first entity , to a plurality of email accounts (paragraph [0021], discloses email service provider (ESP) may monitoring electronic communications network through servers connected to the internet and/or plurlity of email server);
analyzing the first activity to generate a first set of activity information corresponding to the first activity (paragraph [0027], discloses server 104, 106, 108, and 110 may be configured to receive, collect, analyze, evaluate report, display and, passing and/or filtering of electronic message based on reputation score.., electronic messages, reports from users, system activity, patterns of messaging.., filtering electronic message);
storing the first set of activity information in an entity profile associated with the first entity (paragraph 0032], discloses general reputation system [storage] may also support queries for providing historical events [activity information]…, (e.g., user name) entity profile assocted with entity ) wherein:
the entity profile (paragraph [0032], discloses (e.g., user name) entity profile) comprises a plurality of sets of activity information (paragraph [0032], discloses general reputation system 200 may also encrypts user names, attributed data, and event labeled in the output for the queries providing a history of user events [activity information] ) associated with a plurality of emails transmitted by one or more email accounts associated with the first entity (paragraph [0032] discloses aggerate and count .., paragraph [0037], discloses emailing sending behavior; sent email attribute (e.g., the number of recipients per email, per hour, per day, number of mails sent ..) email listing behavior , email reading behavior ; an instant message ..) ;
the plurality of sets of activity information comprises the first set of activity information(paragraph [0027], dislcies the server may be configured to manage and track: electronic messages, reports from users, system activity, pattern of messaging, information regarding .., tracking and collection of electronic messages .., perform filtering of electronic messages and/or deteriming a level of confidence assocted with a suer report);
the plurality of emails comprises the first email(paragraph [0037], discloses number of emails sent .., email listing behavior and paragraph [0100], discloses email messages sent by an entity ) ; and
each set of activity information of the plurality of sets of activity information corresponds to activity associated with an email of the plurality of emails (paragraph [0022], dislcies an attributes assocted with one or more entities interacting with an electronic commucation network, such as an email system.., paragraph [0024], discloses determine whether a give user is spamming based on his reputation and behavior and take appropriate action on user account and paragraph [0028], discloses based on a plurlity of inputs, such as attributes [set of activity information]) ;
generating a quality score, corresponding to the first entity, based upon the entity profile associated with the first entity and indicative of the plurality of sets of activity information comprising the first set of activity information corresponding to the first activity performed using the email accounts to which the first email was transmitted (Fig. 6, 640 dislcies create a new reputation record including a default reputation score, Fig. 7, paragraph [0021] discloses the ESP may then calculate a reputation score assocted with one or more senders communication over the network and then filter a sender’s commucation if the sender’s reputation is below a predetermined threshold and paragraph [0102], discloses table containing a plurlity of reputation record ..)); and
comparing (i) the quality score generated based upon the entity profile associated with the first entity to (ii) a threshold quality score (paragraph [0021], discloses the ESP may then calculate a reputation score assocted with one or more senders[entity profile] communication over the network and then filter a sender’s commucation if the sender’s reputation is below a predetermined threshold, [threshold quality score], paragraph [0027], discloses detecting pattern, and paragraph [0047], dislcies each TDF may output a score value.., between 0 and 1 represent the higher score ..).
Sargent teaches the above elements including detecting first activity, performed using email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, associated with the first email (paragraphs [0027], discloses server may be configured to receive , collect, analyze, evaluate, report display and distribute data related…, tracking, and collection of electronic messages. The servers may also be configured to perform filtering of electronic messages and/or determine a level of confidence associated with a user report ) , the first email being marked as spam (paragraph [0005], discloses allow user to mark emails the consider spam and report them to their ESP.., spam filtering system and method , paragraph [0021], discloses identified as likely being spam base on a reputation of or trust level assocted with the sender of the commucation and paragraph [0058], discloses to delete spam reputation), responsive to determining that the quality score is less than the threshold quality score, (paragraph [0021], discloses the ESP may then calculate a reputation score assocted with one or more senders[entity profile] communication over the network and then filter a sender’s commucation if the sender’s reputation is below a predetermined threshold, [threshold quality score]). Sargent failed to teach wherein the first activity comprises at least two of the first email being forwarded, the first email being deleted, the first email being marked as desirable, a first social media post, comprising content related to the first email, being posted, or a first query, associated with content of the first email, being used to perform a first search; and responsive to determining that the quality score is less than the threshold quality score, generating and transmitting notification to first client devices, associated with the first entity for which the quality score was generated inductive of the quality score being less than the threshold quality score.
However, Steinbok teaches wherein the first activity comprises at least two of the first email being forwarded, the first email being deleted, the first email being marked as desirable, a first social media post, comprising content related to the first email, being posted, or a first query, associated with content of the first email, being used to perform a first search(paragraph [0016], discloses monitor user action (e.g., action such as reading, deleting, forwarding, moving, etc.) on an e-mail message or thread received form the sender computer, paragraph [0038], discloses monitor user actions on the e-mail message or thread, received form the sender computer .., user action are monitored my comprises a list of actions in the statistics .., monitor whether a positive or negative feedback rating is received which represents an opinion of the quality of the e-mail message or thread, and paragraph [0039], discloses generates statistics based on one or more of the monitored user actions); and
responsive to determining that the quality score is less than the threshold quality score(paragraphs [0010], [0013] [0016] discloses provide a quality ranking of the electronic mail message based on the generated statistics, paragraphs [0026],-[0036] discloses user actions which may be performed on e-mail message or thread…, provide a quality ranking for an e-mail message or thread, paragraph [0038], discloses utilizing a gesture-based rating system …, thumbs up or thumbs down button .., high quality email .., indicative low quality email, paragraph [0040], discloses the lowers quality ranging for an email message, paragraph [0041], dislcies utilized to filter e-mail messages or threads based on the quality ranking and paragraph [0042], dislcies disply the current quality ranking as a number score (or value) for each email message or thread ), generating and transmitting notification to first client devices, associated with the first entity for which the quality score was generated inductive of the quality score being less than the threshold quality score(paragraph [0014], discloses the received feedback and quality ranking may be utilized by sender to improve quality of futher emails sent to recipients[creating quality message} .., paragraph [0017], discloses collect, aggregate and store the statistics and the quality ranking 42A-42N received from the recipient computer 2A-2N.., database futher congrued to generate a summary email which may be sent to sender computer via the web service. The summery e-mail may be utilized by a user of the sender computer to receive feedback from the recipients of e-mails sent to the recipient computer 2A-2N to improve the quality of future sent emails and paragraph [0038], discloses send a new electronic mail message to the sender computer with combined voting result from recipients of the e-mail messages or thread upon occurrence of the one or more the following…). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
With respect to claim 1
2, Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 11, furthermore, Sargent teaches the computing device operation comprising: analyzing content of the plurlity of emails, wherein the generating the quality score is performed based upon the content of the plurality of emails(paragraph [0021], discloses the ESP may then calculate a reputation score assocted with one or more senders[entity profile] communication over the network and then filter a sender’s commucation if the sender’s reputation is below a predetermined threshold, [threshold quality score], paragraph [0027], discloses detecting pattern, reputation score based on email messages and paragraph [0047], dislcies each TDF may output a score value.., between 0 and 1 represent the higher score .. ).
With respect to claim 13 , Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 11, furthermore, Sargent teaches the computing device operation receiving, from one or more email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, one or more messages indicative of the first email being marked spam (paragraph [0005], discloses allow user to mark emails the consider spam and report them to their ESP.., spam filtering system and method , paragraph [0021], discloses identified as likely being spam base on a reputation of or trust level assocted with the sender of the commucation and paragraph [0058], discloses to delete spam reputation).
With respect to claim 14 , Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 13, furthermore, Sargent teaches the computing device operation determining a spam rate associated with the first email based upon the one or more messages, wherein: the first set of activity information is indicative of the spam rate; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of spam rates, comprising the spam rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information (paragraph [0103], discloses methods may be used to perform any number or combination of spam fighting technique .., deteriming the likelihood that a five user will send spam .., identifying user that may be spamming or not spamming if a user has just sent 200 emails, which triggers rate limiting and a spam actioning event, the spam actioning system may check the user's reputation and determine this is a "trusted" user).
With respect to claim 15, Sargent teaches a non-transitory machine-readable medium having stored thereon processor-executable instructions that when executed by the processor cause performance of operations, the operation (paragraph [0021], dislcies electronic communications network through server connected to the internet and/or a plurality of email server.., and paragraph [0047], discloses TDFs’ the multiple TDFs may be stored in memory ..) comprising:
identifying a first email transmitted, by a first email account associated with a first entity , to a plurality of email accounts (paragraph [0021], discloses email service provider (ESP) may monitoring electronic communications network through servers connected to the internet and/or plurlity of email server);
analyzing the first activity to generate a first set of activity information corresponding to the first activity (paragraph [0027], discloses server 104, 106, 108, and 110 may be configured to receive, collect, analyze, evaluate report, display and, passing and/or filtering of electronic message based on reputation score.., electronic messages, reports from users, system activity, patterns of messaging.., filtering electronic message);
storing the first set of activity information in an entity profile associated with the first entity (paragraph 0032], discloses general reputation system [storage] may also support queries for providing historical events [activity information]…, (e.g., user name) entity profile assocted with entity ) wherein:
the entity profile (paragraph [0032], discloses (e.g., user name) entity profile) comprises a plurality of sets of activity information (paragraph [0032], discloses general reputation system 200 may also encrypts user names, attributed data, and event labeled in the output for the queries providing a history of user events [activity information] ) associated with a plurality of emails transmitted by one or more email accounts associated with the first entity (paragraph [0032] discloses aggerate and count .., paragraph [0037], discloses emailing sending behavior; sent email attribute (e.g., the number of recipients per email, per hour, per day, number of mails sent ..) email listing behavior , email reading behavior ; an instant message ..) ;
the plurality of sets of activity information comprises the first set of activity information(paragraph [0027], dislcies the server may be configured to manage and track: electronic messages, reports from users, system activity, pattern of messaging, information regarding .., tracking and collection of electronic messages .., perform filtering of electronic messages and/or deteriming a level of confidence assocted with a suer report);
the plurality of emails comprises the first email(paragraph [0037], discloses number of emails sent .., email listing behavior and paragraph [0100], discloses email messages sent by an entity ) ; and
each set of activity information of the plurality of sets of activity information corresponds to activity associated with an email of the plurality of emails (paragraph [0022], dislcies an attributes assocted with one or more entities interacting with an electronic commucation network, such as an email system.., paragraph [0024], discloses determine whether a give user is spamming based on his reputation and behavior and take appropriate action on user account and paragraph [0028], discloses based on a plurlity of inputs, such as attributes [set of activity information]) ;
generating a quality score, corresponding to the first entity, based upon the entity profile associated with the first entity and indicative of the plurality of sets of activity information comprising the first set of activity information corresponding to the first activity performed using the email accounts to which the first email was transmitted (Fig. 6, 640 dislcies create a new reputation record including a default reputation score, Fig. 7, paragraph [0021] discloses the ESP may then calculate a reputation score assocted with one or more senders communication over the network and then filter a sender’s commucation if the sender’s reputation is below a predetermined threshold and paragraph [0102], discloses table containing a plurlity of reputation record ..)); and
comparing (i) the quality score generated based upon the entity profile associated with the first entity to (ii) a threshold quality score (paragraph [0021], discloses the ESP may then calculate a reputation score assocted with one or more senders[entity profile] communication over the network and then filter a sender’s commucation if the sender’s reputation is below a predetermined threshold, [threshold quality score], paragraph [0027], discloses detecting pattern, and paragraph [0047], dislcies each TDF may output a score value.., between 0 and 1 represent the higher score ..).
However, Steinbok teaches wherein the first activity comprises at least two of the first email being forwarded, the first email being deleted, the first email being marked as desirable, a first social media post, comprising content related to the first email, being posted, or a first query, associated with content of the first email, being used to perform a first search(paragraph [0016], discloses monitor user action (e.g., action such as reading, deleting, forwarding, moving, etc.) on an e-mail message or thread received form the sender computer, paragraph [0038], discloses monitor user actions on the e-mail message or thread, received form the sender computer .., user action are monitored my comprises a list of actions in the statistics .., monitor whether a positive or negative feedback rating is received which represents an opinion of the quality of the e-mail message or thread, and paragraph [0039], discloses generates statistics based on one or more of the monitored user actions); and
responsive to determining that the quality score is less than the threshold quality score(paragraphs [0010], [0013] [0016] discloses provide a quality ranking of the electronic mail message based on the generated statistics, paragraphs [0026],-[0036] discloses user actions which may be performed on e-mail message or thread…, provide a quality ranking for an e-mail message or thread, paragraph [0038], discloses utilizing a gesture-based rating system …, thumbs up or thumbs down button .., high quality email .., indicative low quality email, paragraph [0040], discloses the lowers quality ranging for an email message, paragraph [0041], dislcies utilized to filter e-mail messages or threads based on the quality ranking and paragraph [0042], dislcies disply the current quality ranking as a number score (or value) for each email message or thread ),
suspending the first entity, for which the quality sores was generated from one or more service for duration of time (paragraph [0041], discloses receiving by one or more of the recipients commuters 2A-2N has a low quality ranking the application may be configured to automatically move the e-mail mess or thread from an inbox folder to a delete folder (e.g., thereby delete email) or to a “spam” or “junk” folder for storing unsolicited or undesirable e-mail messes or threads [suspending the first entity]) ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
With respect to claim 16
, Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 15, furthermore, Sargent teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium wherein:
Sargent failed to teach the analyzing the first activity comprises determining a click through rate (CTR) associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the CTR; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of CTRs, comprising the CTR, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information.
However, Steinbok teaches the analyzing the first activity comprises determining a click through rate (CTR) associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the CTR; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of CTRs, comprising the CTR, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information (paragraph [0016], discloses monitor user action (e.g., action such as reading, deleting, forwarding, moving, etc.) on an e-mail message or thread received form the sender computer, paragraph [0038], discloses monitor user actions on the e-mail message or thread, received form the sender computer .., user action are monitored my comprises a list of actions in the statistics .., monitor whether a positive or negative feedback rating is received which represents an opinion of the quality of the e-mail message or thread, and paragraph [0039], discloses generates statistics based on one or more of the monitored user actions). T Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
With respect to claim
17, Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 15, furthermore, Sargent teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium, Sargent failed to teach wherein: the analyzing the first activity comprises determining a click-to-open rate associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the click-to-open rate; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of click-to-open rates, comprising the click-to-open rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information.
However, Steinbok teaches wherein: the analyzing the first activity comprises determining a click-to-open rate associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the click-to-open rate; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of click-to-open rates, comprising the click-to-open rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information(paragraph [0016], discloses monitor user action (e.g., action such as reading, deleting, forwarding, moving, etc.) on an e-mail message or thread received form the sender computer, paragraph [0038], discloses monitor user actions on the e-mail message or thread, received form the sender computer .., user action are monitored my comprises a list of actions in the statistics .., monitor whether a positive or negative feedback rating is received which represents an opinion of the quality of the e-mail message or thread, and paragraph [0039], discloses generates statistics based on one or more of the monitored user actions). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
With respect to claim
18, Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 15, furthermore, Sargent teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium, Sargent failed to teach wherein:
the analyzing the first activity comprises determining an open rate associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the open rate; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of open rates, comprising the open rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information.
However, Steinbok teaches wherein: the analyzing the first activity comprises determining an open rate associated with the first email; the first set of activity information is indicative of the open rate; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of open rates, comprising the open rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information(paragraph [0016], discloses monitor user action (e.g., action such as reading, deleting, forwarding, moving, etc.) on an e-mail message or thread received form the sender computer, paragraph [0038], discloses monitor user actions on the e-mail message or thread, received form the sender computer .., user action are monitored my comprises a list of actions in the statistics .., monitor whether a positive or negative feedback rating is received which represents an opinion of the quality of the e-mail message or thread, and paragraph [0039], discloses generates statistics based on one or more of the monitored user actions). T Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
With respect to claim 19 , Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 15, furthermore, Sargent teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium receiving, from one or more email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, one or more messages indicative of the first email being marked spam (paragraph [0005], discloses allow user to mark emails the consider spam and report them to their ESP.., spam filtering system and method , paragraph [0021], discloses identified as likely being spam base on a reputation of or trust level assocted with the sender of the commucation and paragraph [0058], discloses to delete spam reputation); and
determining a spam rate associated with the first email based upon the one or more messages, wherein: the first set of activity information is indicative of the spam rate; and
the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of spam rates, comprising the spam rate, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information (paragraph [0103], discloses methods may be used to perform any number or combination of spam fighting technique .., deteriming the likelihood that a five user will send spam .., identifying user that may be spamming or not spamming if a user has just sent 200 emails, which triggers rate limiting and a spam actioning event, the spam actioning system may check the user's reputation and determine this is a "trusted" user).
With respect to claim 20 , Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, Sargent teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium. Sargent filed to disclose wherein the analyzing the first activity comprises determining time-lengths that the first email is displayed using client devices associated with email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, the method comprising: generating a measure of displaying activity based upon the time-lengths, wherein: the first set of activity information is indicative of the measure of displaying activity; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of measures of displaying activity, comprising the measure of displaying activity, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information.
However, Steinbok teaches wherein the analyzing the first activity comprises determining time-lengths that the first email is displayed using client devices associated with email accounts of the plurality of email accounts(paragraph [0038], discloses determine (if the e-mail message 38 or thread was read) how long it to a suer to read the e-mail message or thread (I.e., it to a suer to read the e-mail message or thread *i.e., a time length prior to when the e-mail message was read), how much time did a user spend reading the e-mail message or thread( e.g., time length)…, ), the method comprising: generating a measure of displaying activity based upon the time-lengths(paragraph [0038], discloses time length taken by a user while reding the e-mail message email ..), wherein: the first set of activity information is indicative of the measure of displaying activity(paragraph [0035], discloses average time that the recipient takes to act on an email ..); and the generating the quality score is performed based upon a plurality of measures of displaying activity comprising the measure of displaying activity, associated with the plurality of sets of activity information (paragraph [0040], discloses (1) an average of various quality ranking determine for each of the e-mail messages in the thread (2) the lowest or minimum quality ranking for an email message the thread; or (3) the highest to maximum quality ranked for an email message in the thread)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for SARGENT's method of analyzing email accounts to optimize emails and reduce spam to include electronic messages may be collaboratively ranking and filtering of Steinbok in order to send e-mail message including the received feedback and quality rankings to be utilized by the sender to improve the quality of future e-mails sent to recipients(see Steinbok , paragraph [0014]).
Claims 8, and 9 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sargent et al. (US PG Pub 20100115040) in view of Steinbok et al. (US Pub., No., 2012/005282 A1) and further view of Rothschild et al (US PG Pub 20090030774)
With respect to claim 8 , Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, Sargent teaches the method. Sargent and Steinbok failed to disclose: determining a first advertisement revenue received in association with advertisements being displayed on client devices, associated with email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, in association with the first email; and storing the first advertisement revenue in the entity profile, wherein: the entity profile comprises a plurality of advertisement revenues associated with the plurality of emails; the plurality of advertisement revenues comprises the first advertisement revenue;
each advertisement revenue of the plurality of advertisement revenues is received in association with an email of the plurality of emails; and the generating the quality score is performed based upon the plurality of advertisement revenues.
However, Rothschild teaches determining a first advertisement revenue received in association with advertisements being displayed on client devices, associated with email accounts of the plurality of email accounts, in association with the first email; and storing the first advertisement revenue in the entity profile, wherein: the entity profile comprises a plurality of advertisement revenues associated with the plurality of emails (paragraph [0103], discloses email client advertising system .., email client works together with the advertising application compensation); the plurality of advertisement revenues comprises the first advertisement revenue (paragraph [0017], discloses compensating the contributor for the mere presence of advertisement, paragraphs [0098], discloses sending an advertisement, and the compensating that is due for an advertisement's transmission, interaction, or purchases made thereafter and paragraph [0103], discloses compensation); each advertisement revenue of the plurality of advertisement revenues is received in association with an email of the plurality of emails (paragraph s [0098], discloses sending an advertisement, and the compensating that is due for an advertisement's transmission, interaction, or purchases made thereafter and paragraph [0107] discloses determines the amount of compensation that is due the sender based upon the selected advertisement and the number of recipients that received the advertisement); and
the generating the quality score is performed based upon the plurality of advertisement revenues(paragraph [0098], discloses generating statistical data from the web site , the statical data may include but is not limited the number of times an advertismetn has been sent, the number of times an advertisement was interacted …). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine SARGENT and Steinbok method electronic mail message may collaboratively rank and filtering to include ROTHSCHILD's method of providing compensation with providing advertisements in order for SARGENT to allow compensation associated with advertisements available to consumers (Rothschild, para. 0019)
With respect to claim 9 , Sargent in view Steinbok teaches elements of claim 1, furthermore, Sargent teaches the method. Sargent and Steinbok failed to disclose: the first activity comprises the first social media post, comprising content related to the first email, being posted; and the first social media post being posted impacts the quality score positively.
However, Rothschild teaches the first activity comprises the first social media post, comprising content related to the first email, being posted (paragraph [0021], disclose posting the message on the network application server …, ser-generated content), or sent to a designated recipient (such as by e-mail, instant message, blog, post online social network comment, multi-user chat, etc.)) ; and the first social media post being posted impacts the quality score positively (paragraph [0023], discloses this alignment will likely increase the probability that an advertisement will appeal to the reader). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine SARGENT and Steinbok method electronic mail message may collaboratively rank and filtering to include ROTHSCHILD's method of providing compensation with providing advertisements in order for SARGENT to allow compensation associated with advertisements available to consumers (Rothschild, para. 0019)
Prior arts:
Sargent et al. (US PG Pub 20100115040) discloses according to one aspect of the present disclosure, a computer- implemented method is provided for generating a reputation record and filtering electronic messages, each reputation record including a reputation score and a reputation key. The method includes receiving at least one incoming event notification, including a reputation key.
Steinbok et al. (US Pub., No., 2012/005282 A1) discloses electronic mail messages may be collaboratively ranked and filtered. User actions on an electronic mail message received from a sender by one or more recipients may be monitored. Statistics may be generated based on the user action.
Zeng et al ( US PG Pub 20150347925 A1) discloses techniques are described herein for predicting one or more behaviors by an email recipient and, more specifically, to machine learning techniques for predicting one or more behaviors of an email recipient, changing one or more components in the email to increase the likelihood of a behavior, and determining and/or scheduling an optimal time to send the email.
Rothschild et al (US PG Pub 20090030774) discloses a system and method is provided for adding an advertisement to a digital message and providing additional communication data to a recipient that interacts with the advertisement regardless of the network device the recipient is utilizing. An advertisement generator residing on a network host accepts digital messages from contributors and allows the contributors to select an advertisement to be displayed with their contributed messages. These digital messages may be sent to specified recipients or published on a Web site.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments of 35 U.S.C 101 rejection with respect to claims 1-20 filed on 4 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants’ arguments of the amended claim is not directed to a fundamental economic practice or a mental process is not persuasive. The amended limitation describe an automated scoring and notification system, when evaluated by the USPTO guidelines, the claims is directed to an intelligible “abstract idea” (such as a method of organizing human activity or a mental process) without adding a meaningful technological improvement). Furthermore, determining quality, calculating threshold and generating instructional message fall under mental process or method of organizing human activity, simply performing these tasks on a generic computer or network does not prove an inventive concept.
Applicants’ arguments of the claim requires identifying a first email transmitted to a plurality of email accounts, detecting multiple types of activity performed using those accounts (including forwarding, deletion, spam marking, social media posting related to the email, and related search queries), analyzing that activity to generate a structured set of activity information, storing that information in an entity profile comprising multiple sets of activity information corresponding to multiple emails, and generating a quality score based upon that profile. The Specification explains that these activities may be detected via monitoring email interfaces and receiving spam/delete messages and other interaction signals across a distributed communication service. The described techniques include maintaining counter values for open events, selection events, spam events, and related activity, and computing open rates, click-through rates, spam rates, and related measures based upon those counters. These operations require automated monitoring of network-based email activity across a plurality of accounts and devices and cannot practically be performed in the human mind is not persuasive.
The examiner asserts that the claims—while framed as using email systems—are actually directed to the unpatentable fundamental idea of gathering, analyzing, and aggregating data because claims where a human has historically performed an action, and the applicant merely puts it on a "generic computer". The activities of "identifying transmitted emails," "tracking responses," "profiling user activity," and "calculating a quality score" fall into this judicial exception as data analysis, bookkeeping, or mental processes. Furthermore, in order to be patent-eligible, the claim must include an "inventive concept"—a technical solution or improvement that goes beyond routine data collection and analysis. The rejection indicates that the components utilized are merely conventional.
Thus, the 35 U.S.C 101 rejection with respect to claims 1-20 is maintained.
Applicant's arguments of 35 U.S.C 101 rejection with respect to claims 1-20 filed on 4 March 2026 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.
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 SABA DAGNEW whose telephone number is (571)270-3271. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6:45.
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, Waseem Ashraf can be reached at (571) 270 -3948. 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.
/SABA DAGNEW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621
Prosecution Insights