DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
This is a non-final office action relating to U.S. Patent Application 19/029,641, filed on January 17, 2025. This is a Division of U.S. Patent Application 18/494,534, filed on October 25, 2023, which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 17/660,583, filed on April 25, 2022, now U.S. Patent 11,836,689, which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application 15/979,773, filed on May 15, 2018, now U.S. Patent 11,341,467.
Information Disclosure Statements
The Information Disclosure Statements submitted by the Applicant on February 7, 2025, June 17, 2025 and February 23, 2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and have been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Independent Claim 11 is directed to a computer-readable medium storing instructions. The Specification (Par. 121) discloses: Computer readable media may be any available media that may be accessed by a computer. By way of example and not meant to be limiting, computer readable media may comprise "computer storage media" and "communications media." This may include transitory forms of signal transmission (referred to as signals per se) which is not a statutory class of invention. Independent Claim 11 and dependent Claims 12-19, which fail to remedy the issue, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being non-statutory
This issue can be remedied with an amendment directing Claim 11 to a non-transitory computer medium storing instructions … . Claims 11-30 are rejected pursuant to 35 USC § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 - Statutory Class
Claims 1-10 are directed to a method. Claims 11-19 are non-statutory, as discussed above. Claim 20 is directed to system. Therefore, on their face, Claims 1-10 and 20 are directed to a statutory class of invention.
Step 2A, Prong 1 – Abstract Idea
Discussing claim 20 as exemplary, claim 20 recites determine a record indicating a content asset accessed by a device of a plurality of devices, wherein the record comprises an identifier configured to identify a user of the device while maintaining anonymity of the user to at least a portion of the plurality of devices, retrieve, based on the identifier demographic information associated with the user and associate the demographic information with the record and store the demographic information, wherein the device is configured to retrieve the demographic information. The abstract idea in Claim 20 recites determining a record of a content asset associated with a user (identified anonymously) and associating demographic information from another data source with the user ID which amounts to profiling of content consumption which is a part of targeted advertising to users based on demographics and is a pre-sale activity within commercial interactions under Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity under MPEP 2106. Claims 1 and 11 recite the same abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong 2 – Practical Application
Claim 20 recites a device, a distributed ledger and a database. The additional
elements are recited at a high level of generality and are used as tools to implement the abstract idea. They do not provide improvements to the functioning of a computer or to technology. The claims do not invoke a particular machine as our guidance is clear that a generic computer is not the particular machine envisioned, they do not transform matter as they only manipulate data which is not matter. They amount to an instruction to “apply it” with a computer.
Step 2B – Significantly more
As set forth in the discussion in Step 2A, Prong 2, above, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and are used as tools to implement the abstract idea. They do not provide improvements to the functioning of a computer or to technology and do not add significantly more to the abstract idea.
Dependent claims
Claims 2 and 12 (anonymity of the user is maintained by encrypting at least a portion of the identifier using a key), Claims 3 and 13 (the record comprises a digital signature of the device, wherein the digital signature comprises an encryption of at least a portion of the record using a key), Claims 4 and 14 (identifying, based on the associating the demographic information with the record, a second content asset; and sending the second content asset to the user), Claims 5 and 15 (determining, from at least the demographic information, viewership data associated with the content asset), Claims 6 and 16 (identifying, from the viewership data, a second content asset; determining, from at least the demographic information, a second user; and sending the second content asset to the second user), Claims 7 and 17 (the record is one of a plurality of records associated with the distributed ledger), Claims 8 and 18 (determining, based at least in part on the plurality of records, a pattern of access to the content asset; and determining, based on the pattern of access to the content asset, second demographic information associated with the content asset, wherein the second demographic information is associated with the at least the portion of the plurality of devices), Claims 9 and 19 (determining, based at least in part on the second demographic information, a consumption rating for the content asset) and Claim 10 (determining, based at least in part on the plurality of records, consumption information associated with the content asset; and associating the consumption information with demographic information associated with the at least the portion of the plurality of devices) further define and add specificity to the abstract idea. Thus, the dependent claims also fail to add significantly more to the abstract idea.
As such, Claims 1-20 are not patent eligible.
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.
Claims 1, 5, 7, 10-11, 15 and 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vanderhook et al., US 2009/0070443 A1, (“Vanderhook”), in view of Wheeler et al., US 2019/01028250 A1, (“Wheeler”).
Claim 1:
Vanderhook teaches:
determining, from a distributed ledger, a record indicating a content asset accessed by a device of a plurality of devices, (See Vanderhook, Par. 56, Fig 3A (disclosing receipt of data regarding a plurality of users’ visits to a web site (each a “viewing event”), each user identified by a UserID and further disclosing that “in certain embodiments, the log data comprises … IP address of the user” (thus the content consumption data is associated with operation of a user device operating from the IP address.))
wherein the record comprises an identifier configured to identify a user of the device while maintaining anonymity of the user to at least a portion of the plurality of devices; (See Vanderhook, Par. 56, Fig 3A (disclosing that the viewing data is encoded and stored in a table (see Fig. 3A) which includes a SiteID indicating a website visited) and comprising an identifier configured to identify a user of the device … disclosing that the encoded data includes a UserID identifying the user.))
retrieving, based on the identifier and from a demographic information source, demographic information associated with the user; and
associating the demographic information with the record. (See Vanderhook, entire disclosure, especially [0005]-[0008], [0084]-[0087], [0092], Fig. 11 (disclosing automated derivation of a user’s demographic profile from the user’s online behavior, at least [0048] disclosing manners of storage of same and at least [0117]-[0142] for an extensive discussion of the retrieval and use of such stored user demographic profiles to profile websites.))
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose that the viewing data is encoded as a distributed ledger transaction in a distributed ledger, or that the encoding of the identifier configured to identify a user of the device is done while maintaining anonymity of the user to at least a portion of the plurality of devices. However, use of anonymous user IDs in blockchains was known at the time of the invention. In analogous art, Wheeler teaches use of blockchain and smart contract technologies to implement a commodity exchange (see Par. 1). Wheeler further teaches use of anonymous consumer identifiers in ledgers (see at Par. 29, last sentence), which ledgers are stored in blockchains (see at least Fig. 3, elements 324, 328, 340, 342, 370, 372).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have substituted the anonymous consumer identifiers taught by Wheeler for the UserIDs taught by Vanderhook and to have substituted the conventional storage of content consumption data disclosed by Vanderhook for storage of data in a blockchain as taught by Wheeler, in order to enable better consumer anonymity (See Wheeler, Par. 38). Further, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the blockchain with anonymous user identifiers disclosed by Wheeler for the table with UserIDs disclosed by Vanderhook and the results of the substitution would have been predictable.
Claim 5:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 1 above.
Vanderhook further teaches:
determining, from at least the demographic information, viewership data associated with the content asset. (See Vanderhook, Par 85 (The users of the predetermined group of users are anonymous and providing the plurality of user demographic profiles in the operational block 410 comprises assigning at least some of the users of the predetermined group of users to one or more demographic
subgroups based on known or derived demographic profiles of the websites visited by these users. The assigned users are selected from web traversal history files obtained from internet service providers (ISPs). These web traversal history files contain lists of users and the URLs of the websites visited by the listed users.), Par. 87 (The web traversal history files include a plurality of lines each having a plurality of fields. In certain embodiments, only some of these fields are used in the subsequent analysis, and some of these fields are ignored. The fields used in the subsequent analysis can include, but are not limited to: UserID, EpochTime, Delta, and URL. User ID is a unique identification string provided by the ISP to identify the user, and URL is the URL as sent by the user's computer to the ISP. EpochTime is the number of seconds that had elapsed between the moment the user first accessed the URL and a predetermined moment.))
Claim 7:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 1 above.
Vanderhook further teaches:
the record is one of a plurality of records associated with the distributed ledger. (See Vanderhook, Par. 56, Fig 3A (disclosing receipt of data regarding a plurality of users’ visits to a web site (each a “viewing event”), each user identified by a UserID and further disclosing that “in certain embodiments, the log data comprises … IP address of the user” (thus the content consumption data is associated with operation of a user device operating from the IP address.))
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose that the viewing data is encoded as a distributed ledger transaction in a distributed ledger, or that the encoding of the identifier configured to identify a user of the device is done while maintaining anonymity of the user to at least a portion of the plurality of devices. However, use of anonymous user IDs in blockchains was known at the time of the invention. In analogous art, Wheeler teaches use of blockchain and smart contract technologies to implement a commodity exchange (see Par. 1). Wheeler further teaches use of anonymous consumer identifiers in ledgers (see at Par. 29, last sentence), which ledgers are stored in blockchains (see at least Fig. 3, elements 324, 328, 340, 342, 370, 372).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have substituted the anonymous consumer identifiers taught by Wheeler for the UserIDs taught by Vanderhook and to have substituted the conventional storage of content consumption data disclosed by Vanderhook for storage of data in a blockchain as taught by Wheeler, in order to enable better consumer anonymity (See Wheeler, Par. 38). Further, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the blockchain with anonymous user identifiers disclosed by Wheeler for the table with UserIDs disclosed by Vanderhook and the results of the substitution would have been predictable.
Claim 10:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 7 above.
Vanderhook further teaches:
based at least in part on the plurality of records, consumption information associated with the content asset; and (See Vanderhook, Par. 56, Fig 3A (disclosing receipt of data regarding a plurality of users’ visits to a web site (each a “viewing event”), each user identified by a UserID and further disclosing that “in certain embodiments, the log data comprises … IP address of the user” (thus the content consumption data is associated with operation of a user device operating from the IP address.))
associating the consumption information with demographic information associated with the at least the portion of the plurality of devices. (See Vanderhook, Par 85 (The users of the predetermined group of users are anonymous and providing the plurality of user demographic profiles in the operational block 410 comprises assigning at least some of the users of the predetermined group of users to one or more demographic subgroups based on known or derived demographic profiles of the websites visited by these users. The assigned users are selected from web traversal history files obtained from internet service providers (ISPs). These web traversal history files contain lists of users and the URLs of the websites visited by the listed users.), Par. 87 (The web traversal history files include a plurality of lines each having a plurality of fields. In certain embodiments, only some of these fields are used in the subsequent analysis, and some of these fields are ignored. The fields used in the subsequent analysis can include, but are not limited to: UserID, EpochTime, Delta, and URL. User ID is a unique identification string provided by the ISP to identify the user, and URL is the URL as sent by the user's computer to the ISP. EpochTime is the number of seconds that had elapsed between the moment the user first accessed the URL and a predetermined moment.))
Claim 11
Vanderhook teaches:
A computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed, cause: (See Vanderhook, Par. 47 (Certain embodiments described herein include
methods which are performed by computer hardware and/or software comprising one or more modules. The computers running the software will typically include one or more input devices, such as a mouse, trackball, touchpad, and/or keyboard, a display, and computer-readable memory media, such as random-access memory (RAM) integrated circuits and a hard disk drive.))
determining, from a distributed ledger, a record indicating a content asset accessed by a device of a plurality of devices, (See Vanderhook, Par. 56, Fig 3A (disclosing receipt of data regarding a plurality of users’ visits to a web site (each a “viewing event”), each user identified by a UserID and further disclosing that “in certain embodiments, the log data comprises … IP address of the user” (thus the content consumption data is associated with operation of a user device operating from the IP address.))
wherein the record comprises an identifier configured to identify a user of the device while maintaining anonymity of the user to at least a portion of the plurality of devices; (See Vanderhook, Par. 56, Fig 3A (disclosing that the viewing data is encoded and stored in a table (see Fig. 3A) which includes a SiteID indicating a website visited) and comprising an identifier configured to identify a user of the device … disclosing that the encoded data includes a UserID identifying the user.))
retrieving, based on the identifier and from a demographic information source, demographic information associated with the user; and associating the demographic information with the record. (See Vanderhook, entire disclosure, especially [0005]-[0008], [0084]-[0087], [0092], Fig. 11 (disclosing automated derivation of a user’s demographic profile from the user’s online behavior, at least [0048] disclosing manners of storage of same and at least [0117]-[0142] for an extensive discussion of the retrieval and use of such stored user demographic profiles to profile websites.))
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose that the viewing data is encoded as a distributed ledger transaction in a distributed ledger, or that the encoding of the identifier configured to identify a user of the device is done while maintaining anonymity of the user to at least a portion of the plurality of devices. However, use of anonymous user IDs in blockchains was known at the time of the invention. In analogous art, Wheeler teaches use of blockchain and smart contract technologies to implement a commodity exchange (see Par. 1). Wheeler further teaches use of anonymous consumer identifiers in ledgers (see at Par. 29, last sentence), which ledgers are stored in blockchains (See at least Fig. 3, elements 324, 328, 340, 342, 370, 372).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have substituted the anonymous consumer identifiers taught by Wheeler for the UserIDs taught by Vanderhook and to have substituted the conventional storage of content consumption data disclosed by Vanderhook for storage of data in a blockchain as taught by Wheeler, in order to enable better consumer anonymity (See Wheeler, Par. 38). Further, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the blockchain with anonymous user identifiers disclosed by Wheeler for the table with UserIDs disclosed by Vanderhook and the results of the substitution would have been predictable.
Claim 15:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 11 above.
Vanderhook further teaches:
determining, from at least the demographic information, viewership data associated with the content asset. (See Vanderhook, Par 85 (The users of the predetermined group of users are anonymous and providing the plurality of user demographic profiles in the operational block 410 comprises assigning at least some of the users of the predetermined group of users to one or more demographic subgroups based on known or derived demographic profiles of the websites visited by these users. The assigned users are selected from web traversal history files obtained from internet service providers (ISPs). These web traversal history files contain lists of users and the URLs of the websites visited by the listed users.), Par. 87 (The web traversal history files include a plurality of lines each having a plurality of fields. In certain embodiments, only some of these fields are used in the subsequent analysis, and some of these fields are ignored. The fields used in the subsequent analysis can include, but are not limited to: UserID, EpochTime, Delta, and URL. User ID is a unique identification string provided by the ISP to identify the user, and URL is the URL as sent by the user's computer to the ISP. EpochTime is the number of seconds that had elapsed between the moment the user first accessed the URL and a predetermined moment.))
Claim 17:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 11 above.
Vanderhook further teaches:
the record is one of a plurality of records associated with the distributed ledger. (See Vanderhook, Par. 56, Fig 3A (disclosing receipt of data regarding a plurality of users’ visits to a web site (each a “viewing event”), each user identified by a UserID and further disclosing that “in certain embodiments, the log data comprises … IP address of the user” (thus the content consumption data is associated with operation of a user device operating from the IP address.))
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose that the viewing data is encoded as a distributed ledger transaction in a distributed ledger, or that the encoding of the identifier configured to identify a user of the device is done while maintaining anonymity of the user to at least a portion of the plurality of devices. However, use of anonymous user IDs in blockchains was known at the time of the invention. In analogous art, Wheeler teaches use of blockchain and smart contract technologies to implement a commodity exchange (see Par. 1). Wheeler further teaches use of anonymous consumer identifiers in ledgers (see at Par. 29, last sentence), which ledgers are stored in blockchains (see at least Fig. 3, elements 324, 328, 340, 342, 370, 372).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have substituted the anonymous consumer identifiers taught by Wheeler for the UserIDs taught by Vanderhook and to have substituted the conventional storage of content consumption data disclosed by Vanderhook for storage of data in a blockchain as taught by Wheeler, in order to enable better consumer anonymity (See Wheeler, Par. 38). Further, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the blockchain with anonymous user identifiers disclosed by Wheeler for the table with UserIDs disclosed by Vanderhook and the results of the substitution would have been predictable.
Claim 20:
Vanderhook teaches:
A system comprising: a device configured to: determine, from a distributed ledger, a record indicating a content asset accessed by a device of a plurality of devices, (See Vanderhook, Par. 56, Fig 3A (disclosing receipt of data regarding a plurality of users’ visits to a web site (each a “viewing event”), each user identified by a UserID and further disclosing that “in certain embodiments, the log data comprises … IP address of the user” (thus the content consumption data is associated with operation of a user device operating from the IP address.))
wherein the record comprises an identifier configured to identify a user of the device while maintaining anonymity of the user to at least a portion of the plurality of devices, (See Vanderhook, Par. 56, Fig 3A (disclosing that the viewing data is encoded and stored in a table (see Fig. 3A) which includes a SiteID indicating a website visited) and comprising an identifier configured to identify a user of the device … disclosing that the encoded data includes a UserID identifying the user.))
retrieve, based on the identifier and from a demographic information source, demographic information associated with the user, and associate the demographic information with the record; and a database configured to store the demographic information, wherein the device is configured to retrieve the demographic information from the database. (See Vanderhook, entire disclosure, especially [0005]-[0008], [0084]-[0087], [0092], Fig. 11 (disclosing automated derivation of a user’s demographic profile from the user’s online behavior, at least [0048] disclosing manners of storage of same and at least [0117]-[0142] for an extensive discussion of the retrieval and use of such stored user demographic profiles to profile websites.))
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose that the viewing data is encoded as a distributed ledger transaction in a distributed ledger, or that the encoding of the identifier configured to identify a user of the device is done while maintaining anonymity of the user to at least a portion of the plurality of devices. However, use of anonymous user IDs in blockchains was known at the time of the invention. In analogous art, Wheeler teaches use of blockchain and smart contract technologies to implement a commodity exchange (see Par. 1). Wheeler further teaches use of anonymous consumer identifiers in ledgers (see at Par. 29, last sentence), which ledgers are stored in blockchains (See at least Fig. 3, elements 324, 328, 340, 342, 370, 372).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have substituted the anonymous consumer identifiers taught by Wheeler for the UserIDs taught by Vanderhook and to have substituted the conventional storage of content consumption data disclosed by Vanderhook for storage of data in a blockchain as taught by Wheeler, in order to enable better consumer anonymity (See Wheeler, Par. 38). Further, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the blockchain with anonymous user identifiers disclosed by Wheeler for the table with UserIDs disclosed by Vanderhook and the results of the substitution would have been predictable.
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vanderhook et al., US 2009/0070443 A1, (“Vanderhook”), in view of Wheeler et al., US 2019/0102850 A1, (“Wheeler”), in further view of Orlowski, US 2019/0058917 A1, (“Orlowski”).
Claim 2:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 1 above.
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose, however, Orlowski teaches:
anonymity of the user is maintained by encrypting at least a portion of the identifier using a key. (See Orlowski, Par. 44 (Once the data is enriched, key identifiers can be hashed or encrypted or de-identified to protect the identity of the viewer.))
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art just before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a step for encrypting key identifiers of the viewer, as taught by Orlowski for the anonymous viewers taught by Vanderhook, in order to protect the identity of the viewer and to provide data security (See Orlowski, Pars. 44-45).
Claim 12:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 11 above.
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose, however, Orlowski teaches:
anonymity of the user is maintained by encrypting at least a portion of the identifier using a key. (See Orlowski, Par. 44 (Once the data is enriched, key identifiers can be hashed or encrypted or de-identified to protect the identity of the viewer.))
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art just before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a step for encrypting key identifiers of the viewer, as taught by Orlowski for the anonymous viewers taught by Vanderhook, in order to protect the identity of the viewer and to provide data security (See Orlowski, Pars. 44-45).
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vanderhook et al., US 2009/0070443 A1, (“Vanderhook”), in view of Wheeler et al., US 2019/0102850 A1, (“Wheeler”), in further view of Kaehler, US 2018/0034642 A1, (“Kaehler”).
Claim 3:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 1 above.
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose, however, Kahler teaches:
the record comprises a digital signature of the device, wherein the digital signature comprises an encryption of at least a portion of the record using a key. (See Kaehler, Abstract (After receiving a content request, a sender device can send a record to a receiver device making the request. The record can comprise a sender signature created using the sender device's private key. The receiver device can verify the authenticity of the sender signature using the sender device's public key.))
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art just before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a step for a record associated with a device can be decrypted using a key, as taught by Kaehler for the records created by Vanderhook, in order to verify the authenticity of the sender’s record (See Kaehler, Par. 8).
Claim 13:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 11 above.
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose, however, Kahler teaches:
the record comprises a digital signature of the device, wherein the digital signature comprises an encryption of at least a portion of the record using a key. (See Kaehler, Abstract (After receiving a content request, a sender device can send a record to a receiver device making the request. The record can comprise a sender signature created using the sender device's private key. The receiver device can verify the authenticity of the sender signature using the sender device's public key.))
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art just before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a step for a record associated with a device can be decrypted using a key, as taught by Kaehler for the records created by Vanderhook, in order to verify the authenticity of the sender’s record (See Kaehler, Par. 8).
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vanderhook et al., US 2009/0070443 A1, (“Vanderhook”), in view of Wheeler et al., US 2019/0102850 A1, (“Wheeler”), in further view of Igoe et al., US 8,930,204 B1, (“Igoe”).
Claim 4:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 1 above.
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose, however, Igoe teaches:
identifying, based on the associating the demographic information with the record, a second content asset; and sending the second content asset to the user. (See Igoe, Col. 40, lines 64-67 (A collaborative recommendation engine might recommend a content item to a particular demographic group due to the content item's popularity with users with the same, or similar, demographic profiles.))
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art just before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a step for identifying a second content based on demographic information, as taught by Igoe from the records created by Vanderhook, in order recommend additional content to users with the same demographics (See Igoe, Cols. 41-42).
Claim 14:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 11 above.
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose, however, Igoe teaches:
identifying, based on the associating the demographic information with the record, a second content asset; and sending the second content asset to the user. (See Igoe, Col. 40, lines 64-67 (A collaborative recommendation engine might recommend a content item to a particular demographic group due to the content item's popularity with users with the same, or similar, demographic profiles.))
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art just before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a step for identifying a second content based on demographic information, as taught by Igoe from the records created by Vanderhook, in order recommend additional content to users with the same demographics (See Igoe, Cols. 41-42).
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vanderhook et al., US 2009/0070443 A1, (“Vanderhook”), in view of Wheeler et al., US 2019/0102850 A1, (“Wheeler”), in further view of Knox, US 2020/0364588 A1, (“Knox”).
Claim 6:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 5 above.
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose, however, Knox teaches:
identifying, from the viewership data, a second content asset; (See Knox, Par. 112 (Recommendation engine 508 generates media content lists for presentation to any authorized user 516, 518 derived from aggregated media consumption preference data from newly detected and historical ubicomp data 514 collected from a defined group of users 516 on system 500 or a group of networked systems 500.))
determining, from at least the demographic information, a second user; and sending the second content asset to the second user. (See Knox, Par. 112 (Computer application 78 implements automated recommendation engine 508 processes to identify and recommend media content and media content lists based
on individual user media consumption preference data or aggregated data from a group or group network of system 500 users. Authorized users 516, 518 may request media content lists using API 512 controls to create and define media consumption preference data parameters with automated programming or manually created parameters such as demographics, consumption category, geography, device, lifestyle habits, and etc.))
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art just before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a step for identifying a second content for a second user, as taught by Knox from the records created by Vanderhook, in order recommend additional content to users with the same demographics (See Knox, Par. 8).
Claim 16:
Vanderhook and Wheeler teach each and every element of Claim 15 above.
Vanderhook does not expressly disclose, however, Knox teaches:
identifying, from the viewership data, a second content asset; (See Knox, Par. 112 (Recommendation engine 508 generates media content lists for presentation to any authorized user 516, 518 derived from aggregated media consumption preference data from newly detected and historical ubicomp data 514 collected from a defined group of users 516 on system 500 or a group of networked systems 500.))
determining, from at least the demographic information, a second user; and sending the second content asset to the second user. (See Knox, Par. 112 (Computer application 78 implements automated recommendation engine 508 processes to identify and recommend media content and media content lists based
on individual user media consumption preference data or aggregated data from a group or group network of system 500 users. Authorized users 516, 518 may request media content lists using API 512 controls to create and define media consumption preference data parameters with automated programming or manually created parameters such as demographics, consumption category, geography, device, lifestyle habits, and etc.))
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art just before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a step for identifying a second content for a second user, as taught by Knox from the records created by Vanderhook, in order recommend additional content to users with the same demographics (See Knox, Par. 8).
Conclusion
There are no art rejections asserted for Claims 8-9 and 18-19.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE PROIOS whose telephone number is (571)272-4573. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Bennett M Sigmond can be reached at 303-297-4411. 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.
/GEORGE N. PROIOS/Examiner, Art Unit 3694
/BENNETT M SIGMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3694
Prosecution Insights