Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 22-27, 30-35, 38-40 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2009/0119169 A1 to Chandratillake et al. ("Chandratillake") (see provisional 60977033), U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20070288518 A1 to Crigler et al ("Crigler"), US 20030028873 A1 to Lemmons et al. (“Lemmons”).
As to claim 22, Chandratillake teaches a non-transitory, processor-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to: cause display, via a user interface, of a video stream that includes a representation of at least one product or service(¶0018, ¶0095); and cause display, via the user interface and concurrently with the display of the video stream, of at least one interactive object configured to facilitate execution, at a remote server and in response to a user interaction with the at least one interactive object via the user interface (Chandratillake, Abstract, ¶0070, ¶0076, embedded advertisement, Fig. 4, shows a webpage with an overlay, ¶0027, ¶0028, an overlay is presented based on the user searching for something on the main page)
Chandratillake does not teach an electronic commerce transaction involving the at least one product or service without a user, via the user interface. Lemmons teaches an electronic commerce transaction involving the at least one product or service without a user, via the user interface, navigating away from the video stream (¶0046, FIG. 2, the additional information 204 may include company profile 206, web address 208, coupons 210, or other information. The web address 208 may simply be an address that is non-interactive and is simply there for the viewer to take note of and to have the opportunity to visit that address at a later time, or the web address may act as a direct, interactive link. The interactive link 208 may link the viewer to the company home page, or the company website that allows the viewer to make a purchase 214. That is, the "order a pizza" website 214 may be a special website designed specifically for viewer interaction with labels. In addition, if the advertiser is a national company, the additional information may include local distributors or franchises 212 of the national company. The label may provide a link to the local server to provide information regarding the local store. For example, if Paul's Pizzeria is a national chain, the local broadcaster may superimpose the local franchise of Paul's Pizzeria at the server at the head-end, as illustrated in FIG. 7. The viewer, when clicking on the label, will see their local Paul's' Pizzeria in the additional information display, and be able to order a pizza directly from their local store). At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Chandratillake with Lemmons. The suggestion/motivation would be providing more flexible embedded advertising in a simple and inexpensive manner. Crigler teaches navigating away from the video stream (Crigler, ¶0153-¶0161,). At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Chandratillake with Crigler. The suggestion/motivation would be a system and method for aggregating, categorizing, expanding and virally redistributing content.
As to claim 23, Chandratillake, Lemmons and Crigler teaches the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 22, wherein the user interface is part of a social media software platform (Crigler, ¶0159).
As to claim 24, Chandratillake, Lemmons and Crigler teaches the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 22, wherein the user interface is part of an Internet protocol television ("IPTV") platform (Crigler, ¶0004).
As to claim 25, Chandratillake, Lemmons and Crigler teaches the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 22, wherein the representation of the at least one product or service is at least one of (1) included in the video stream as part of a video production of the video stream, or (2) is included in the video stream as an overlay (Chandratillake, 027, 069, 076, 077, overlays of advertising on video, when someone talks on the main page about energy, a overlay appears with an ad for Shell).
As to claim 26, Chandratillake, Lemmons and Crigler teaches the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 22, wherein the instructions to cause the display of the at least one interactive object during the display of the video stream include instructions to cause the display of the at least one interactive object for a predefined duration (Chandratillake, ¶0042).
As to claim 27, Chandratillake, Lemmons and Crigler teaches the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 22, wherein the electronic commerce transaction includes a communication with a secure data decryption server (Crigler, Fig.1).
As to claim 30, see the rejection of claim 22.
As to claim 31, see the rejection of claim 23.
As to claim 32, see the rejection of claim 24.
As to claim 33, see the rejection of claim 25.
As to claim 34, see the rejection of claim 26.
As to claim 35, see the rejection of claim 27.
As to claim 38, see the rejection of claim 22.
As to claim 39, see the rejection of claim 24.
As to claim 40, see the rejection of claim 25.
Claim 28. 36, 41 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chandratillake, Lemmons and Crigler as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of US 20020066103 A1 to Gagnon et al. (“Gagnon”).
As to claim 28, Chandratillake, Lemmons and Crigler teaches the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 22, further storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to at least one of: receive, from a warehouse management system, a signal indicating that the electronic commerce transaction has been completed; or receive, from a payment gateway, a signal indicating whether the electronic commerce transaction has been posted or denied. Gagnon teaches receive, from a warehouse management system, a signal indicating that the electronic commerce transaction has been completed; or receive, from a payment gateway, a signal indicating whether the electronic commerce transaction has been posted or denied (0062).At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the combination of references. The suggestion/motivation would be notify the user of the activity of purchase.
As to claim 36, see the rejection of claim 28.
As to claim 41, see the rejection of claim 28.
Claim 29 and 37 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chandratillake, Lemmons and Crigler as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of US 20080235085 A1 to Kovinsky et al. (“Kovinsky”).
As to claim 29, Chandratillake, Lemmons and Crigler teaches the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 22, further storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: Chandratillake, Lemmons and Crigler does not teach cause display of the video stream via the user interface in response to a user selection from a media playlist presented via the user interface. Kovinsky teaches cause display of the video stream via the user interface in response to a user selection from a media playlist presented via the user interface (Fig. 6, label 622, ¶0089). At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the combination of references with Kovinsky. The suggestion/motivation would be to provide the proliferation of high-speed, high-capacity broadband connections fueling media-rich, interactive online advertising.
As to claim 37, see the rejection of claim 29.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE A KURIEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 7:30-4:30.
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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at 571-272-1915. 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.
/CHRISTINE A KURIEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2421 /NATHAN J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights