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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, filed 7/28/26, with respect to the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly found prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 5-7, 11, 15-17 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jakobsson et al. (9,847,973) in view of Goldman (2003/0233418).
As per claim 1, Jakobsson et al. teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions, which when executed by one or more processors, are configured to: store a list of trusted identifiers, wherein each trusted identifier corresponds to a trusted sender;
add an identifier to the list of trusted identifiers in response to receiving an input;
receive an incoming message, defined as an email message from an email server [Jakobsson et al., col. 4, ll. 15-41], wherein the incoming message includes an identifier corresponding to a sender of the incoming message;
determine whether the identifier of the incoming message is included in the list of trusted identifiers [Jakobsson et al., col. 3, ll. 16-53].
But Jakobsson et al. fails to explicitly teach, however, Goldman in the same field of endeavor teaches, in response to determining that the identifier of the incoming message is not included in the list of trusted identifiers, add the incoming message to an electronic trash folder without adding the incoming message to an electronic inbox viewable by the user [Goldman, paragraphs 0041 and 0049]; and
in response to determining that the identifier of the incoming message is included in the list of trusted identifiers, add the incoming message to the electronic inbox viewable by the user [Goldman, paragraphs 0049 and 0091]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Jakobsson et al. with Goldman in order to effectively cause unsolicited electronic messages to be filtered out.
As per claim 5, Jakobsson-Goldman teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are further configured to: store a list of third-party trusted identifiers; add a third-party trusted identifier to the list of third-party trusted identifiers in response to receiving a third-party input; determine whether the identifier of the incoming message corresponds to a third-party trusted identifier included in the list of third-party trusted identifiers in response to determining that the identifier of the incoming message is not included in the list of trusted identifiers; and provide the incoming message to the user with an indication in response to determining that the identifier of the incoming message corresponds to a third-party trusted identifier included in the list of third-party trusted identifiers [Jakobsson et al., col. 12, ll. 62-col. 13, ll. 34].
As per claim 6, Jakobsson-Goldman teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 5, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are further configured to: determine a number of third-party inputs received, wherein each third-party input includes the third-party trusted identifier; and add the third-party trusted identifier to the list of third-party trusted identifiers based on the number of third-party inputs and a predetermined threshold number [Jakobsson et al., col. 36, ll. 27-48].
As per claim 7, Jakobsson-Goldman teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the input is further defined as a user input including an identifier, and wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are further configured to add the identifier of the user input to the list of trusted identifiers [Jakobsson et al., col. 18, ll. 50-65].
As per claim 21, Jakobsson-Goldman teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 5, wherein the incoming message is provided to the user with the indication by flagging the incoming message in the electronic trash folder [Goldman, paragraph 0041].
As per claim 23, Jakobsson-Goldman teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the email server comprises a mail transfer server, a mail delivery server, a webmail server, or an application programming interface (API) server configured to provide access to email messages [Jakobsson et al., col. 4, ll. 15-41].
Claims 11, 15-17, 22 and 24 have similar limitations as to the rejected claims above therefore they are being rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 4, 8-10, 14 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jakobsson et al. (9,847,973) in view of Goldman (2003/0233418) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above and further in view of Sullivan et al. (2005/0125667).
As per claim 4, Jakobsson et al. in view of Goldman teaches the limitations of claim 1 as above but fails to explicitly teach, however, Sullivan et al. in the same field of endeavor teaches, wherein the electronic trash folder is viewable by the user [Sullivan et al., paragraph 0007].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Jakobsson et al. and Goldman with Sullivan et al. in order to use delivery tickets that include data and a checksum to authenticate incoming electronic messages on behalf of a user.
As per claim 8, Jakobsson-Goldman-Sullivan teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the email server is further defined as a Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) email server [Sullivan et al., paragraph 0050].
As per claim 9, Jakobsson-Goldman-Sullivan teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the identifier is further defined as an email address [Jakobsson et al., col. 3, ll. 16-39].
As per claim 10, Jakobsson-Goldman-Sullivan teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the electronic inbox is further defined as an email inbox viewable by the user [Sullivan et al., paragraph 0070].
Claims 14 and 18-20 have similar limitations as to the rejected claims above therefore they are being rejected under the same rationale.
There are prior art made of record not relied upon but is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 RANODHI N SERRAO whose telephone number is (571)272-7967. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm.
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, John Follansbee can be reached on (571) 272-3964. 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.
Ranodhi N. Serrao
/RANODHI SERRAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights