DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to a filing filed claims on August 20th, 2025. Claims 1-23 is/are cancelled and new claims 24-43 is/are added. Claims 24-43 is/are have been examined in this application. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 08/20/2025 and 03/25/2026 has been acknowledged.
Priority
The present application is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 18/608,537 filed March 18, 2024, which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 17/888,343, filed August 15, 2022, which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 17/569,265, filed January 5, 2022, now U.S. Patent No. 11,416,897, the entire contents of each of which is hereby incorporated by reference. U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 17/569,265 is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 17/496,590, filed October 7, 2021, now U.S. Patent No. 11,553,074, which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 15/986,569, filed May 22, 2018, which claims the benefit of and priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/511,413, filed May 26, 2017.
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 .
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 24-43 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims, of U.S. Patent No. 12248941. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because instant claims is/are anticipated by the conflicting patented claims as shown in the table below. The difference between the instant examined claim and the conflicting patented claim is that the conflicting patented claim is narrower in scope and falls within the scope of the examined claim. Thus, the species or sub-genus claimed in the conflicting patent anticipates the examined claimed genus. Therefore, a patent to the examined claim genus would improperly extend the right to exclude granted by a patent to the species or sub-genus should the genus issue as a patent after the species or sub-genus. See MPEP §804(II)(B)(1).
For reference, the following table matches the narrower limitations of claim 1 of the patented parent application no. 18/608,537 (Pat. 12248941) with the similar limitations of claim 24 of current child Application No. 19/075,437:
Claim 1 of Patented Application 12248941
Claim 24 of Application 19/075,437
1. A non-transitory, processor-readable medium storing code configured to be executed by at least one server, the code including instructions configured to cause the at least one server to:
receive, in response to a tag that is attached to a webpage being executed by a mobile device in response to the mobile device requesting and/or loading the webpage, a request, from the mobile device, for a promotional message via a web-based channel;
1. A non-transitory processor-readable medium storing code configured to be executed by a processor of a mobile device, the code including instructions configured to cause the mobile device to:
display a promotional message via a first application;
send the promotional message to the mobile device via the web-based channel such that the mobile device displays the promotional message in an iframe disposed in or at least partially overlaying content of the webpage via a first interface rendered in a browser;
send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message;
receive a user identifier from the user device via the web-based channel in response to a user interaction with the first interface and the promotional message;
enroll the mobile device in a subscription associated with the promotional message in response to receiving the user identifier;
receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message;
and send, to the mobile device via a text message channel different from the web-based channel, a first confirmation of enrollment in the subscription such that the first confirmation of enrollment in the subscription is received and displayed at the mobile device via a second interface associated with a messaging application different from the browser,
the first confirmation of enrollment including an interactive link configured such that, in response to a user interaction with the interactive link via the second interface,
the mobile device automatically switches from the second interface to a third interface associated with the browser, the third interface containing at least one of shipping information, payment information, or a second confirmation of enrollment.
automatically (1) switch from the first application to a messaging application different from the first application and (2) populate a custom text message based on receiving the response message;
send the custom text message to the at least one processor in response to the user interacting with a send icon of the messaging application;
and receive a promotion associated with the promotional message in response to sending the custom text message.
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 24-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 24-34 is/are drawn to processor-readable medium (i.e., a manufacture), and Claims 35-43 is/are drawn to method (i.e., a process). As such, claims 24-43 is/are drawn to one of the statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A - Prong One: In prong one of step 2A, the claim(s) is/are analyzed to evaluate whether it/they recite(s) a judicial exception.
Representative Claim 24: A non-transitory processor-readable medium storing code configured to be executed by a processor of a mobile device, the code including instructions configured to cause the mobile device to:
display a promotional message via a first application;
send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message;
receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message;
automatically (1) switch from the first application to a messaging application different from the first application and (2) populate a custom text message based on receiving the response message;
send the custom text message to the at least one processor in response to the user interacting with a send icon of the messaging application;
and receive a promotion associated with the promotional message in response to sending the custom text message.
(Examiner notes: The underlined claim terms above are interpreted as additional elements beyond the abstract idea and are further analyzed under Step 2A - Prong Two)
Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim recites the abstract idea of presenting a promotion to a user, receiving or detecting the user’s response to the promotion, preparing a message for the user to send in connection with the promotion, sending the message, and providing a promotional response based on the sent message. Further the claim recites using a first communication channel to present advertising or promotional content, using a user interaction with the promotional content to initiate a second communication channel, and providing a promotion or advertising-related response after the user sends a message (i.e., recite a process, that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation(s) in the commercial interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relationship), then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity”. The claim also recites, at a high level of generality, collecting information, recognizing a user interaction, preparing information for communication, transmitting information, and receiving responsive information. But for the recitation of generic computer components, these steps correspond to concepts that may be performed as observations, evaluations, judgments, or instructions by a person, such as observing that a user interacted with an advertisement, determining an appropriate promotional message or response, preparing a message for the user to send, and providing a promotional response. Accordingly, the claim also recites an abstract idea within the “Mental Processes” grouping.
Dependent claim 25 and 36 further narrows the abstract idea by reciting that the send-icon interaction is the only user interaction detected between the user’s interaction with the promotional message and the sending of the custom text message, and by reciting that the custom text message is configured to enroll the mobile device in a subscription associated with the promotional message. These limitations further describe reducing user input during a promotional response flow and enrolling a user/mobile device in a promotional subscription or marketing campaign. Such limitations continue to fall within commercial interactions, including advertising, marketing, sales activities or behaviors, and business relations. Dependent claims 26-27 and 37-38 further narrow the abstract idea by specifying that the response message includes a deeplink or uniform resource identifier (URI) that, when activated, causes the mobile device to switch to the messaging application and populate the custom text message. These limitations specify the format or mechanism by which the promotional messaging flow is initiated, but they do not change the underlying focus of the claims, which remains presenting promotional content, obtaining a user response, preparing a promotional communication, and providing a promotion or promotional response. Dependent claim 28 and 39 further narrows the abstract idea by reciting that the signal includes an identifier associated with the promotional message, the mobile device, or the user. Dependent claim 29 and 40 further narrows the abstract idea by reciting that the signal includes an identifier and that the response message includes code associated with the identifier to cause switching to the messaging application and population of the custom text message, with the custom text message being customized based on the identifier. These limitations further describe using identifying information associated with a promotion, user, or device to customize a promotional communication. Such customization of advertising or marketing content based on identifying information is a commercial interaction and also involves collecting, evaluating, and using information. Dependent claims 30-31 and 43 further narrow the abstract idea by specifying the type of first application, namely a web browser, e-mail application, or book reader application. These limitations merely identify the environment or communication channel through which the promotional message is presented and do not alter the abstract character of the claimed advertising and promotional messaging concept. Dependent claims 32-34 further narrow the abstract idea by reciting that a webpage displayed via the first application includes an integration tag configured to cause display of the promotional message, and in claims 33-34 and 41-42, configured to cause generation and sending of an identifier associated with the user or mobile device, with the promotional message or response message being received or customized based on that identifier. These limitations further describe requesting, selecting, and customizing promotional content based on tag-generated identifying information. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, such limitations continue to recite advertising or marketing activities and the collection, evaluation, and use of information to provide promotional content.
Independent claim(s) 35 recite/describe nearly identical steps (and therefore also recite limitations that fall within this subject matter grouping of abstract ideas), and this/these claim(s) is/are therefore determined to recite an abstract idea under the same analysis.
As such, the Examiner concludes that claim 24 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong One: YES).
Step 2A - Prong Two: In prong two of step 2A, an evaluation is made whether a claim recites any additional element, or combination of additional elements, that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. An “addition element” is an element that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception (i.e., an element/limitation that sets forth an abstract idea is not an additional element). The phrase “integration into a practical application” is defined as requiring an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
The requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions using a processor-readable medium, code, processor, mobile device, etc. (Claims 24 and 35) is/are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer.
Similarly, the limitations of applying a processor-readable medium, code, processor, mobile device, etc. (Independent Claim(s) 24 and 35, and dependent claims 25-34, and 36-43) are recited at a high level of generality and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Further, the additional limitations beyond the abstract idea identified above, serves merely to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Specifically, it/they serve(s) to limit the application of the abstract idea to computerized environments (e.g., display, send, receive, switch, populate, etc. steps performed by a processor-readable medium, code, processor, mobile device, etc.). This reasoning was demonstrated in Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (Fed. Cir. 2015), where the court determined "an abstract idea does not become nonabstract by limiting the invention to a particular field of use or technological environment, such as the Internet [or] a computer"). This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
The recited additional element(s) of displaying a promotional message via a first application, sending a signal to at least one processor in response to a user interacting with the promotional message, receiving a response message from the at least one processor, automatically switching from the first application to a messaging application different from the first application, populating a custom text message based on receiving the response message, sending the custom text message in response to the user interacting with a send icon of the messaging application, and receiving a promotion associated with the promotional message in response to sending the custom text message (Claim(s) 24 and 35), additionally and/or alternatively simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea). The recited additional element(s) do not meaningfully limit the claim because to perform an advertising activity displaying of a promotional message, receiving or detecting a user interaction with the promotional message, sending a signal/request based on the user interaction, receiving a response message, populating a message, sending the message, and receiving a promotional response constitute no more than pre-solution data gathering, intermediate data processing, and post-solution output activity performed in connection with the abstract idea of conducting advertising/marketing activity by presenting a promotion, soliciting a user response, sending a promotional communication, and providing a promotion or promotional response would be required in any implementation of the abstract idea. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. (See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Dependent claim 25-34 and 36-43 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective dependent claims is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim).
The Examiner has therefore determined that the additional elements, or combination of additional elements, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claim(s) is/are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong two: NO).
Step 2B: In step 2B, the claims are analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is/are sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. This analysis is also termed a search for an "inventive concept." An "inventive concept" is furnished by an element or combination of elements that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception, and is sufficient to ensure that the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 2355, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72-73, 101 USPQ2d at 1966).
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the identified additional elements in independent claim(s) 24 and 35, and dependent claims 25-34 and 36-43 are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer, and/or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Therefore, the claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
The recited additional element(s) of displaying a promotional message via a first application, sending a signal to at least one processor in response to a user interacting with the promotional message, receiving a response message from the at least one processor, automatically switching from the first application to a messaging application different from the first application, populating a custom text message based on receiving the response message, sending the custom text message in response to the user interacting with a send icon of the messaging application, and receiving a promotion associated with the promotional message in response to sending the custom text message (Claim(s) 24 and 35), additionally and/or alternatively simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea) that is similar to “Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data”, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information), “Storing and retrieving information in memory”, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93; “Presenting offers to potential customers and gathering statistics generated based on the testing about how potential customers responded to the offers; the statistics are then used to calculate an optimized price”, OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93, buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network), is a well-understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here) (See MPEP 2106.05(d) (II)).
This conclusion is based on a factual determination. Applicant’s own disclosure at paragraph [1025] acknowledges that “at least one processor 101 can be any hardware module and/or component configured to receive and process data, and/or to execute code representing instructions. In some embodiments, the at least one processor 101 can be a general purpose processor, a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), an Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC), a Digital Signal Processor (DSP), and/or the like. The at least one processor 101 can implement a number of modules and/or server components. The at least one processor 101 can be configured to execute instructions generated by any of its modules and/or server components, and/or instructions stored in the memory 103, for example, the integrator instructions 105 and the click-to-text instructions 106. In some implementations, if the at least one processor 101 includes multiple processors, the modules and/or server components can be distributed among and/or executed by the multiple processors ...” The applicant’s disclosure [1062], discloses the hardware modules may include, for example, a general-purpose processor, a field programmable gate array (FPGA), and/or an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC). Software modules (executed on hardware) can be expressed in a variety of software languages (e.g., computer code), including Unix utilities, C, C++, Objective-C JavaTM, Ruby, SQL, SAS®, the R programming language/software environment, Visual BasicTM, and other object-oriented, procedural, scripted, machine language or other programming language and development tools. Examples of computer code include, but are not limited to, micro-code or micro-instructions, machine instructions, such as produced by a compiler, code used to produce a web service, and files containing higher-level instructions that are executed by a computer using an interpreter to perform the steps of receiving data associated with user to deliver promotion associated with promotional message (i.e. conventional nature of receiving and transmitting data/messages over a network). This additional element therefore do not ensure the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Viewing the additional limitations in combination also shows that they fail to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. When considered as an ordered combination, the additional components of the claims add nothing that is not already present when considered separately, and thus simply append the abstract idea with words equivalent to “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer or/and append the abstract idea with insignificant extra solution activity associated with the implementation of the judicial exception, (e.g., mere data gathering, post-solution activity) and/or simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception.
The dependent claims 25-34 and 36-43 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective independent claims is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim).
The Examiner has therefore determined that no additional element, or combination of additional claims elements is/are sufficient to ensure the claim(s) amount to significantly more than the abstract idea identified above (Step 2B: NO).
Therefore, claims 24-43 are not eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 24 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 20170228797 (“Nath”) in view of NPL “AdWords Click-to-MessageAds” (“Debecker”).
As per claims 24 and 35, Nath discloses, non-transitory processor-readable medium storing code configured to be executed by a processor of a mobile device, the code including instructions configured to cause the mobile device to (“one or more non-transitory computer readable storage media storing computer instructions translatable by one or more processors in Ad system 210”) (0050):
display a promotional message via a first application (Examiner interprets Nath’s deep-linked advertisement as the claimed promotional message and the website, browser, mobile application, or other online media on which the advertisement is displayed as the claimed first application. Nath teaches deep-linked advertisements for online advertising and e-commerce, wherein the advertisements may be automatically generated using dynamic data from arbitrary websites, mobile apps, and other forms of online media, and wherein the generated advertisements may be inserted into ad servers and served in real time) (“Targeting and customizing the ad copy dynamically results in much greater click-through rates, and landing the ad click deep in the booking process results in much greater conversion rates. As a result, deep-linked ads have much higher overall return-on-investment for advertisers, translating to much higher monetization rates for publisher … an automated way to generate deep-linked ads, as that will spur rapid and much wider adoption of these kinds of ads by increasing numbers of participating web sites and by bringing new market efficiencies to both publishers and advertisers and thereby produce greater economic gains for a larger cross-section of publisher and advertiser sites. These benefits accrue whether the automated ad generation system is operated by human beings at the network acting upon requests made by publishers or advertisers, as well as by self-help systems that can be directly used by human operators at publishers and advertisers.”) (0008-0011, 0002);
send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message (Examiner interprets the user’s click, selection, or other interaction with the deep-linked advertisement as causing a signal/request to be sent to the ad/deep-linking system i.e. Nath teaches that, in response to user interaction with a deep-linked advertisement on a first site or application, values corresponding to computer-readable field identifiers are extracted from the user interaction, the user device is automatically directed to a second site or application, and the extracted values are passed to the second site or application (Nath see claim 2). Nath also teaches that user interaction, such as selecting or clicking content on a website, may set appropriate variables that are then used to customize and automatically generate deep-linked advertisements) (“process can occur in real time such that, immediately after the user types in the text search query and causes the browser to submit a request for a result on the search query, the user's input can be parsed, decomposed into the pertinent values for the appropriate variables, linked to the corresponding variables on the advertiser's site, and land the ad click deep into the advertiser's site. In this way, the user's browser “fast forwards” from a horizontal search page to a deep vertical form page where the user can purchase a flight ticket to travel by air from London to Amsterdam on March 13 … a user may not be required to type in information, but may be required to click or otherwise select an icon representing a target of interest (e.g., a product or service offered by or through the web site). In some cases, as discussed above, a user may simply hover over an ad and value(s) to certain variable(s) may be set accordingly. At run time, these values can be used to customize an ad copy, set other linked and mapped variables. Although a user clicking or hovering over site text or image is not an explicit data-entry action on the part of the user, contextual information provided by their implicit action can still be recognized and utilized by embodiments disclosed herein to customize and automatically generate deep-linked ads that can take the user directly to a checkout page with pre-populated values extracted from the user interaction. For instance, say a user is on the Amazon (www.amazon.com) web site. The user then selects the laptops section, and is on a page showing laptop selections by brand, product type, price range, etc. In this implementation, the ad system can scan and read in the tags on this page on the Amazon web site. Now when the user clicks on a selection on the Amazon laptops page, the appropriate variables can be set—for instance, Vertical can be set to Electronics, the Product to Laptops, and the brand to Dell, price to Under $2000, etc.”) (0102-0103, 0054, also see Claim 2);
receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message (Examiner interprets the automatic directing of the user device and the passing of values to the second site or application as a response/deep-link instruction generated by the ad/deep-linking system in response to the user’s interaction with the promotional message i.e. in response to the user interaction with the deep-linked advertisement, the system automatically directs the user device to display a second site or application and passes values so that fields of the second site or application are pre-populated with values extracted from the user interaction see claim 2) (“customize and automatically generate deep-linked ads that can take the user directly to a checkout page with pre-populated values extracted from the user interaction. For instance, say a user is on the Amazon (www.amazon.com) web site. The user then selects the laptops section, and is on a page showing laptop selections by brand, product type, price range, etc. In this implementation, the ad system can scan and read in the tags on this page on the Amazon web site. Now when the user clicks on a selection on the Amazon laptops page, the appropriate variables can be set—for instance, Vertical can be set to Electronics, the Product to Laptops, and the brand to Dell, price to Under $2000, etc. Then on the results page for those selections, deep-linked ads can be presented with the appropriate variable values set”) (0054, 0102-0103, also see Claim 2).
Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, automatically (1) switch from the first application to a messaging application different from the first application and (2) populate a custom text message based on receiving the response message, send the custom text message to the at least one processor in response to the user interacting with a send icon of the messaging application, and receive a promotion associated with the promotional message in response to sending the custom text message, however Debecker discloses, automatically (1) switch from the first application to a messaging application different from the first application and (2) populate a custom text message based on receiving the response message (Examiner interprets the Google/search advertisement interface as the first application and the automatically opened SMS application as a messaging application different from the first application. Debecker therefore teaches automatically switching from the first application to a messaging application and automatically populating a custom text message in the messaging application. Debecker also discloses a mobile search advertisement including a click-to-message control, such as a “Send us a text” button. When the user taps the button displayed with the advertisement in the first application, the mobile device automatically opens the SMS messaging application. The opened SMS application is different from the first application in which the advertisement was displayed. Google further teaches that the SMS application is automatically pre-filled with message text, such as “Hi, I’m interested in a reservation. Please text me back.” Thus, the mobile device automatically transitions from the advertising/search interface to the SMS messaging application and automatically populates a custom text message for the user to send to the advertiser) (Pgs. 3-4);
send the custom text message to the at least one processor in response to the user interacting with a send icon of the messaging application (Examiner interprets the user’s sending of the pre-filled SMS from the messaging application as sending the custom text message in response to interacting with the send icon/send control of the messaging application. Debecker states that, after the SMS application opens and the SMS is pre-filled, the person sends the text to the advertiser (Debecker, p. 4). The screenshot of the messaging application shown in Debecker also depicts the messaging interface including a send arrow/icon. Thus, the Examiner interprets the user’s sending of the pre-filled SMS from the messaging application as sending the custom text message in response to interacting with the send icon/send control of the messaging application) (Pgs. 3-4);
and receive a promotion associated with the promotional message in response to sending the custom text message (Examiner interprets that after the user sends the pre-filled SMS to the advertiser, the advertiser replies (Debecker, p. 4). Debecker further teaches that the advertiser receives the SMS along with the user’s phone number and can interact with the user instantly via SMS (Debecker, p. 13). Debecker also teaches use of an autoresponder that automatically sends a message back to anyone who messages the phone number through the Google AdWords click-to-message ad extension, and that the autoresponder may be configured with no delay so that the response is sent instantly (Debecker, pp. 19–21). i.e. Examiner interprets the advertiser reply/autoresponder message as a promotional response associated with the original click-to-message advertisement because the response is sent as a result of the user sending the custom SMS initiated from the promotional advertisement. Further, examiner interprets that Google teaches that after the user sends the pre-filled text message to the advertiser, the advertiser replies. Because the text message was initiated from the click-to-message advertisement and sent to the advertiser identified by the advertisement, the advertiser’s reply is associated with the promotional message. Accordingly, Debecker teaches or at least suggests receiving a response/promotion associated with the promotional advertisement after sending the custom text message. i.e. the Debecker click-to-message reference teaches that after a user sends the pre-filled SMS message to the advertiser, the advertiser replies. The reference further teaches that the advertiser receives the SMS along with the user’s phone number and may interact with the user instantly via SMS. In addition, the reference teaches using an autoresponder that automatically sends a message back to anyone who messages the phone number through the Google AdWords click-to-message ad extension. The autoresponder message may be configured with no delay so that the message is fired instantly after the user sends the SMS. Thus, the reply/autoresponder message is received in response to sending the custom text message and is associated with the original promotional click-to-message advertisement.) (Pgs. 3-4, 13, 19-21).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, automatically (1) switch from the first application to a messaging application different from the first application and (2) populate a custom text message based on receiving the response message, send the custom text message to the at least one processor in response to the user interacting with a send icon of the messaging application, and receive a promotion associated with the promotional message in response to sending the custom text message, as taught by Debecker in response to incorporate click-to-message functionality, such that selecting a promotional advertisement causes a mobile device to open a messaging application, pre-fill a custom text message, allow the user to send the message using the messaging application’s send control, and receive an advertiser response, thus to reduce user data entry, reduce friction associated with navigating to landing pages or manually contacting advertisers, increase advertisement conversion rates, and provide a direct communication channel between the advertiser and the potential customer.
Claims 25 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 20170228797 (“Nath”) in view of NPL “AdWords Click-to-MessageAds” (“Debecker”) in view of U.S. Pub. 20120282953 (“Butler”).
As per claims 25 and 36, Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, wherein the user interacting with the send icon of the messaging application is the only user interaction detected by the mobile device between the user interaction with the promotional message and the custom text message being sent, however Debecker discloses, wherein the user interacting with the send icon of the messaging application is the only user interaction detected by the mobile device between the user interaction with the promotional message and the custom text message being sent (Examiner interprets that Debecker teaches/suggests that after the user taps the promotional click-to-message ad, the SMS app opens automatically with the message already pre-filled. Because the message is pre-filled, no typing or additional message-composition interaction is required before sending. The only remaining user interaction is selecting the send icon/send control in the messaging app. i.e. p. 4: user taps “Send us a text”; SMS app opens automatically; SMS is pre-filled; person sends the text to advertiser. And further this supports that the outgoing SMS is not manually composed by the user after the ad click. The advertiser configures the custom message text in advance, and the mobile device presents the pre-filled SMS to the user. i.e. p. 10: “Message text” field lets advertiser pre-fill the SMS that potential customers are going to send.) (Pgs. 4, 10, 19-21).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, wherein the user interacting with the send icon of the messaging application is the only user interaction detected by the mobile device between the user interaction with the promotional message and the custom text message being sent, as taught by Debecker in response to incorporate click-to-message functionality, such that selecting a promotional advertisement causes a mobile device to open a messaging application, pre-fill a custom text message, allow the user to send the message using the messaging application’s send control, and receive an advertiser response, thus to reduce user data entry, reduce friction associated with navigating to landing pages or manually contacting advertisers, increase advertisement conversion rates, and provide a direct communication channel between the advertiser and the potential customer.
Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, the custom text message being configured to enroll the mobile device in a subscription associated with the promotional message, however Butler discloses, the custom text message being configured to enroll the mobile device in a subscription associated with the promotional message (Examiner interprets Butler’s SMS keyword/short-code message as a custom text message configured to enroll the mobile device in a promotional SMS subscription or campaign list associated with the promotional message i.e. an SMS keyword/short-code opt-in arrangement in which a mobile user sees a keyword and short code, sends an SMS text message using the keyword to the short code, and receives an SMS/MMS reply. Butler further teaches that the mobile user’s phone number is stored in a subscriber database for future SMS/MMS messages and that captured mobile device numbers may be used for future campaigns, advertising, announcements, reminders, and promotion) (“a prior art system for contacting subscriber via SMS communications. When a mobile user sees keyword and short code (1) mobile user can send the keyword to the subscriber and receive and an SMSS/MMS reply (2). Mobile user's phone number is stored (3) in subscribers database for future sending of SMS/MMS messages to mobile user's phone(s).Once mobile user's phone number is known subscriber can also send and receive SMS/MMS messages by web/email based program, with mobile user's mobile device (5) … FIG. 3 illustrates a flow chart of the present invention illustrated in FIG. 2. Once a mobile user sees a subscriber's short code and keyword and sends a SMS text message.”) (0035-0040, 0027).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, the custom text message being configured to enroll the mobile device in a subscription associated with the promotional message, as taught by Butler for the purpose to configure pre-filled click-to-message SMS using keyword/short-code opt-in technique so that sending the pre-filled SMS enrolls the mobile device in a promotional messaging subscription thus to allow the advertiser to capture the user’s mobile number and provide future promotions, advertising, announcements, and reminders through SMS/MMS messaging.
Claims 26-27 and 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 20170228797 (“Nath”) in view of NPL “AdWords Click-to-MessageAds” (“Debecker”) in view of U.S. Pub. 20160292728 (“Kang”).
As per claims 26 and 37, Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, wherein the response message includes a deeplink, however Kang discloses, wherein the response message includes a deeplink that when activated causes the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application (Examiner notes that the underlined limitation is disclosed by another prior art. Examiner interprets that deep linking uses a URI to link to a specific location within a mobile app and the URI is used to trigger/deep link the app and user selects customized deep link of ad campaign and, in response, the targeted software application or targeted content is displayed) (“the context of mobile apps, deep linking consists of using a uniform resource identifier (URI) that links to a specific location within a mobile app (e.g., exampleApp://location/123456), rather than simply launching the app (e.g., exampleApp://). Depending on the mobile device, the URI required to trigger the app may be different (e.g., exampleOS_type#1App://location/123456 versus exampleOS_type#2App://launch?location=123456) based on a type of operating system for a mobile device. The format of the URI used to trigger or deep link an app is often different depending on the mobile operating system.”) (0021).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, wherein the response message includes a deeplink, as taught by Kang in response to use known mobile deep-link/URI technique to cause the mobile device to open the targeted messaging application and populate the message content associated with the advertisement.
Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, that when activated causes the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application and (2) automatically populate the custom text message, however Debecker discloses, that when activated causes the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application (Examiner interprets that the specific messaging-app result, namely that tapping the click-to-message control causes the SMS application to open automatically and pre-fill the SMS text) (Pgs. 3-4);
and (2) automatically populate the custom text message (Examiner interprets that Debecker supplies the specific result: the click-to-message ad opens the SMS app and pre-fills the message i.e. Debecker teaches/suggests that after the user taps the promotional click-to-message ad, the SMS app opens automatically with the message already pre-filled. Because the message is pre-filled, no typing or additional message-composition interaction is required before sending. The only remaining user interaction is selecting the send icon/send control in the messaging app. i.e. p. 4: user taps “Send us a text”; SMS app opens automatically; SMS is pre-filled; person sends the text to advertiser. And further this supports that the outgoing SMS is not manually composed by the user after the ad click. The advertiser configures the custom message text in advance, and the mobile device presents the pre-filled SMS to the user. i.e. p. 10: “Message text” field lets advertiser pre-fill the SMS that potential customers are going to send.) (Pgs. 3-4).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, that when activated causes the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application and (2) automatically populate the custom text message, as taught by Debecker in response to incorporate click-to-message functionality, such that selecting a promotional advertisement causes a mobile device to open a messaging application, pre-fill a custom text message, allow the user to send the message using the messaging application’s send control, and receive an advertiser response, thus to reduce user data entry, reduce friction associated with navigating to landing pages or manually contacting advertisers, increase advertisement conversion rates, and provide a direct communication channel between the advertiser and the potential customer.
As per claims 27 and 38, Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, wherein the response message includes a uniform resource identifier (URI) that when activated causes the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application, however Kang discloses, wherein the response message includes a uniform resource identifier (URI) that when activated causes the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application (Examiner notes that the underlined limitation is disclosed by another prior art. Examiner interprets that deep linking uses a URI to link to a specific location within a mobile app and the URI is used to trigger/deep link the app and user selects customized deep link of ad campaign and, in response, the targeted software application or targeted content is displayed) (“the context of mobile apps, deep linking consists of using a uniform resource identifier (URI) that links to a specific location within a mobile app (e.g., exampleApp://location/123456), rather than simply launching the app (e.g., exampleApp://). Depending on the mobile device, the URI required to trigger the app may be different (e.g., exampleOS_type#1App://location/123456 versus exampleOS_type#2App://launch?location=123456) based on a type of operating system for a mobile device. The format of the URI used to trigger or deep link an app is often different depending on the mobile operating system.”) (0021).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, wherein the response message includes a uniform resource identifier (URI), as taught by Kang in response to in response to use known mobile deep-link/URI technique to cause the mobile device to open the targeted messaging application and populate the message content associated with the advertisement.
Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, that when activated causes the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application and (2) automatically populate the custom text message, however Debecker discloses, that when activated causes the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application (Examiner interprets that the click-to-message ad opens the SMS app automatically and pre-fills the message. Thus, the combination teaches or suggests a response message including a URI that, when activated, causes the mobile device to switch to the messaging application and populate the custom text message) (Pgs. 3-4);
and (2) automatically populate the custom text message (Examiner interprets that Debecker supplies the specific result: the click-to-message ad opens the SMS app and pre-fills the message i.e. Debecker teaches/suggests that after the user taps the promotional click-to-message ad, the SMS app opens automatically with the message already pre-filled. Because the message is pre-filled, no typing or additional message-composition interaction is required before sending. The only remaining user interaction is selecting the send icon/send control in the messaging app. i.e. p. 4: user taps “Send us a text”; SMS app opens automatically; SMS is pre-filled; person sends the text to advertiser. And further this supports that the outgoing SMS is not manually composed by the user after the ad click. The advertiser configures the custom message text in advance, and the mobile device presents the pre-filled SMS to the user. i.e. p. 10: “Message text” field lets advertiser pre-fill the SMS that potential customers are going to send.) (Pg. 3-4).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, that when activated causes the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application and (2) automatically populate the custom text message, as taught by Debecker in response to incorporate click-to-message functionality, such that selecting a promotional advertisement causes a mobile device to open a messaging application, pre-fill a custom text message, allow the user to send the message using the messaging application’s send control, and receive an advertiser response, thus to reduce user data entry, reduce friction associated with navigating to landing pages or manually contacting advertisers, increase advertisement conversion rates, and provide a direct communication channel between the advertiser and the potential customer.
Claims 28-23 and 39-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 20170228797 (“Nath”) in view of NPL “AdWords Click-to-MessageAds” (“Debecker”) in view of U.S. Pub. 20120109741 (“Ballapragada”).
As per claims 28 and 39, Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, wherein the signal sent to the at least one processor in response the user interacting with the promotional message includes an identifier associated with at least one of the promotional message, the mobile device, or the user, however Ballapragada discloses, wherein the signal sent to the at least one processor in response the user interacting with the promotional message includes an identifier associated with at least one of the promotional message, the mobile device, or the user (Examiner interprets that the signal/request generated by tag code or ad interaction includes identifying/contextual information, such as publisher credentials, parameters, geographic location, browser type, OS, device type, network, and/or user-selected variables. These reasonably map to identifiers associated with the promotional message, mobile device, or user i.e. tag code includes publisher credentials and parameters defining what content is displayed; browser loads page with tag; tag executes and sends request call to server; server receives inventory request from tag code. Server identifies user geographic location, browser type, OS, device type, and network) (“the publisher 140, may place a tag in the Web site source code, such as next to or within the published content (310). The publisher 140 may directly place the tag in the source code of the destination page or pages, application, or device operating system, or an ad-server application with direct access to the Web site files may update the page source code. The tag may comprise code that is adapted to communicate with a server, such as the server 120 via the server application 125, and request content. The tag code may be controlled by the published content, the source code, the browser 200, another application, the operating system, the local machine, a remote server or device, the user, an administrator, or any other application, device, or individual. The tag code may comprise publisher credentials and other parameters that may define what content is displayed, how it is displayed, and any other settings … server application 125 may issue an inventory response to the tag code (340). The network request for creative media is received by the server application 125, which may respond appropriately to arrange service of content”) (0081-0086).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, wherein the signal sent to the at least one processor in response the user interacting with the promotional message includes an identifier associated with at least one of the promotional message, the mobile device, or the user, as taught by Ballapragada in response to incorporate identifier-containing tag/request mechanism so that the server can select and return content based on publisher, device, browser, network, location, and user/context parameters to improve ad targeting, select relevant creative content, verify the request, and optimize the advertising response for the particular user/device/ad context.
As per claims 29 and 40, Nath discloses, the signal sent to the at least one processor in response the user interacting with the promotional message includes an identifier associated with at least one of the promotional message, the mobile device, or the user (Examiner notes that the underlined limitation is disclosed by another prior art. Examiner interprets the user’s click or selection of the deep-linked advertisement as causing a signal/request to be sent to the ad/deep-linking system i.e. sending a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message. Nath teaches that, in response to user interaction with a deep-linked advertisement on a first site or application, values corresponding to computer-readable field identifiers are extracted from the user interaction, the user device is automatically directed to a second site or application, and the extracted values are passed to the second site or application (Nath see claim 2). Nath also teaches that user interaction, such as selecting or clicking content on a website, may set appropriate variables that are then used to customize and automatically generate deep-linked advertisements) (“process can occur in real time such that, immediately after the user types in the text search query and causes the browser to submit a request for a result on the search query, the user's input can be parsed, decomposed into the pertinent values for the appropriate variables, linked to the corresponding variables on the advertiser's site, and land the ad click deep into the advertiser's site. In this way, the user's browser “fast forwards” from a horizontal search page to a deep vertical form page where the user can purchase a flight ticket to travel by air from London to Amsterdam on March 13 … a user may not be required to type in information, but may be required to click or otherwise select an icon representing a target of interest (e.g., a product or service offered by or through the web site). In some cases, as discussed above, a user may simply hover over an ad and value(s) to certain variable(s) may be set accordingly. At run time, these values can be used to customize an ad copy, set other linked and mapped variables. Although a user clicking or hovering over site text or image is not an explicit data-entry action on the part of the user, contextual information provided by their implicit action can still be recognized and utilized by embodiments disclosed herein to customize and automatically generate deep-linked ads that can take the user directly to a checkout page with pre-populated values extracted from the user interaction. For instance, say a user is on the Amazon (www.amazon.com) web site. The user then selects the laptops section, and is on a page showing laptop selections by brand, product type, price range, etc. In this implementation, the ad system can scan and read in the tags on this page on the Amazon web site. Now when the user clicks on a selection on the Amazon laptops page, the appropriate variables can be set—for instance, Vertical can be set to Electronics, the Product to Laptops, and the brand to Dell, price to Under $2000, etc.”) (0102-0103, 0054, also see Claim 2).
Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, includes an identifier associated with at least one of the promotional message, the mobile device, or the user and the response message includes code associated with the identifier, however Ballapragada discloses, includes an identifier associated with at least one of the promotional message, the mobile device, or the user (Examiner interprets that the User-associated identifiers include user activity, click-response patterns, conversion history, location, and other user/context data used to select or customize the ad response and server receives the request from tag code, validates credentials, identifies the user’s geographical location, browser type, operating system, device type, and network, and queries creative media inventory for that request.) (“server application 125 may issue an inventory response to the tag code (340). The network request for creative media is received by the server application 125, which may respond appropriately to arrange service of content. … the decision to render may be based on a near-real-time click prediction optimization algorithm. For example, the system may use the optimization algorithm to predict nearly in real time the likelihood of a user clicking on each advertisement in a set of advertisements and then decide which advertisement or set of advertisements to render based on those predictions. The client application 115 and/or the server application 125 may implement optimization algorithms in any type of advertisement, such as anchored-layer advertisements and conventional advertisements … data may also comprise user activity, such as click-response patterns on previous advertisements shown, such as whether the advertisement was closed or hidden, whether there was any clicking or interacting within the unit, and/or any post-click conversions. The server application 125 may assign a unique score or weight to each parameter (domain, time, geo-location, etc.) based on the clicks generated and the conversions. For example, the inventory response may increase the advertisements as the clicks and conversions increase for a given parameter, and conversely, the inventory response may decrease the advertisements as the clicks and conversions decrease for a given parameter, thereby optimizing the money spent by advertisers”) (0084-0089);
and the response message includes code associated with the identifier to cause the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application and (2) automatically populate the custom text message, the custom text message being customized based on the identifier (Examiner notes that the underlined limitation is disclosed by another prior art. Examiner interprets that the response message is the inventory/content response returned by the server. The returned content/reference/code is associated with the identifiers in the request because the server uses the request parameters to identify matching creative media) (“overlay object 220 may directly communicate with the server application 125, the creative media module application 135, and/or the publisher application 145. The server application 125, the creative media module application 135, and/or the publisher application 145 may communicate with and serve the overlay object 220. For example, the overlay object 220 may send a request to the server application 125, which may respond by sending content to the overlay object 220. Further, the server application 125 may provide a reference to an additional content that the overlay object 220 may access from the creative media module application 135 and/or the publisher application 145. The server application 125 and the overlay object 220 may continue to communicate via the browser 200 and/or the client application 115”) (0058, 0081-0089).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, includes an identifier associated with at least one of the promotional message, the mobile device, or the user and the response message includes code associated with the identifier, as taught by Ballapragada in response to incorporate identifier-containing tag/request mechanism so that the server can select and return content based on publisher, device, browser, network, location, and user/context parameters to improve ad targeting, select relevant creative content, verify the request, and optimize the advertising response for the particular user/device/ad context.
Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, to cause the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application and (2) automatically populate the custom text message, the custom text message being customized based on the identifier however Debecker discloses, to cause the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application and (2) automatically populate the custom text message, the custom text message being customized based on the identifier (Examiner interprets the Google/search advertisement interface as the first application and the automatically opened SMS application as a messaging application different from the first application. Debecker therefore teaches automatically switching from the first application to a messaging application and populating a custom text message in the messaging application. Debecker also discloses a mobile search advertisement including a click-to-message control, such as a “Send us a text” button. When the user taps the button displayed with the advertisement in the first application, the mobile device automatically opens the SMS messaging application. The opened SMS application is different from the first application in which the advertisement was displayed. Google further teaches that the SMS application is automatically pre-filled with message text, such as “Hi, I’m interested in a reservation. Please text me back.” Thus, the mobile device automatically transitions from the advertising/search interface to the SMS messaging application and automatically populates a custom text message for the user to send to the advertiser) (Pgs. 3-4).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, to cause the mobile device to automatically (1) switch from the first application to the messaging application and (2) automatically populate the custom text message, the custom text message being customized based on the identifier, as taught by Debecker for the purpose in response to incorporate click-to-message functionality, such that selecting a promotional advertisement causes a mobile device to open a messaging application, pre-fill a custom text message, allow the user to send the message using the messaging application’s send control, and receive an advertiser response, thus to reduce user data entry, reduce friction associated with navigating to landing pages or manually contacting advertisers, increase advertisement conversion rates, and provide a direct communication channel between the advertiser and the potential customer.
As per claims 30, Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, wherein the first application is a web browser, however Ballapragada discloses, wherein the first application is a web browser (Examiner interprets that the client application may comprise a browser displaying a website; browser may be Internet Explorer, Safari, Firefox, Chrome, Opera, mobile browser, browser plug-in, toolbar, or other appropriate application; browser communicates with server using HTTP and displays content) (“the client application 115 comprises a browser, such as a browser 200, which may display a Web site. The client application 115 may be configured in a variety of layouts to display content, such as with the overlay object. In one embodiment, the browser 200 may be adapted to comprise the content area, such as an exemplary content area 210, and the overlay object, such as an exemplary overlay object 220. In an alternative embodiment, a non-browser application may also be adapted to comprise the content area 210 and the overlay object 220”) (0052-0054).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, wherein the first application is a web browser, the mobile device, or the user, as taught by Ballapragada in response to use browser-based implementation as the first application in the combined advertisement system because web browsers were conventional applications for displaying webpages, advertisements, and tag-based advertising content.
As per claims 31, Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, wherein the first application is an email application or a book reader application, however Ballapragada discloses, wherein the first application is an email application or a book reader application (Examiner interprets these teachings as suggesting that the first application may be an e-mail application or other non-browser content-display application. If a narrow construction of “book reader application” is applied, this limitation may require an additional reference more expressly directed to advertisements displayed in an e-mail or book-reader application) (“the transferred data may comprise content files, such as images, videos, Adobe Flash, or any other embedded or referenced files that may be used by the client application 115 or any other application running on the client 110 or any other device connected to or communicating with the client 110. The client application 115 may enable the client 110 to output various types of content, such as video, audio, and the like. In another embodiment, the client application 115 may comprise a non-browser application, such as a standard executable application, a mobile application, or any other application capable of displaying content. The client application 115 may also comprise an external application, such as an application that serves as a plug-in to a browser or another application”) (0030).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, wherein the first application is an email application or a book reader application, the mobile device, or the user, as taught by Ballapragada in response to use browser-based implementation as the first application in the combined advertisement system because web browsers were conventional applications for displaying webpages, advertisements, and tag-based advertising content.
As per claims 32, Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, display a webpage via the first application, the webpage including an integration tag, the integration tag configured to cause the first application to display the promotional message, however Ballapragada discloses, display a webpage via the first application, the webpage including an integration tag, the integration tag configured to cause the first application to display the promotional message (Examiner interprets Ballapragada’s publisher tag as the claimed integration tag and the returned advertisement/creative media as the claimed promotional message i.e. that an overlay object may operate via a publisher tag placed in published source code and that the publisher tag may comprise code adapted to send requests to and communicate with a server. Ballapragada further teaches that a publisher may place a tag in website source code, the browser may load the page with the tag, and execution of the tag code may result in a request call to a server. The server then returns a response/content to be displayed) (“the overlay object 220 may be displayed horizontally across the bottom of the content area 210 and operate via a publisher tag placed in the published source code. The publisher or any administrator may distribute the tag in a custom installation or a standard installation on a Web site, in an application, through a function or class, or in any other suitable method. The publisher tag may be distributed through real-time bidding exchanges, publisher networks, third-party ad servers, feeds, application download or installation, and the like … publisher tag may comprise code adapted to send requests to and/or communicate with the server 120, the server application 125, the creative media module 130, the creative media module application 135, the publisher 140, the publisher application 145, and/or any other application or device. Alternatively, the overlay object 220 may operate via code in another module or application, such as a toolbar. In a toolbar embodiment, the user may see the overlay object 220 on every Web site the user visits, regardless of whether the Web site contains the publisher tag”) (0059-0060, 0081-0087).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, wherein the first application is an email application or a book reader application, the mobile device, or the user, as taught by Ballapragada in response to dynamically request, select, and display advertising content on webpages thus to allow promotional content to be served dynamically from an ad server, to customize the displayed content based on request parameters, and to provide a standard integration mechanism for publishers and advertisers.
As per claims 33 and 41, Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, display a webpage via the first application, the webpage including an integration tag that is configured to cause the first application to display the promotional message and the mobile device to generate an identifier associated with at least one of the user or the mobile device, send the identifier to the at least one processor, the promotional message received in response to receiving the identifier, however Ballapragada discloses, display a webpage via the first application, the webpage including an integration tag that is configured to cause the first application to display the promotional message and the mobile device to generate an identifier associated with at least one of the user or the mobile device (Examiner interprets the publisher credentials, device/browser/network information, geo-location, and other request parameters as identifiers associated with the user or mobile device, and the returned matched creative media as the promotional message received in response to the identifier-containing request) (“the publisher 140, may place a tag in the Web site source code, such as next to or within the published content (310). The publisher 140 may directly place the tag in the source code of the destination page or pages, application, or device operating system, or an ad-server application with direct access to the Web site files may update the page source code. The tag may comprise code that is adapted to communicate with a server, such as the server 120 via the server application 125, and request content. The tag code may be controlled by the published content, the source code, the browser 200, another application, the operating system, the local machine, a remote server or device, the user, an administrator, or any other application, device, or individual. The tag code may comprise publisher credentials and other parameters that may define what content is displayed, how it is displayed, and any other settings … server application 125 may issue an inventory response to the tag code (340). The network request for creative media is received by the server application 125, which may respond appropriately to arrange service of content”) (0081-0084);
send the identifier to the at least one processor, the promotional message received in response to receiving the identifier (i.e. the tag code includes publisher credentials and parameters defining displayed content; browser loads the page with tag; tag executes, resulting in a request call to server; server receives inventory request from tag code. Server validates credentials, identifies user geo-location, browser type, OS, device type, and network; then queries inventory and returns response identifying a match) (“server application 125 may issue an inventory response to the tag code (340). The network request for creative media is received by the server application 125, which may respond appropriately to arrange service of content. … the decision to render may be based on a near-real-time click prediction optimization algorithm. For example, the system may use the optimization algorithm to predict nearly in real time the likelihood of a user clicking on each advertisement in a set of advertisements and then decide which advertisement or set of advertisements to render based on those predictions. The client application 115 and/or the server application 125 may implement optimization algorithms in any type of advertisement, such as anchored-layer advertisements and conventional advertisements … data may also comprise user activity, such as click-response patterns on previous advertisements shown, such as whether the advertisement was closed or hidden, whether there was any clicking or interacting within the unit, and/or any post-click conversions. The server application 125 may assign a unique score or weight to each parameter (domain, time, geo-location, etc.) based on the clicks generated and the conversions. For example, the inventory response may increase the advertisements as the clicks and conversions increase for a given parameter, and conversely, the inventory response may decrease the advertisements as the clicks and conversions decrease for a given parameter, thereby optimizing the money spent by advertisers”) (0084-0089).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, display a webpage via the first application, the webpage including an integration tag that is configured to cause the first application to display the promotional message and the mobile device to generate an identifier associated with at least one of the user or the mobile device, send the identifier to the at least one processor, the promotional message received in response to receiving the identifier, as taught by Ballapragada in response to allow the advertisement server to dynamically select and customize promotional content based on user, device, browser, location, and campaign parameters thus to improve relevance, improve click-through and conversion rates, reduce irrelevant advertisements, and provide a predictable tag-based mechanism for serving customized promotional messages to mobile/web users.
As per claims 34 and 42, Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, display a webpage via the first application, the webpage including an integration tag, the integration tag configured to cause the first application to display the promotional message, however Ballapragada discloses, display a webpage via the first application, the webpage including an integration tag, the integration tag configured to cause the first application to display the promotional message and the mobile device to generate an identifier associated with at least one of the user or the mobile device (Examiner interprets this as customizing the response message/content for the mobile device based on the identifier or request parameters i.e. that the decision whether to render or which advertisement to render may be based on user data, published content, real-time content, advertisement payloads, user conduct/activity, incoming requests, advertisements served, clicks, conversions, publisher domain, time, and geo-location. Ballapragada further teaches that the server may assign scores or weights to parameters and adjust the inventory response based on clicks and conversions) (“decision whether to render or which advertisement to render may be based on any suitable factors, including the availability of creative media. For example, an optimization algorithm may involve other factors, including data about a user, published content, real-time content, content sites, advertisement payloads, user conduct and activity (instantaneous or aggregated), or any other available information. In one embodiment, rendering may only take place when there is a likelihood of user interaction. Additionally, the decision to render may be based on a near-real-time click prediction optimization algorithm. For example, the system may use the optimization algorithm to predict nearly in real time the likelihood of a user clicking on each advertisement in a set of advertisements and then decide which advertisement or set of advertisements to render based on those predictions”) (0088-0090);
send the identifier to the at least one processor, the response message customized for the mobile device based on the identifier (i.e. the tag code includes publisher credentials and parameters defining displayed content; browser loads the page with tag; tag executes, resulting in a request call to server; server receives inventory request from tag code. Server validates credentials, identifies user geo-location, browser type, OS, device type, and network; then queries inventory and returns response identifying a match) (“server application 125 may issue an inventory response to the tag code (340). The network request for creative media is received by the server application 125, which may respond appropriately to arrange service of content. … the decision to render may be based on a near-real-time click prediction optimization algorithm. For example, the system may use the optimization algorithm to predict nearly in real time the likelihood of a user clicking on each advertisement in a set of advertisements and then decide which advertisement or set of advertisements to render based on those predictions. The client application 115 and/or the server application 125 may implement optimization algorithms in any type of advertisement, such as anchored-layer advertisements and conventional advertisements … data may also comprise user activity, such as click-response patterns on previous advertisements shown, such as whether the advertisement was closed or hidden, whether there was any clicking or interacting within the unit, and/or any post-click conversions. The server application 125 may assign a unique score or weight to each parameter (domain, time, geo-location, etc.) based on the clicks generated and the conversions. For example, the inventory response may increase the advertisements as the clicks and conversions increase for a given parameter, and conversely, the inventory response may decrease the advertisements as the clicks and conversions decrease for a given parameter, thereby optimizing the money spent by advertisers”) (0084-0089).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, wherein the signal sent to the at least one processor in response the user interacting with the promotional message includes an identifier associated with at least one of the promotional message, the mobile device, or the user, as taught by Ballapragada in response to allow the advertisement server to dynamically select and customize promotional content based on user, device, browser, location, and campaign parameters thus to improve relevance, improve click-through and conversion rates, reduce irrelevant advertisements, and provide a predictable tag-based mechanism for serving customized promotional messages to mobile/web users.
As per claims 43, Nath specifically doesn’t disclose, wherein the first application is a web browser or an email application or a book reader application, however Ballapragada discloses, wherein the first application is at least one of (1) a web browser (Examiner interprets that the client application may comprise a browser displaying a website; browser may be Internet Explorer, Safari, Firefox, Chrome, Opera, mobile browser, browser plug-in, toolbar, or other appropriate application; browser communicates with server using HTTP and displays content) (“the client application 115 comprises a browser, such as a browser 200, which may display a Web site. The client application 115 may be configured in a variety of layouts to display content, such as with the overlay object. In one embodiment, the browser 200 may be adapted to comprise the content area, such as an exemplary content area 210, and the overlay object, such as an exemplary overlay object 220. In an alternative embodiment, a non-browser application may also be adapted to comprise the content area 210 and the overlay object 220”) (0052-0054);
or (2) an email application or a book reader application (Examiner interprets that the client application may be a non-browser application, standard executable application, mobile application, or any application capable of displaying content. Ballapragada also teaches e-mail as an available widget/tool/content type and productivity function) (“he transferred data may comprise content files, such as images, videos, Adobe Flash, or any other embedded or referenced files that may be used by the client application 115 or any other application running on the client 110 or any other device connected to or communicating with the client 110. The client application 115 may enable the client 110 to output various types of content, such as video, audio, and the like. In another embodiment, the client application 115 may comprise a non-browser application, such as a standard executable application, a mobile application, or any other application capable of displaying content. The client application 115 may also comprise an external application, such as an application that serves as a plug-in to a browser or another application”) (0030).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention to display a promotional message via a first application, send a signal to at least one processor in response to a user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, receive a response message from the at least one processor and in response to sending the signal associated with the user of the mobile device interacting with the promotional message, as disclosed by Nath, wherein the first application is a web browser or an email application or a book reader application, as taught by Ballapragada in response to use browser-based implementation as the first application in the combined advertisement system because web browsers were conventional applications for displaying webpages, advertisements, and tag-based advertising content.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The following references have been cited to further show the state of the art.
U.S. Pub. No. 20180060914 (“Conrad”)
Conrad discloses, method or process for generating an attributable and trackable message based engagement through SMS or IP based messaging unit, from within a single unified campaign platform environment, between internet connected devices on any open or closed content delivery networks, servers, website, or social media sites such that the intent and messaging sequence may be tracked and attributed to campaigns, specified audiences, and ad platforms..
U.S. Pub. No. 20170236196 (“Isaacson”).
Isaacson discloses, receiving an interaction from a user with an object associated with an advertisement for a product, the advertisement being presented via a first site presented within a browser, transitioning the user from the first site to a destination merchant site in a deep link state. The transitioning process includes retrieving data from the browser and using the data from the browser to enable the user to transition from the first site to the destination merchant site in the deep link state. The deep link state enables the user to purchase the product via an interaction with a purchase object without manually entering payment account data or user address data. The deep link state can enable a “one click” purchasing experience after the transition from the first site.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GAUTAM UBALE whose telephone number is (571)272-9861. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri. 7:00 AM- 6:30 PM PST.
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, Marissa Thein can be reached on (571) 272-6764. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GAUTAM UBALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689
Prosecution Insights