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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to application filed on March 12, 2025 in which claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/12/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Independent claim 18 line 1 recites “a computer-readable medium…”, but Applicant’s Specification does not define the term "computer readable medium". Pending claims are interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow (See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 3 19 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is non-limiting (See MPEP 2111.01). When the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim covers a signal per se, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter).
The Examiner suggests that a claim drawn to such a computer readable medium that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. §101 by adding the limitation "non-transitory" to the claim. Such an amendment would typically not raise the issue of new matter, even when the specification is silent because the broadest reasonable interpretation relies on the ordinary and customary meaning that includes signals per se. The limited situations in which such an amendment could raise issues of new matter occur, for example, when the specification does not support a non-transitory embodiment because a signal per se is the only viable embodiment such that the amended claim is impermissibly broadened beyond the supporting disclosure. See, e.g., Gentqv Galleiy, Inc. v. Berkline Corp., 134 F.3d 1473 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 8, 10-12, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Corley et al. (US 20200210510 A1) hereinafter “Corley”.
As to claim 1, Corley discloses a method comprising: receiving, via a user input element of an application, an input of a uniform resource locator (URL) corresponding to a webpage (Corley [45-48], discloses wherein user is able to share a webpage link via a messaging application and generating a link preview of the webpage);
obtaining, based on the URL, a plurality of images associated with the webpage (Corley [47-48, 54-55], discloses wherein a link preview is generated via the preview generation module upon receiving digital content/images associated with the webpage);
displaying at least some of the plurality of images as candidate images for selection by a user (Corley [47-48, 54-55], discloses wherein the link preview includes formatted for display in a generally landscape orientation with a selection of multiple digital images);
receiving a selection of an image from the displayed candidate images (Corley [54-55, 60-63], discloses receiving by the customization data module describing user interaction with link previews and characteristics of the link previews including digital images); and
displaying the selected image within the user input element of the application in association with the URL (Corley [48-51, 55, 60], discloses wherein displaying digital content/images on the user interface/display via the customization data module).
As to claim 2, Corley discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the application comprises a messaging application and the selected image is displayed as part of a message container with the user input element (Corley [19, 31-34], discloses utilizing instant messaging and other messaging application).
As to claim 3, Corley discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising: analyzing the selected image to determine a dominant color; and displaying the message container as having a fill color based on the dominant color, wherein the fill color corresponds to the dominant color, a contrasting color to the dominant color, or a complimentary color to the dominant color (Corley [19, 31-34], discloses customization data module can determine digital contents’ color themes, resolutions, and aspect ratios).
As to claim 5, Corley discloses the method of claim 1, wherein displaying the at least some of the plurality of images as the candidate images for selection by the user comprises: displaying, within the user input element, the at least some of the plurality of images as the candidate images for selection by the user (Corley [54-56], discloses displaying in a generally landscape orientation with a selection of multiple digital images).
As to claim 6, Corley discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the candidate images are displayed within the user input element in a grid layout (Corley [54-56], discloses wherein the link preview is configured to output/display in various orientation/layout).
As to claim 8, Corley discloses the method of claim 1, wherein obtaining, based on the URL, the plurality of images associated with the webpage further comprises: fetching the webpage using the URL to obtain the plurality of images associated with the webpage (Corley [46-48], discloses wherein the title and image received/obtained by the service provider system 108 in response to the request is then to be used in an OG tag scenario by the service provider system 108 to generate the link preview, itself).
As to claim 10, Corley discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the set of criteria further comprises image content (Corley [46-48], discloses images).
As to claim 11, Corley discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the URL is received via the user input element by a pasting action (Corley [35-37, 44-48], discloses clicking/interacting with the content and then sharing the content).
As to claim 12, Corley discloses the method of claim 11, further comprising: receiving, at the application from another application from which the URL was copied, along with the URL, the plurality of images associated with the webpage (Corley [35-37, 44-48], discloses wherein the webpage title and image received by the service provider system).
As to claim 15, Corley discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the selected image for display comprises a composite of at least two of the candidate images (Corley [48-51, 55, 60], discloses wherein displaying digital content/images on the user interface/display via the customization data module).
As to claim 16, Corley discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: prior to displaying the at least some of the plurality of images, adjusting one or more of the plurality of images, the adjusting comprising: altering the one or more of the plurality of images so that each of the plurality of images have the same width (Corley [47-48, 51-54], discloses wherein the preview generation module renders the digital content/webpage and captures a screenshot to generate a digital image, e.g., having a size, resolution, aspect ratio, and so on as specified by the customization data).
As to claim 17, Corley discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the adjusting further comprises cropping the one or more of the plurality of images (Corley [47-48, 51-54], discloses wherein the preview generation module is capable of cropping images by having capabilities to adjust the size, resolution, aspect of the digital content).
Claims 18-20 are corresponding apparatus and non-transitory computer-readable medium claims that recite similar limitations as of claims 1-3, 5-6, 8, 10-12, and 15-17 and do not contain any additional features with respect to novelty and/or inventive steps; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7, 9, 13-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Form 892.
Correspondence Information
The examiner also requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line no(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application. When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Razu Miah whose telephone number is (571)270-5433. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5 EST.
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, Glenton Burgess can be reached at 23949. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RAZU A MIAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454
Prosecution Insights