DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Administrative Oversight
The examination of claims 1-20 regarding the previous non-final office action were with regards to an older set of claims. It is noted that we had not treated the Preliminary Amendment with newly filed set of claims including new claims 21-40 and canceled claims 1-20. The present office action addresses the most recent claim set filed 08/11/2026.
Response to Arguments
On page 9 of the Applicant’s Response, Applicant argues that the previous nonstatutory double patenting rejections as applied are moot since the grounds of rejection were directed toward claims canceled in Preliminary Amendment filed October 28, 2025.
The previous nonstatutory double patenting rejections applied to canceled claims 1-20 have been withdrawn. A new updated nonstatutory double patenting rejection with regards to claims 21-40 has been provided below.
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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,273,589. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. For instance, note the following similarities of instant application claim 21 to patent claim 1.
Instant Application Claim 21
US Pat. 12,273,589 Claim 1
A system for providing customized content, comprising: a recognition device configured to identify at least one user and the presence of the at least one user at a venue, wherein the venue includes at least one point of interest; and a processor and a memory, in communication with the recognition device, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
A system for providing customized content, comprising: a recognition device configured to identify at least one user and the presence of the at least one user at a venue, wherein the venue includes at least one point of interest;
generate an initial media presentation for the at least one point of interest of the venue; identify user preferences for the at least one user, wherein identifying the user preferences includes identifying, by an artificial neural network implemented by the processor, at least one topic of interest for the at least one user, wherein the artificial neural network implements a deep-learning process and an artificial-intelligence (AI)-driven search process;
an artificial intelligence (AI) driven search module, wherein the media generation module is configured to: generate an initial media presentation for the at least one point of interest of the venue; identify user preferences for the at least one user, wherein identifying the user preferences includes identifying, by the deep learning module of the artificial neural network, at least one topic of interest for the at least one user;
detect a location of the at least one user in the venue with respect to the at least one point of interest of the venue; generate a custom media presentation for the at least one user based on the initial media presentation, the identified user preferences for the at least one user, and the detected location of the at least one user in the venue;
detect a location of the at least one user in the venue with respect to the at least one point of interest of the venue; generate a custom media presentation for the at least one user based on the initial media presentation, the identified user preferences for the at least one user, and the detected location of the at least one user in the venue;
update the generated custom media presentation for the at least one user based on the identified user preferences, the at least one topic of interest for the user, and the detected location of the at least one user in the venue concurrently with the presence of the at least one user at the venue,
update the generated custom media presentation for the at least one user based on the identified user preferences, the at least one topic of interest for the user, and the detected location of the at least one user in the venue concurrently with the presence of the at least one user at the venue
wherein updating the generated custom media presentation includes identifying, by the artificial neural network, updated information about the at least one topic of interest for the user, wherein updating the generated custom media presentation further includes identifying, by the artificial neural network, content that additional users similar to the at least one user have interacted with, using a collaborative filtering technique,
wherein updating the generated custom media presentation includes identifying, by the AI driven search module of the artificial neural network, updated information about the at least one topic of interest for the user, wherein updating the generated custom media presentation further includes identifying, by the AI driven search module of the artificial neural network, content that additional users similar to the at least one user have interacted with, using a collaborative filtering technique,
wherein updating the generated custom media presentation further includes identifying, by the artificial neural network, content similar to items the at least one user has previously interacted with, using a content-based filtering technique; and present the updated custom media presentation to the at least one user, wherein the presented updated media presentation includes at least one of audio, visual or tactile content.
wherein updating the generated custom media presentation further includes identifying, by the AI driven search module of the artificial neural network, content similar to items the at least one user has previously interacted with, using a content-based filtering technique; and present the updated custom media presentation to the at least one user, wherein the presented updated media presentation includes at least one of audio, visual or tactile content.
Since claim 21 in the instant application is a broader recitation of claim 1 in Pat. 12,273,589 it would have been obvious to modify claim 1 in Pat. 12,273,589 to get claim 21 in the instant application.
Claim 22 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 2.
Claim 23 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 3.
Claim 24 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 4.
Claim 25 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 5.
Claim 26 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 6.
Claim 27 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 7.
Claim 28 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 8.
Claim 29 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 9.
Claim 30 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 10.
Claim 31 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 11.
Claim 32 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 12.
Claim 33 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 13.
Claim 34 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 14.
Claim 35 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 15.
Claim 36 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 16.
Claim 37 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 17.
Claim 38 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 18.
Claim 39 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 19.
Claim 40 of the instant application corresponds to patented claim 20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Q Huerta whose telephone number is (571)270-3582. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Pendleton can be reached at (571)272-7527. 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.
/ALEXANDER Q HUERTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425 September 18, 2026
