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 . New claims 19-30 filed 23 June 2025 have been examined and are pending and claims 1-18 are canceled.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
New claims 20-30 are objected to because they include the typographical error of depending from canceled claim 1. However, it is understood that claims 20-30 are dependent claims of the only independent claim: claim 19. Appropriate correction is required.
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 19-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claims 19-30 are directed to one of the eligible categories of subject matter.
With respect to independent claim 19, the creating, initializing, selecting, adding, generatings, determining cover performance of the limitations manually and/or in the mind (mental processes abstract idea). The storing limitations is recited at a high level of generality and does not add meaningful limitations to the abstract idea and it is directed to insignificant extra solution activities. The claims as a whole merely describe how to generally “apply” the exception in a computer environment using generic computer functions or components (such as random generation algorithm, data storage system, etc). Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
With respect to dependent claims 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30 the assignings, indicating, representing, disambiguate, comparing, identify cover performance of the limitations manually and/or in the mind (mental processes abstract idea). No additional elements are recited and so the claims do not provide a practical application and are not considered to be significantly more. The claims are not eligible.
With respect to dependent claims 20, 26, 29 comprises digital representation, displaying, storing are recited at a high level of generality and do not add meaningful limitations to the abstract idea. The claims as a whole merely describe how to generally “apply” the exception in a computer environment using generic computer functions or components. Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 19-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mossoba et al., Pub. No.: US 20200089862 A1, hereinafter Mossoba.
As per claim 19, Mossoba discloses A computer-implemented method for generating a 4Emoji Mark (claim interpretation note: under BRI in light of the present application at fig. 3, and as claimed in the steps below, “4Emoji Mark” refers to a data record that stores information about four emojis), comprising:
(a) creating a plurality of key-value pairs (KVPs), each KVP comprising an emoji identifier and a corresponding hash of a byte array representing an emoji (par. 3, 16-23 and fig.’s 1A-1C mapping element disclose maintaining (i.e. creating) an emoji/image to text string mapping data structure in which each emoji is associated with a corresponding text string identifier (i.e. a plurality of key-value pairs, each KVP comprising an emoji identifier) and pars. 18, 25, 80 disclose that each emoji is a graphic (byte array representation) and that a hashed value is derived from the text strings corresponding to those emojis. Note that par. 88 of the present application makes it clear that an emoji byte array corresponds to a graphic of the emoji);
(b) initializing a loop counter (pars. 77-78, 102-103, 159, 164, 171, 180-181 disclose initializing a looping criteria starting from 0 and incrementing each iteration and also disclose that the platform causes processing each user selection one at a time, removing selected emojis from display successively until all emojis and/or images are selected);
(c) iteratively selecting emojis for inclusion in the 4Emoji Mark, wherein each emoji is selected based on one of a random generation algorithm or a user input selection (See rejection above and note that pars. 21-24, 29-35 disclose user selection of emojis and/or images one at a time, in an iterative manner; also, pars. 28, 32, 35 disclose random reordering and adjusting emoji display pattern/order);
(d) adding each selected emoji identifier and corresponding hash to the plurality of KVPs until four emojis have been selected (pars. 3, 60, 74, 84 disclose accumulation of selected emojis into a growing set: “identifying a plurality of text strings associated with the plurality of emojis or images after receiving the input, each text string corresponding to a respective emoji or image of the plurality of emojis or images” and fig. 1B, item 135 shows four selected emojis with four corresponding text identifiers accumulated (set of 4 KVP’s)).
(e) generating the 4Emoji Mark based on the four selected emojis (pars. 24, 25, 75, 85 disclose generate a combined text string based on the plurality of text strings wherein text phrases are concatenated together to form a unified string that constitutes a generated composite emoji-based mark, named “4Emoji Mark” in the claim derived from four selected emojis);
(f) generating a 4Emoji Mark identifier by applying a context identifier algorithm to the emoji identifiers of the selected emojis (par. 25 discloses “hash the concatenated text phrase using one or more hashing algorithms to derive a hashed value” wherein the hashing of the concatenated emoji identifier derived strings is application of a “context identifier algorithm” to emoji identifiers to generate a unique output identifier (hashed value));
(g) determining whether the 4Emoji Mark identifier is unique (see pars. 25 and fig. 1C, item 145 wherein searching stored identifiers to determine whether a newly derived identifier corresponds to an existing stored value is the same as determining whether the identifier is unique); and
(h) in response to determining that the 4Emoji Mark identifier is unique, storing the 4Emoji Mark and the 4Emoji Mark identifier in a data storage system (see pars. 17-18 which disclose storing the mapping (emoji mark) and the derived hash identifier (the mark identifier), both in association with (data identifying) the user and all this is done as a result of the successful processing and comparison workflow).
As per claim 20, Mossoba discloses The method of claim 1, wherein each emoji comprises a digital representation selected from the group consisting of: a graphic, a sound, and a tactile pattern (pars. 22-24).
As per claim 21, Mossoba discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising assigning a theme identifier to the 4Emoji Mark, the theme identifier specifying a predefined visual or contextual theme (pars. 22-24 disclose user selection of visual and textual based “themes”).
As per claim 22, Mossoba discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising assigning a brand identifier to the 4Emoji Mark, the brand identifier corresponding to a specific organization, product, or service (pars. 16, 20-21, 91 disclose organizations that store and manage all the data including the mapping (emoji mark) and the derived hash identifier (the mark identifier), these organizations disclose as specific banks, online retailers, gaming entities, etc. all of which are identifiable via corresponding, known brands).
As per claim 23, Mossoba discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising assigning an affiliation identifier to the 4Emoji Mark, the affiliation identifier indicating an association with a particular entity or group (pars. 16, 20-21, 91 disclose predetermined/assigned affiliations as claimed, also, pars. 22-24 disclose user selection of visual and textual based “affiliations”).
As per claim 24, Mossoba discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising assigning a sentiment identifier to the 4Emoji Mark, the sentiment identifier indicating an emotional attribute associated with the selected emojis (see rejection of at least (e) generating limitation of claim 19 and note that the unified text string includes feeling / sentiment identifications as disclosed in pars. 24-26, 31-34).
As per claim 25, Mossoba discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising assigning a language identifier to the 4Emoji Mark, the language identifier representing a linguistic expression conveyed by the 4Emoji Mark (see rejection of at least (e) generating limitation of claim 19 and note that the unified text string includes text that specifically conveys and represents a linguistic expression (which is a language identifier as defined in the claim) as disclosed in pars. 24-26, 31-34. Note that a linguistic expression is any coherent unit of human language, such as single words and phrases to complex sentences, idioms, or metaphors, used to convey meaning, thoughts, or emotions).
As per claim 26, Mossoba discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the emoji selection comprises displaying a user interface that presents a plurality of emoji options to a user for selection (see rejection of claim 19 and see at least fig. 1B).
As per claim 27, Mossoba discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the 4Emoji Mark identifier is used to disambiguate a target item among a plurality of similar items (par. 25 discloses using the derived hash identifier to identify and distinguish a specific user account from multiple others (i.e. disambiguate)).
As per claim 28, Mossoba discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining whether the 4Emoji Mark identifier is unique comprises comparing the 4Emoji Mark identifier to existing identifiers stored in a database (see rejection of (g) determining limitation of claim 19).
As per claim 29, Mossoba discloses the method of claim 1, wherein storing the 4Emoji Mark and the 4Emoji Mark identifier comprises storing visual, auditory, or tactile metadata associated with the 4Emoji Mark (see pars. 17-18 which disclose storing the mapping (emoji mark) and the derived hash identifier (the mark identifier), both in association with (data identifying) the user and all this is done as a result of the successful processing and comparison workflow, wherein the stored information is available in at least a visual manner on a display screen as seen in fig. 1B and pars. 28-33).
As per claim 30, Mossoba discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the 4Emoji Mark is used as a signature to identify a fact, object, entity, or event in a computing system (pars. 31, 35, 36, 64 disclose using the emoji-based mark and its derived identifier as a user (i.e. entity) authenticating credential signature).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED HASAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5008. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am - 5 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, Boris Gorney can be reached at (571)270-5626. 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.
/SYED H HASAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2154