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 action is response to the application filed on 08/05/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending in this Office Action in which claims 1-20 are rejected and claims 1 and 19-20 are independent claims.
Priority
Acknowledged is that this Application claims the benefit of priority from parent Application 18355452, filed 07/20/2023 now the U.S. Patent 12406016, issued 09/02/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 08/05/2025 are in compliance with 37 CFR 1.97(c) and therein have been considered. Its corresponding PTO-1449 have been electronically signed as attached.
Double Patenting Rejections
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 non-statutory 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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent 12406016 (issued 09/02/2025 to the parent application 18355452, filed 07/20/2023). Although the conflicting are not patentably distinct from each other because since the claims of the U.S. Patent 12406016 contain elements of the claims of the instant application, and as such, anticipate the claims of the instant application. The conflicting claims between the instant application and the granted U.S. Patent 12406016 are listed in parallel in below table.
Patent 12406016 claims 1-25
Instant Application claims 1-20
1. A computer-implemented method for providing search results, comprising:
receiving, using a data processing system having memory and one or more data processors, a first query based on a search term from a first user;
providing, using the data processing system, a set of results to the first query that includes a link to a search thread,
the search thread including a plurality of network links manually curated by a user in a user interface as being relevant to the search term,
the manual curation comprising the first user selecting network links deemed to be relevant to the search term and the user ordering the selected network links,
the link to the search thread being relatively positioned in the set of results based on ratings of the search thread by a plurality of users as compared to other search threads;
determining, using the data processing system, a credibility score for the search thread;
receiving, using the data processing system, a second query from a second user based on the search term;
determining, using the data processing system, a placement of the search thread in a set of results for the second query based on the credibility score for the search thread; and
providing, using the data processing system, the set of results for the second query to the second user.
2. The method of claim 1,
wherein the credibility score is a weighted average of the ratings provided by the plurality of users,
wherein weights are determined based on levels of expertise associated with users providing the ratings.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein an expert associates the thread with the search term via a user interface.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein a related search term for association with the search thread is suggested via the user interface.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the search thread is associated with an additional tagged term, wherein a third query is based on the search term and an additional search term, and wherein the method further comprises:
determining a similarity score based on: the set of the search term and the additional tagged term and the set of the search term and the additional search term,
wherein determining whether the search thread should be included in results responsive to the third query is further based on the similarity score.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the search thread is provided as an ordered list of network links to suggested documents.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the search thread further includes annotations from an expert who created the search thread.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
providing the user interface for creating the search thread,
wherein the user interface is configured to receive an identification of a level of expertise or details of the search thread.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein the search thread is provided along with a listing of organic search results and paid search results in response to the query.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein selection of the search thread by the first user expands the search thread result to show details of the search thread.
11. The method of claim 10, further comprising:
displaying an advertisement with the set of results; and
displaying a second advertisement with the details of the search thread,
wherein a party providing the set of results is compensated for displaying the advertisement and the second advertisement.
12. The method of claim 10, further comprising: providing attribution to an expert associated with the search thread along with the link to the search thread or along with the details of the search thread.
13. The method of claim 12, wherein the attribution includes an expert name, expert contact information, an expert biography, a link to an expert webpage, or a link to a webpage of a business associated with the expert.
14. The method of claim 10, wherein the details of the search thread include additional information created or authored by an expert associated with the search thread in addition to the network links.
15. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of results to the query includes a link to a single search thread.
16. A computer-implemented system for providing search results, comprising:
a processing system comprising one or more data processors;
a non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with instructions for commanding the processing system to execute steps comprising:
receiving a first query based on a search term;
providing a set of results to the first query that includes a link to two or more expert search threads,
each expert search thread including a plurality of network links in an order that a corresponding expert manually identified using a user interface as being helpful to learning about the topic,
the expert search threads each being positioned within the set of results based on a credibility score associated with each expert search thread and which is determined using user feedback;
determining a credibility score for the search thread;
receiving a second query based on the search term;
determining a placement of the search thread in a set of results for the second query based on the credibility score for the search thread; and
providing the set of results for the second query.
17. A non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with instructions for commanding a processing system to execute steps for providing search results comprising:
receiving a query based on a search term;
providing a set of results to the query that includes a link to at least two search threads,
each search thread including a plurality of network links that a user manually curated by way of a user interface as being helpful to learning about the topic along with annotations to the network links generated by such user,
the manual curation comprising the user identifying the network links and generating at least a portion of the annotations,
the search threads each being relatively placed within the set of results based on interactions by a plurality of other users and the corresponding search thread;
determining a credibility score for the search thread;
receiving a second query based on the search term;
determining a placement of the search thread in a set of results for the second query based on the credibility score for the search thread; and
providing the set of results for the second query.
18. A computer-implemented method for providing search results, comprising:
receiving, using a data processing system having memory and one or more data processors, a first query from a first user based on a search term;
providing, using the data processing system, a set of results to the first query that includes a link to a search thread,
the search thread comprising a plurality of network links manually curated by a user by way of a user interface as being relevant to the search term,
the search thread including the plurality of network links that the user identified as being helpful to the first user for learning about a topic associated with the search term and annotation text generated using an annotation engine based on content associated with the plurality of network links,
the search thread being positioned within the set of results based on a credibility score associated with such user search thread that is based on other user interactions with the search thread;
receiving, using the data processing system, a second query from a second user based on the search term;
determining, using the data processing system, a placement of the search thread in a set of results for the second query based on the credibility score for the search thread; and
providing, using the data processing system, the set of results for the second query to the second user.
19. The method of claim 18, wherein the annotation text is based on subject matter extracted from one or more destinations associated with the plurality of network links.
20. The method of claim 19, wherein the annotation text comprises an augmented form of subject matter extracted from the one or more destinations.
21. The method of claim 19, wherein the annotation text is generated semi-automatically, based in part on the subject matter extracted from the one or more destinations and annotation input from the user.
22. The method of claim 19, wherein the subject matter extracted from the one or more destinations comprises text, images, audio clips, or video clips.
23. The method of claim 19, wherein the annotation text comprises a guide for the search thread that is generated based on text extracted from the one or more destinations associated with the plurality of network links.
24. The method of claim 18, wherein the annotation text comprises comments, suggestions, or guidelines associated with the search thread.
25. A computer-implemented method for providing search results, comprising:
receiving, using a data processing system having memory and one or more data processors, a query from a user based on a search term;
providing, using the data processing system, a set of results to the query that includes a link to a search thread,
the search thread including a plurality of network links manually curated by a user in a user interface as being relevant to the search term the manual curation comprising the user selecting network links deemed to be relevant to the search term and the user ordering the selected network links;
determining, using the data processing system, a credibility score for the search thread;
receiving, using the data processing system, a subsequent query based on the search term; determining, using the data processing system, a placement of the search thread in a set of results for the subsequent query based on the credibility score for the search thread; and
providing, using the data processing system, the set of results for the subsequent query.
1. A computer-implemented method for providing search results, comprising:
receiving, using a data processing system having memory and one or more data processors, a first query based on a search term from a first user;
determining, using the data processing system, a credibility score for a guided link thread relative to the search term;
when the credibility score meets a threshold, providing, using the data processing system, a set of results to the first query that includes a control for accessing the guided link thread;
receiving an interaction with the control for accessing the guided link thread;
expanding the guided link thread based on the interaction to show details of the guided link thread,
wherein the expanded guided link thread includes a plurality of network links determined to be relevant to the search term and annotation text generated using an annotation engine based on content associated with the plurality of network links,
wherein the annotation text is based on subject matter extracted from one or more destinations associated with the plurality of network links.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the credibility score is a weighted average of the ratings provided by a plurality of users,
wherein weights are determined based on levels of expertise associated with users providing the ratings.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein an expert associates the thread with the search term via a user interface.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein a related search term for association with the guided link thread is suggested via the user interface.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the guided link thread is provided as an ordered list of network links to suggested documents.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein the guided link thread further includes annotations from an expert who created the guided link thread.
7. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
providing a user interface for creating the guided link thread,
wherein the user interface is configured to receive an identification of a level of expertise or details of the guided link thread.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the guided link thread is provided along with a listing of organic search results and paid search results in response to the query.
9. The method of claim 8, further comprising:
displaying an advertisement with the set of results; and
displaying a second advertisement with the details of the guided link thread,
wherein a party providing the set of results is compensated for displaying the advertisement and the second advertisement.
10. The method of claim 1, further comprising: providing attribution to an expert associated with the guided link thread along with the control for accessing the guided link thread or along with the details of the guided link thread.
11. The method of claim 10 wherein the attribution includes an expert name, expert contact information, an expert biography, a link to an expert webpage, or a link to a webpage of a business associated with the expert.
12. The method of claim 1, wherein the details of the search thread include additional information created or authored by an expert associated with the search thread in addition to the network links.
13. The method of claim 1, wherein the annotation text comprises an augmented form of subject matter extracted from the one or more destinations.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein the annotation text is generated semi-automatically, based in part on the subject matter extracted from the one or more destinations and annotation input from the user.
15. The method of claim 1, wherein the annotation text comprises comments, suggestions, or guidelines associated with the search thread.
16. The method of claim 1, wherein the subject matter extracted from the one or more destinations comprises text, images, audio clips, or video clips.
17. The method of claim 1, wherein the annotation text comprises a guide for the search thread that is generated based on text extracted from the one or more destinations associated with the plurality of network links.
18. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of results to the query includes a link to a single search thread.
19. A computer-implemented system for providing search results, comprising:
a processing system comprising one or more data processors;
a non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with instructions for commanding the processing system to execute steps comprising:
receiving, using a data processing system having memory and one or more data processors, a first query based on a search term from a first user;
determining, using the data processing system, a credibility score for a guided link thread relative to the search term;
when the credibility score meets a threshold, providing, using the data processing system, a set of results to the first query that includes a control for accessing the guided link thread;
receiving an interaction with the control for accessing the guided link thread;
expanding the guided link thread based on the interaction to show details of the guided link thread,
wherein the expanded guided link thread includes a plurality of network links determined to be relevant to the search term and annotation text generated using an annotation engine based on content associated with the plurality of network links,
wherein the annotation text is based on subject matter extracted from one or more destinations associated with the plurality of network links.
20. A non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with instructions for commanding a processing system to execute steps for providing search results comprising:
receiving, using a data processing system having memory and one or more data processors, a first query based on a search term from a first user;
determining, using the data processing system, a credibility score for a guided link thread relative to the search term;
when the credibility score meets a threshold, providing, using the data processing system, a set of results to the first query that includes a control for accessing the guided link thread;
receiving an interaction with the control for accessing the guided link thread;
expanding the guided link thread based on the interaction to show details of the guided link thread,
wherein the expanded guided link thread includes a plurality of network links determined to be relevant to the search term and annotation text generated using an annotation engine based on content associated with the plurality of network links,
wherein the annotation text is based on subject matter extracted from one or more destinations associated with the plurality of network links.
“Omission of element and its function in combination is obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform same functions as before.” See In re Karlson (CCPA) 136 USPQ 184, decide Jan 16, 1963, Appl. No. 6857, U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 35 U.S.C. 103 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 non-obviousness.
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 37CPR 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 1, 5-8, 13-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Hellstrom et al.: “DEEP WEB MINER”, (U.S. Patent Application Publication US 20090204610 A1, DATE FILED 2009-08-13; and DATE PUBLISHED 2009-02-11, hereafter “Hellstrom"), in view of
Nad et al.: “PROVIDING POSTS TO DISCUSSION THREADS IN RESPONSE TO A SEARCH QUERY”, (U.S. Patent Application Publication US 20100030753 A1, DATE PUBLISHED 2010-02-04; and DATE FILED 2009-07-31, hereafter “Nad").
As per claim 1, Hellstrom teaches a computer-implemented method for providing search results, comprising:
receiving, using a data processing system having memory and one or more data processors, a first query based on a search term from a first user (See [0013] and [0085], a user submitting a query to the search engine based on the example query term(s) to receive query results returned in response to submitting the query form to the search engine, for example, as shown, the user has entered the term "Ebola" as a query term. The user teaches the first user).
Hellstrom does not explicitly teach determining, using the data processing system, a credibility score for a guided link thread relative to the search term.
On the other hand, as an analogous art on query search and search results management, Nad teaches determining, using the data processing system, a credibility score for a guided link thread relative to the search term (See [0003], [0008], search engines present search results as a list of links where each link enables a user to access one of the identified resources, and each search engine provides a corresponding plurality of rankings to the plurality of discussion thread web pages. Here the search results as ranking lists of links leading to identified resource teaches the guided link as search results and the list is the result of query using the query terms and the ranking of the thread web pages reads on the credibility score for a guided link thread).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant's invention was made to combine the teaching of Nad with Hellstrom because Nad is dedicated to Internet search engines presenting search results including posts to discussion forums and Hellstrom is dedicated to selectively capturing network accessible information including content and metadata, and a combined teaching of the references would have allowed the deep web miner of Hellstrom to include crawler thread in the query search result to expedite identifying query results without sending to an queue for the expert search thread, the crawler thread, to process.
Hellstrom in view of Nad further teaches the following:
when the credibility score meets a threshold, providing, using the data processing system, a set of results to the first query that includes a control for accessing the guided link thread (See Hellstrom: [00050], web sites and web pages that are readily accessible, and which are typically locatable using conventional search engines and/or by providing URL addresses into a navigation control of a conventional web browser; and Nad: [0008] and [0020], a plurality of links including the link to each of the plurality of discussion forums in a descending order of the plurality of rankings, such that a link to a discussion forum that includes a discussion thread web page with a highest ranking is displayed first; and to categorize a particular web page, the process 100 evaluates a polynomial and If the value of the polynomial meets a predetermined threshold, the process 100 categorizes the page as being a page that includes one or more posts to a discussion thread. Here the combined reference teaches the limitation);
receiving an interaction with the control for accessing the guided link thread (See Hellstrom: [0050] and [0093], web sites and web pages that are readily accessible, and which are typically locatable using conventional search engines and/or by providing URL addresses into a navigation control of a conventional web browser; and If more results from the executed search are available than can be displayed on the exemplary result page, then the deep web miner 112 can continue iteratively retrieving additional results via interaction between the selected form-understanding plug-in and the targeted site, e.g. by simulating the activation of the "NEXT" link 248 or similar links on the results page 246, or through any other appropriate interactions with the corresponding form processing engine 186.);
expanding the guided link thread based on the interaction to show details of the guided link thread (See Hellstrom: [0093], If more results from the executed search are available than can be displayed on the exemplary result page, then the deep web miner 112 can continue iteratively retrieving additional results via interaction between the selected form-understanding plug-in and the targeted site, e.g. by simulating the activation of the "NEXT" link 248 or similar links on the results page).
wherein the expanded guided link thread includes a plurality of network links determined to be relevant to the search term and annotation text generated using an annotation engine based on content associated with the plurality of network links (See Hellstrom: [0112], the deep web miner maximizes data collection, and generates new queries by analyzing the text collected while the deep web miner 112 is iterating. For example, the deep web miner 112 may collect numerous web pages concerning "anthrax", a given seed topic information requesting. Here the example text “anthrax" is related to search term and reads on annotation text generated as a link for the deep web miner thread to determine),
wherein the annotation text is based on subject matter extracted from one or more destinations associated with the plurality of network links (See Hellstrom: [0112], the deep web miner maximizes data collection, and generates new queries by analyzing the text collected while the deep web miner 112 is iterating. For example, the deep web miner 112 may collect numerous web pages concerning "anthrax", a given seed topic information requesting.).
As per claim 5, Hellstrom in view of Nad teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the guided link thread is provided as an ordered list of network links to suggested documents (See Nad: Fig. 1, [0008] and [0018]-[0019], receiving information identifying multiple resources that have been identified by a search engine as satisfying a search query and identifying a first resource in the multiple resources as including a post to a discussion forum as a thread and a plurality of links including the link to each of the plurality of discussion forums in a descending order of the plurality of rankings, such that a link to a discussion forums in a descending order of the plurality of rankings. Here the identifying teaches the selecting).
As per claim 6, Hellstrom in view of Nad teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the guided link thread further includes annotations from an expert who created the guided link thread (See Hellstrom: Fig. 17 and [0093], the deep web miner retrieves the results page of the search and analyzes the page information for relevant content and, the results from the executed search are available than can be displayed on the exemplary result page is listed by annotations, such as CDC Anthrax, CBER -Anthrax, Anthrax, .. based on the content associated with the plurality of network links).
As per claim 7, Hellstrom in view of Nad teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: providing a user interface for creating the guided link thread, wherein the user interface is configured to receive an identification of a level of expertise or details of the guided link thread (See Nad: Figs. 1, 4, [0018]-[0019] and [0042]-[0043], receiving information identifying multiple resources that have been identified by a search engine as satisfying a search query and identifying a first resource in the multiple resources as including a post to a discussion forum as a thread; identifying multiple discussion thread web pages among the multiple resources that satisfy the search query, identifying multiple discussion forums from the multiple discussion thread web pages, and extracting information about each of the multiple discussion forums. Here the discussion forums is the network link and is interpreted the expert thread included in the query results and is relevant to the query term. The identifying of query result resource and the discussion forum threads teaches curating by an expert; and Hellstrom: [0011], queuing query result addresses in a crawler queue and asynchronously servicing each result address by a corresponding crawler thread that obtains content and/or metadata that is cached in a local storage medium, processes the content of the returned results and updates a display with a listing of the mined results, wherein the user may browse a local navigable copy of the crawled results in isolation by selecting a navigable entry of the listing).
As per claim 8, Hellstrom in view of Nad teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the guided link thread is provided along with a listing of organic search results and paid search results in response to the query (See Hellstrom: [0151], links corresponding to advertisements).
As per claim 13, Hellstrom in view of Nad teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the annotation text comprises an augmented form of subject matter extracted from the one or more destinations (See Hellstrom: Fig. 17 and [0093], the deep web miner retrieves the results page of the search and analyzes the page information for relevant content and, the results from the executed search are available than can be displayed on the exemplary result page is listed by annotations, such as CDC Anthrax, CBER – Anthrax, Anthrax, .. based on the content associated with the plurality of network links. The similar pages reads on the an augmented form of subject matter).
As per claim 14, Hellstrom in view of Nad teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the annotation text is generated semi-automatically, based in part on the subject matter extracted from the one or more destinations and annotation input from the user (See Hellstrom: Fig. 17 and [0093], the deep web miner retrieves the results page of the search and analyzes the page information for relevant content and, the results from the executed search are available than can be displayed on the exemplary result page is listed by annotations, such as CDC Anthrax, CBER – Anthrax, Anthrax, .. based on the content associated with the plurality of network links.).
As per claim 15, Hellstrom in view of Nad teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the annotation text comprises comments, suggestions, or guidelines associated with the search thread (See Hellstrom: Fig. 17 and [0093], the deep web miner retrieves the results page of the search and analyzes the page information for relevant content and, the results from the executed search are available than can be displayed on the exemplary result page is listed by annotations, such as CDC Anthrax, CBER – Anthrax, Anthrax, .. based on the content associated with the plurality of network links. The similar pages reads on the comments, suggestions, or guidelines associated with the expert search thread).
As per claim 16, Hellstrom in view of Nad teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the subject matter extracted from the one or more destinations comprises text, images, audio clips, or video clips (See Hellstrom: Fig. 17 and [0093], the deep web miner retrieves the results page of the search and analyzes the page information for relevant content and, the results from the executed search are available than can be displayed on the exemplary result page is listed by annotations, such as CDC Anthrax, CBER – Anthrax, Anthrax, .. based on the content associated with the plurality of network links.).
As per claim 18, Hellstrom in view of Nad teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the set of results to the query includes a link to a single search thread (See Hellstrom: declaring a specific implementation of an abstract forms-based query service in a corresponding content-service thread. In this regard, the computer program product may further comprise computer usable program code configured to obtain a web site of interest, computer usable program code configured to retrieve a query page having a form for accessing the site's search engine, computer usable program code configured to recognize or obtain relevant form input(s), and computer usable program code configured to generate or obtain example search term(s)).
As per claim 19, the claim recites a computer-implemented system for providing search results (See Hellstrom: [0047], a deep web miner 112 defines a tool that is executed on a corresponding one of the processing devices 102 to capture and/or evaluate information) comprising:
a processing system comprising one or more data processors (See Hellstrom: [0167], these computer program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer);
a non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with instructions for commanding the processing system (Hellstrom: [0014], The computer usable program code that enables a user to build a form-understanding plug-in further comprises computer usable program code configured to recognize or obtain result anchors of interest within the query results) to execute steps recited as limitations of the method of claim 1 and rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hellstrom in view of Nad.
Accordingly, claim 19 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected claim 1.
As per claim 20, the claim recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with instructions for commanding a processing system to execute steps for providing search results (See Hellstrom: [0168], the computer usable code may also be stored in a computer-readable memory that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer usable medium, such as a computer-readable memory, and The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to cause a series of operational steps to be performed) comprising the steps recited as limitations of the method of claim 1 and rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hellstrom in view of Nad.
Accordingly, claim 20 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected claim 1.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Hellstrom in view of Nad, as applied to claims 1, 5-8, 13-16 and 18-20 above, and further in view of
ACOSTA et al.: "IDENTIFYING SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS", (U.S. Patent Application Publication US 20100262610A1, DATE PUBLISHED 2010-10-14; and DATE FILED 2009-04-09, hereafter "ACOSTA").
As per claim 2, Hellstrom in view of Nad does not explicitly teach the method of claim 1,
wherein the credibility score is a weighted average of the ratings provided by a plurality of users.
However, ACOSTA teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the credibility score is a weighted average of the ratings provided by a plurality of users (See [0020], calculating, in dependence upon the credibility rating (132) of the each resource (142), a weighted expert score (138) representing an estimated level of expertise for each potential subject matter expert; and returning, to the user (250) as one more search results (136), the potential subject matter experts (140) in order of the weighted expert scores (138) along with resources (142) associated with the potential subject matter experts (140). A weighted expert score is a number, ratio, percentage, or the like that generally represents an estimated level of expertise of a person for a particular subject matter included in a search request ).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant's invention was made to combine the teaching of ACOSTA with Hellstrom in view of Nad because ACOSTA is dedicated to I identifying subject matter experts, Nad is dedicated to Internet search engines presenting search results including posts to discussion forums and Hellstrom is dedicated to selectively capturing network accessible information including content and metadata, and a combined teaching of the references would have allowed the deep web miner of Hellstrom in view of Nad to allowing easy and efficient access to a great amount of information.
Hellstrom in view of Nad and further in view of ACOSTA further teaches:
wherein weights are determined based on levels of expertise associated with users providing the ratings (See [0020], calculating, in dependence upon the credibility rating (132) of the each resource (142), a weighted expert score (138) representing an estimated level of expertise for each potential subject matter expert; and returning, to the user (250) as one more search results (136), the potential subject matter experts (140) in order of the weighted expert scores (138) along with resources (142) associated with the potential subject matter experts (140). A weighted expert score is a number, ratio, percentage, or the like that generally represents an estimated level of expertise of a person for a particular subject matter included in a search request).
Claims 3-4, 1-12, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Hellstrom in view of Nad, as applied to claims 1, 5-8, 13-16 and 18-20 above, and further in view of
Dittli, Stefan: "Computer-based Data Processing System And Method For Assessing The Effectiveness Of Knowledge Transfer", (U.S. Patent Application Publication US 20050282138 A1, DATE PUBLISHED 2005-12-22; and DATE FILED 2004-06-21, hereafter "Dittli").
As per claim 3, Hellstrom in view of Nad does not explicitly teach the method of claim 1, the method of claim 1, wherein an expert associates the thread with the search term via a user interface.
However, Dittli teaches the method of claim 1, wherein teaches the method of claim 1, wherein an expert associates the thread with the search term via a user interface (See [0030]-[0031], the expert will understand that the sets of quality indicators can be stored in the same table as the areas of expertise or in another table; and configuration steps for defining and storing an instance of knowledge transfer that can be executed by a user of a data entry terminal, and the user can request execution of the configuration steps C1 to C3 through a menu of the user interface).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant's invention was made to combine the teaching of Nad with Hellstrom because Nad is dedicated to Internet search engines presenting search results including posts to discussion forums and Hellstrom is dedicated to selectively capturing network accessible information including content and metadata, and a combined teaching of the references would have allowed the deep web miner of Hellstrom to include crawler thread in the query search result to expedite identifying query results without sending to an queue for the expert search thread, the crawler thread, to process.
As per claim 4, Hellstrom in view of Nad and further in view of Dittli teaches the method of claim 3, wherein a related search term for association with the guided link thread is suggested via the user interface (See Hellstrom: [0018], generating at least one new content based query term based upon analyzing the search results, updating the query terms based upon at least one new content-based query term. Th updated term teaches the suggested by the user; and Dittli: the proposed system and method make it possible to control a user interface such that a user is prompted to enter exactly and exclusively the rating values for those quality indicators used for measuring the effectiveness of knowledge transfer for the selected areas of expertise).
As per claim 10, Hellstrom in view of Nad and further in view of Dittli teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
providing attribution to an expert associated with the guided link thread along with the control for accessing the guided link thread or along with the details of the guided link thread (See Nad: Fig. 5 and [0045], the discussion thread web page to which Link 1 points is a discussion forum showing details of the search thread including nine posts by four authors, the latest of which was received on March 17. The time of day can also be displayed if available. When a user selects Link 1, for example, the web browser opens the discussion thread web page to which Link 1 points; and Dittli: [0036], The amount of estimated maximum time savings represents an expert opinion of the maximum time savings that can be expected in the selected areas of expertise after "delivery" of the instance of knowledge transfer.).
As per claim 11, Hellstrom in view of Nad and further in view of Dittli teaches the method of claim 10 wherein the attribution includes an expert name, expert contact information, an expert biography, a link to an expert webpage, or a link to a webpage of a business associated with the expert (See Nad: Fig. 5 and [0045], the discussion thread web page to which Link 1 points is a discussion forum showing details of the search thread including nine posts by four authors, the latest of which was received on March 1 7. The time of day can also be displayed if available. When a user selects Link 1, for example, the web browser opens the discussion thread web page to which Link 1 points; and Dittli: [0029] The expert will understand, that it is also possible to arrange the preparatory steps P1 to P4 in a different sequence, for example, P4 could be executed before step P3, or the area of expertise to which a set of quality indicators is to be assigned could be specified before execution of P2.).
As per claim 12, Hellstrom in view of Nad and further in view of Dittli teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the details of the search thread include additional information created or authored by an expert associated with the search thread in addition to the network links (See Nad: Fig. 5 and [0045], the discussion thread web page to which Link 1 points is a discussion forum showing details of the search thread including nine posts by four authors, the latest of which was received on March 1 7. The time of day can also be displayed if available. When a user selects Link 1, for example, the web browser opens the discussion thread web page to which Link 1 points. Using outlinks located on the discussion thread web page, the user can navigate to other posts in the thread; and Dittli: [0029] The expert will understand, that it is also possible to arrange the preparatory steps P1 to P4 in a different sequence, for example, P4 could be executed before step P3, or the area of expertise to which a set of quality indicators is to be assigned could be specified before execution of P2).
As per claim 17, Hellstrom in view of Nad and further in view of Dittli teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the annotation text comprises a guide for the search thread that is generated based on text extracted from the one or more destinations associated with the plurality of network links (See Hellstrom: Fig. 17 and [0093], the deep web miner retrieves the results page of the search and analyzes the page information for relevant content and, the results from the executed search are available than can be displayed on the exemplary result page is listed by annotations, such as CDC Anthrax, CBER – Anthrax, Anthrax, .. based on the content associated with the plurality of network links; and Dittli: [0029] The expert will understand, that it is also possible to arrange the preparatory steps P1 to P4 in a different sequence, for example, P4 could be executed before step P3, or the area of expertise to which a set of quality indicators is to be assigned could be specified before execution of P2).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Hellstrom in view of Nad, as applied to claims 1, 5-8, 13-16 and 18-20 above, and further in view of
Celik et al.: "METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DISPLAYING CONTEXTUAL ROTATING ADVERTISEMENTS", (U.S. Patent US 8595633 B2, DATE PUBLISHED 2013-11-26; and DATE FILED 2005-10-31, hereafter "Celik").
As per claim 9, Hellstrom in view of Nad does not explicitly teach the method of claim 8, further comprising: displaying an advertisement with the set of results.
On the other hand, as an analogous art on data searching and extracting, Celik teaches displaying an advertisement with the set of results (See Celik: col. 20, lines 50-64, displaying of a different one of the qualified advertisements from the single advertiser comprises rotating the more than one of the qualified advertisements, such that only a first advertisement from the single advertiser is displayed at the particular location on the page including results from search query, and only a second advertisement from the single advertiser is displayed at that particular location on the page provided in response to the second receipt, the second advertisement being different than the first advertisement; wherein the displayed qualified advertisements each comprise a link configured to initiate the display of a plurality of the single advertiser's business locations on a map when the user interacts with the link).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's application was filed to combine Celik’s teaching with Hellstrom in view of Nad reference because Celik is dedicated to providing advertising content over a computer network and selecting relevant advertisements for limited advertisement spaces, Nad is dedicated to Internet search engines presenting search results including posts to discussion forums and Hellstrom is dedicated to selectively capturing network accessible information including content and metadata and the further combined teaching would have allowed Hellstrom in view of Nad users efficiently access web content via listings based on categories associated with search results.
Hellstrom in view of Nad and further in view of Celik further teaches:
displaying a second advertisement with the details of the guided link thread (See Celik: col. 20, lines 50-64, displaying of a different one of the qualified advertisements from the single advertiser comprises rotating the more than one of the qualified advertisements, such that only a first advertisement from the single advertiser is displayed at the particular location on the page including results from search query, and only a second advertisement from the single advertiser is displayed at that particular location on the page provided in response to the second receipt, the second advertisement being different than the first advertisement; wherein the displayed qualified advertisements each comprise a link configured to initiate the display of a plurality of the single advertiser's business locations on a map when the user interacts with the link),
wherein a party providing the set of results is compensated for displaying the advertisement and the second advertisement (See Celik: col. 20, lines 50-64, displaying of a different one of the qualified advertisements from the single advertiser comprises rotating the more than one of the qualified advertisements, such that only a first advertisement from the single advertiser is displayed at the particular location on the page including results from search query, and only a second advertisement from the single advertiser is displayed at that particular location on the page provided in response to the second receipt, the second advertisement being different than the first advertisement; wherein the displayed qualified advertisements each comprise a link configured to initiate the display of a plurality of the single advertiser's business locations on a map when the user interacts with the link).
Related Prior Arts
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the PTO-892 Notice of Reference Cited.
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. SEE MPEP 2141.02 [R-5] VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984) In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201, 73 USPQ2d 1141, 1146 (Fed. Cir. 2004). >See also MPEP §2123.
In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUEN S LU whose telephone number is (571)272-4114. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8-19, Mid-Flex 2 hours.
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, Mr. Aleksandr Kerzhner can be reached on 571-270-1760. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
KUEN S LU /Kuen S Lu/
Art Unit 2165
Primary Patent Examiner
June 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights