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 .
Priority
The effective filing date is based upon provisional application 62/580495 filed November 2, 2017. The use of artificial intelligence is not sufficiently supported in provisional application 62/437324.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 1-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 22 and 28 of Sherwin et al., US 11,087,389.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the rejected claims achieve a non-distinct outcome using the same computing structures.
Rejected claim 9 (represents claim 1)
Parent claim 22 (represents claim 1)
A method for operating a message system, the method comprising:
A method, the method comprising;
hosting multiple websites on a website building system (WBS);
WBS to host multiple websites
creating an actionable widget card (AWC) associated with a product of a website of said multiple websites, said AWC implementing at least e-commerce related operations for said product between at least one of said WBS and said website, said website and a user of said website, and between said user of said website and a second user of said WBS;
creating at least one actionable widget card associated with a website building system (WBS), wherein said widget card implements at least e-commerce related operations for a product, said creating comprising: storing parameters for said multiple websites said website and at least one user of said website and between said user and a second user of said WBS.
applying artificial intelligence techniques to accumulate information about user behavior and preferences across said multiple websites and product similarities over said multiple websites; and providing, by said AI analyzer, product classifications and user recommendations to said card creator for input to said AWC.
28. The method according to claim 27 analyzing and accumulating information based on artificial intelligence regarding said user insights, said website behavior of said user, activity history of said user and preferences of said user.
matching said product with at least one like product having a similar classification
Closest US Patent/US Pre-Grant Publication
Jenks, US 10,505,875 IDS filed December 31, 2025 and considered, remains the closest prior art. Forward/backward citations of Jenks failed to reveal closer prior art. AI tools, More Like This Document (MLTD) and Similarity, failed to reveal closer prior art. Jenks alone or in combination with other cited prior art fails to teach and/or suggest the combination of methods as claimed.
Closest Non-Patent Literature
Kokil, IDS filed December 31, 2025 and considered, is the closest non-patent literature. Kokil alone or in combination with other cited prior art fails to teach and/or suggest the combination of methods as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT M POND whose telephone number is (571)272-6760. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30 AM-6:30 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, Maria-Teresa Thein can be reached at 571-272-6764. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
/ROBERT M POND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3688 September 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights