`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`11/734,294
`
`04/12/2007
`
`Sihem Amer Yahia
`
`12729—243 (Y02108US00)
`
`9765
`
`BGLNahoo! Overture
`PO. BOX 10395
`CHICAGO, IL 60610
`
`DURAN, ARTHUR D
`
`ART UNIT
`
`3622
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`08/19/2016
`
`PAPER NUIVIBER
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`
` 11/734,294 YAHIA ET AL.
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`AIA (First Inventorto File)
`Office Action Summary
`
`3622ARTHUR DURAN first“
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`-
`-
`
`Status
`
`1)IXI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 8/4/16.
`[I A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|:| This action is non-final.
`2a)IZ| This action is FINAL.
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:I Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under EX parte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IXI C|aim(s) 1-3 5-9 13-1719-2124 27 and 32-39 is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`6 III Claim s) _ is/are allowed.
`
`1-3 5-9 13-17 19-21 24 27 32-39 is/are rejected.
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`htt
`://www.usoto. ov/ atents/init events"
`h/index.‘s
`
`
`
`
`
`or send an inquiry to PRI-Ifeedback{<‘buspto.qov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:I The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)|:I The drawing(s) filed on _ is/are: a)I:I accepted or b)I:I objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)I:I Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`b)I:I Some” c)I:I None of the:
`a)I:I All
`1.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.I:I Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PT0_413)
`1) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`—
`4) I:I Other'
`2) D Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date .
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20160818
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent
`
`provisions.
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Claims 1-3, 5-9, 13-17, 19-21, 24, 27, 32-39 have been examined.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are
`
`moot in view of the grounds of rejection. Note the new 103 rejection with the addition of
`
`the Loftus prior art. Also, note the following.
`
`On 8/4/2016, Applicant amended the independent claims 1, 13 (where the
`
`underline is the amended part):
`
`“defining a plurality of domains, each domain of the plurality of domains
`
`identifying a predefined user intent of a plurality of possible user intents, each domain
`
`having plurality of general predicates that relate to the plurality of domains;
`
`receiving bids from advertisers on a domain of the plurality of domains;
`
`matching the query to the domain of the plurality of domains based the
`
`predefined user intent, assigning a first set of keywords in the guery to at least one
`
`general predicate of the plurality of predicates, assigning a second set of kemords in
`
`the guery to domain specific predicates that are associated specifically with the domain,
`
`wherein the matching is performed by a computer system;”.
`
`And, Applicant's 8/4/16 Remarks address these amended features.
`
`Applicant’s Specification at the following places of the PG_Pub version was
`
`found helpful for understanding these features:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`“[0023] The query engine 12 is also in communication with the advertisement
`
`engine 16 allowing the query engine 12 to tightly integrate advertisements with the user
`
`query and search results. To more effectively select appropriate advertisements that
`
`match the user's interest and query intfl, the query engine 12 is configured to further
`
`analyze the text query 20 and generate a more sophisticated translated query 30. The
`
`
`query intent may be better categorized by defining a number of domains that model
`
`typical search scenarios. Typical scenarios may include looking for a hotel room,
`
`searching for a plane flight, shopping for a product, or similar scenarios.
`
`[0044] The architecture described also incorporates the ability to bid on a
`
`combination of domain, fields and terms. As described above, the domain may identify
`
`a predefined query m, such as a search for a hotel, insurance, or a laptop. Further,
`
`fields may be predefined to more specifically identify the desired product or service.
`
`The fields may correspond to the general and domain specific predicates.
`
`[0048] Two query scenarios are provided with regard to the bids provided in
`
`Table 1 above. The first query scenario is for a text query "Dell Laptop Black 30 GB
`
`Multimedia Speakers" and the second query scenario is for the text "Apple Laptop Black
`
`Multimedia Speakers". During query processing, certain of the text items may be
`
`analyzed to identify the domain, for example Domain: Laptop.”
`
`Hence, Examiner interprets that Applicant’s amended features can be interpreted
`
`as receiving a keyword query, determining what
`
`domain/category/type/class/intent/scenario/grouping that query belongs to, determining
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`if an advertiser bid on that domain/category/type/class/intent/scenario/grouping, and
`
`then displaying the appropriate ad based on the bidding.
`
`And, in regards to the new features of each domain having general predicates
`
`and domain specific predicates, Examiner found these parts of the Applicant’s Spec
`
`helpful (Applicant’s Figs. 3, 4 and the following from Applicant’s Spec):
`
`“[0025] Once a domain has been selected, the keywords may be analyzed to
`
`identify known predicates for a particular domain. Predicates are descriptive terms that
`
`further identify the product or service being sought by the user. Some predicates are
`
`general predicates that may apply to all domains, for example the quantity or price of
`
`the product or service. Other predicates are domain specific predicates and fall into
`
`M predefined categories for a particular domain. Referring to the "New York hotel
`
`August 23" text query example, once the domain is identified as the hotel domain,
`
`certain categories may be predefined that further identify the hotel stay sought,
`
`including for example the city, date, cost, etc. Accordingly, one possible format for the
`
`translated query may be provided below:
`
`[0026] This concept is further illustrated graphically in FIG. 3. Block 310
`
`represents the text query "New York Hotel August 3". The translated query is denoted
`
`by block 312. The domain is denoted by block 314 and is identified as the hotel
`
`domain. The keywords "New York", "Hotel", and "August 3" are also included in the
`
`translated query as noted by block 316. General predicates 318 may be identified from
`
`the text query or keywords including the date of stay "Aug. 3, 2006", the quantity (which
`
`may default to 1 for the hotel domain, could be identified by a phrase such as "2
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`rooms"), and the price range. Further, once the domain is identified as the hotel
`
`domain, domain specific predicates 320 can be further formatted for example the city
`
`and location (which may default to a value such as within 25 miles of the city center).”
`
`Hence, Applicant’s domain general predicates are considered things like price,
`
`quantity, color that could apply to multiple domains and domain specific predicates are
`
`predicates that apply to that particular domain.
`
`And, Zinn discloses defining a plurality of domains, each domain identifying a
`
`predefined scenario from a plurality of predefined scenarios (Zinn grouping and
`
`classifying keywords ([28, 46, 8, 9]);
`
`receiving bids from advertisers identifying a search to place an advertisement in
`
`an advertisement slot on a web page resulting from the search (Figs. 1, 2; [30, 32, 36,
`
`37, 49]);
`
`matching the query to the search and bid parameters based on the predefined
`
`search and bid parameters, wherein the matching is performed by a computer system
`
`(Figs. 1, 2; [30, 32, 36, 37, 49]).
`
`Zinn further discloses classification manager works with the bid management and
`
`search engine ([30, 38, 26]). Also, Zinn discloses different
`
`divisions/classifications/groups of keywords for different search engines ([46, 48, 49]).
`
`Zinn does not explicitly disclose each domain identifying a predefined search
`
`scenario from a plurality of predefined search scenarios; receiving bids from advertisers
`
`on a domain of the plurality of domains identifying a predefined search scenario to place
`
`an advertisement in an advertisement slot on a web page resulting from the predefined
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`search scenario; matching the query to the domain of the plurality of domains based on
`
`the predefined search scenario. However, Gottfurcht discloses these features.
`
`Gottfurcht discloses that an advertisers bids on a particular
`
`type/domain/category/scenario/intent ([87, 88], “[87]...
`
`In one embodiment, interactive
`
`television shopping network bases the order and level of sellers and advertisers in the
`
`navigation hierarchy on a set of factors including the M by an advertiser or seller for a
`
`category, search keyword, location, time of day, date and similar factors”). Gottfurcht
`
`further discloses taking a search keyword, determining the category of that keyword and
`
`presenting results in the determined category ([74] and also see [89]). Schiavi also
`
`discloses bid on a particular type/domain/category/ scenario/intent ([58]; claims 16, 17)
`
`and different search types ([51]) and searching for types ([67]). Hence, Gottfurcht
`
`discloses these features. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary
`
`skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add Gottfurcht’s bidding on
`
`categories/classifications/domains/scenarios/intents related to a search and presenting
`
`search results based on matching category to Zinn’s categories/classifications and
`
`bidding and presenting results based on bid to search match. One would have been
`
`motivated to do this in order to better bid for and present search results (as seen in Zinn
`
`and Gottfurcht).
`
`Also, Zinn does not explicitly disclose each domain having plurality of general
`
`predicates that relate to the plurality of domains or assigning a first set of keywords in
`
`the query to at least one general predicate of the plurality of predicates, assigning a
`
`second set of keywords in the query to domain specific predicates that are associated
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`specifically with the domain. However, Loftus 20100250535 (at least Loftus provisional
`
`60743256 was analyzed and shown to have 112 support for the domain, aspect, and
`
`predicate features) discloses each domain having plurality of general predicates that
`
`relate to the plurality of domains and assigning a first set of keywords in the query to at
`
`least one general predicate of the plurality of predicates, assigning a second set of
`
`keywords in the query to domain specific predicates that are associated specifically with
`
`the domain. Loftus discloses domains (Fig. 5) for Internet searches (Figs. 4, 7, 12, 14,
`
`19). And Loftus discloses receiving a query and then determining the keywords,
`
`category, and item specific parts (Fig. 14). And, Loftus discloses that there are
`
`classifications/domains and for different domains there are different domain rules and
`
`aspect rules (Fig. 9a, [73, 74, 91]). And, the domain rules read on Applicant's claimed
`
`domain specific predicates. And, the aspect rules read on Applicant's claimed general
`
`predicates. Loftus uses aspect/general predicates such as color, brand. And, the
`
`system analyzes the predicates in the query (Fig. 10). And, as seen in Fig. 10, the
`
`predicate analysis can be for aspects, or general predicates in Applicant's claim
`
`language, that would be across multiple domains such as color (Fig. 10). And, Loftus at
`
`Fig. 34 further shows how a specific domain of shoes would have certain aspects, or
`
`general predicates, that apply to it such as color, brand, style (Fig. 34). And Loftus
`
`shows a domain dictionary for ([113]) and Loftus shows that the domain dictionary has
`
`domain specific rules and domain aspect rules ([154, 73]). Domain rules involve
`
`analysis of the query for words/predicates and applying rules specific to that domain
`
`([55, 73, 91]). And, the domain rules read on Applicant's claimed domain specific
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`predicates. And, the aspect rules read on Applicant's claimed general predicates.
`
`Further see Loftus at ([91, 116, 127, 129, 149, 215]) for further description. Therefore, it
`
`would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to add Loftus searches for Internet products/information and each domain
`
`having plurality of general predicates that relate to the plurality of domains and
`
`assigning a first set of keywords in the query to at least one general predicate of the
`
`plurality of predicates, assigning a second set of keywords in the query to domain
`
`specific predicates that are associated specifically with the domain to Zinn’s searches
`
`for Internet products/information and Zinn’s classifications and keywords. One would
`
`have been motivated to do this in order to better perform Internet searches for Internet
`
`products/information.
`
`And, the above is added to the rejection.
`
`Also, in regards to the 101, the 101 is still found to apply. See the updated 101
`
`rejection following. Applicant's claim is found to be an Abstract idea comparable to
`
`some of the Abstract idea non-limiting examples. Also, Applicant has not stated or
`
`shown “significantly more” in Applicant’s Remarks. Hence, the 101 is still found to
`
`apply.
`
`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, or 365(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied
`
`with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35
`
`U.S.C. as follows.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention
`
`which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional
`
`application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent
`
`application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the
`
`requirements of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112. See Transco Products, Inc. v.
`
`Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
`
`The disclosure of the prior-filed Continuation in Part (CIP) application ,
`
`Application No. 11/595,585 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the
`
`manner provided by the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112 for one or more claims of this
`
`application. The parent CIP 11/595,585 does not support “channel advertisement”. The
`
`word channel does not occur in the parent CIP. Hence, the parent CIP does not
`
`support the current application. Hence, the priority date for the current application will
`
`be the filing date of this application which is 4/12/2007.
`
`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 1-3, 5-9, 13-17, 19—21, 24, 27, 32-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101
`
`because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (Le, a law of nature, a
`
`natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The Claims are
`
`directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Note the Abstract idea non-
`
`limiting example types of Fundamental Economic Practices, Certain Methods of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 10
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`Organizing Human Activity , Mathematical Relationships/Formulas, An Idea ‘Of Itself.
`
`(see July 2015 101 update ,link provided below). Note the illustrative and not limiting
`
`examples of abstract ideas with the July 2015 101 update (link provided below): “Using
`
`advertising as an exchange or currency; Displaying an advertisement in exchange for
`
`access to copyrighted media; Creating a contractual relationship; Hedging; Mitigating
`
`settlement risk; Processing loan information; Managing an insurance policy; Managing
`
`a game of bingo; Allowing players to purchase additional objects during a game;
`
`Generating rule-based tasks for processing an insurance claim; Tax-free investing;
`
`Arbitration; Structuring a sales force or marketing company; Using an algorithm for
`
`determining the optimal number of visits by a business representative to a client;
`
`Computing a price for the sale of a fixed income asset and generating a financial
`
`analysis output; A mental process that a neurologist should follow when testing a patient
`
`for nervous system malfunctions; Meal planning; Comparing information regarding a
`
`sample or test subject to a control or target data; Collecting and comparing known
`
`information; Comparing data to determine a risk level; Diagnosing an abnormal
`
`condition by performing clinical tests and thinking about the results; Obtaining and
`
`comparing intangible data; Comparing new and stored information and using rules to
`
`identify options; Using categories to organize, store and transmit information; Data
`
`recognition and storage; Organizing information through mathematical correlations; A
`
`formula for computing an alarm limit; A mathematical formula for hedging; Managing a
`
`stable value protected life insurance policy by performing calculations and manipulating
`
`the results; Reducing the amount of calculations in known and established
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 11
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`computations; An algorithm for calculating parameters indicating an abnormal condition;
`
`Computing a price for the sale of a fixed income asset and generating a financial
`
`analysis output; Calculating the difference between local and average data values”.
`
`These claims are directed to the abstract idea of receiving a query, defining
`
`domains, receiving bids, displaying an ad. This is similar to the non-limiting abstract
`
`idea examples above of: Using advertising as an exchange or currency; Creating a
`
`contractual relationship; Collecting and comparing known information; Obtaining and
`
`comparing intangible data; Comparing new and stored information and using rules to
`
`identify options; Using categories to organize, store and transmit information; Data
`
`recognition and storage. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are
`
`sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the
`
`additional elements are: (i) mere instructions to implement the idea on a computer,
`
`and/or (ii) recitation of generic computer structure that serves to perform generic
`
`computer functions that are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities
`
`previously known to the pertinent industry. Note the non-limiting examples of routine
`
`computer functions in the July 2015 update: performing repetitive calculations;
`
`receiving, processing, and storing data; electronically scanning or extracting data from a
`
`physical document; electronic recordkeeping; automating mental tasks, and receiving or
`
`transmitting data over a network, 9.9., using the Internet to gather data (see link below).
`
`Viewed separately or as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide
`
`meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of
`
`the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 12
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`idea itself. Therefore, the claim(s) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed
`
`to non-statutory subject matter.
`
`Please see the 35 USC 101 section at the Examination Guidance and Training
`
`Materials page on the USPTOgov website. The information is available at this
`
`webpage: “http://www.usgto.gov/patent/iaws—andregNations/examination“
`
`poiicy/examination—goidance~and—trainEng-materials”.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set
`forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and
`the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the
`invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.
`Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`Claims 1-3, 5-9, 13-17, 19-21, 24, 27, 32-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a)
`
`as being unpatentable over Zinn (2007/0118392) in view of Gottfurcht (20050021387) in
`
`view of Schiavi (20080126191) in view of Loftus (20100250535).
`
`Concerning Claim 1, Zinn teaches “A method for bidding on advertisements, the
`
`method comprising the steps of:
`
`a) defining a plurality of domains that correspond to a plurality of possible
`
`user intents (i.e. query utilizing keywords) (Fig. 1 and Fig. 6; [0026], [0027], [0028],
`
`[0032], [0034], [0046]);
`
`b) receiving bids from advertisers on a domain of the plurality of domains (Fig.3
`
`and Fig. 4; [0026], [0027], [0028], [0032], [0034], [0046]);
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 13
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`c) matching a query to the domain of the plurality of domains (i.e. classifications)
`
`(Fig. 1); [0026], [0027], [0028], [0032], [0034], [0046];
`
`d) determining whether to display an advertisement based on the domain (i.e.
`
`classifications) (Fig. 7, Fig. 8, Fig. 1; [0026], [0027], [0028], [0032], [0034], [0046]);
`
`e) generating an advertisement for display to the user” (Fig. 7, Fig. 8, Fig. 11;
`
`[0026], [0027], [0028], [0032], [0034], [0046]); and
`
`f) displaying the advertisement to the user” (Figs. 1-4, Fig. 6, Fig. 7, Fig. 8, Fig.
`
`11; [0026], [0027], [0028], [0032], [0034], [0046]).
`
`Additionally, in response to 11/9/2009 arguments, Zinn discloses an advertiser
`
`and also a searching user who submits a query thru a search engine (Figs. 1, 2; [2-5];
`
`and below citations):
`
`“[0032] The web analytics tool 306 and bid management system 304 are adapted
`
`to communicate with the search engine 308. The search engine is a conventional type
`
`such as an Internet search engine like those provided by Google, Microsoft Search or
`
`Yahoo.
`
`[0003] The present invention relates to a system and methods interfacing with
`
`Internet search engines.
`
`[0005] With the development of the Internet, a number of new business models
`
`for producing sales and generating revenue have been developed. For example,
`
`it is now commonplace for search engines to allow advertisers to purchase keywords
`
`and display their associated advertising in response to searches or queries on such
`
`keywords.”
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 14
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`Also, the prior art does disclose an advertiser bidding on categories or domains.
`
`Examiner notes that Applicant’s Specification discloses the advertiser bidding on
`
`keywords and/or domains/categories, “[9]... The advertisements may include bids, for
`
`example offers to advertise for certain domain, keywords, or combinations thereof for a
`
`predefined bid price.” (from PG_PUB version). And, Zinn discloses the advertiser
`
`bidding on keywords ([3, 37]). Zinn does not explicitly disclose the advertiser bidding
`
`on domains or categories. However, Zinn discloses that keywords are placed into
`
`classifications/categories which are functionally equivalent to Applicant’s domains ([9,
`
`26, 27, 28, 35, 38, 46]; Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; claims 1, 5; "[26]...The user 310 interacts
`
`with the classification manager 302 to select keywords, associate the keywords with a
`
`classification, and create advertising campaigns that will be described in detail below.;
`
`[0035] The classification and keyword repository 502 is a storage device for storing
`
`classifications, sub-classifications, classification names, keywords associated with a
`
`classification and other information associated with the classification...”). And, Zinn
`
`discloses that the bid management system can interact with the
`
`categories/classifications/domains (Figs. 3, 4):
`
`“[0009] The present invention overcomes the deficiencies and limitations of the
`
`prior art by providing a classification manager for managing keywords across multiple
`
`campaigns.
`
`In one embodiment, the system comprises a classification manager, a bid
`
`management system, a web analytics tool and a search engine. The classification
`
`manager interfaces with both the bid management system and the web analytics tool to
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 15
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`provide user interfaces for reviewing data about specific keywords across multiple
`
`campaigns.
`
`[0014] FIG. 4 is a block diagram of an embodiment of the system according to
`
`the present invention having a bid management system including the classification
`
`manager.
`
`[35]...The classification and keyword repository 502 is adapted for
`
`communication with the other components of the classification manager 302. The
`
`classification and keyword repository 502 can also be accessed by the web analytics
`
`tool 306 and bid management system 304.
`
`[0038] The classification creation module 508 is a software tool for creating a
`
`classification including different interfaces to solicit data from the user and to interact
`
`with the bid management system 304 and the search engine 308.”
`
`Hence, Zinn discloses bidding on keywords. And, Zinn discloses that keywords
`
`are placed into categories/classifications/domains. And, Zinn discloses that the
`
`categories/classifications/domains are connected to and interact with the bid
`
`management functions. Hence, since they are already connected and already interact,
`
`it is obvious that Zinn can bid on keywords and/or categories/classifications.
`
`As a further example of this, Gottfurcht discloses a searching user and an
`
`advertiser ([73, 74, 78, 88) and also discloses an advertiser bidding on keywords
`
`and/or categories/classification ([87, 88]). Also, Schiavi discloses a searching user and
`
`an advertiser (Abstract) and also discloses an advertiser bidding on keywords and/or
`
`categories/classification ([58]; claims 16, 17). Hence, it is obvious that Zinn can bid on
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 16
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`keywords and/or categories/classifications. One would be motivated to do this in order
`
`to better allow advertisers to target in a manner convenient or appropriate for them.
`
`Additionally, on 3/1/10, Applicant added features to the independent claims.
`
`Zinn discloses receiving a query from the user (Figs. 3, 4; [3, 5, 6]).
`
`Zinn discloses the advertiser bidding (Figs. 3, 4, “bid management system”; [37,
`
`49], “bid strategy”; claims 1, 5, “bid management system”). And, as noted above, the
`
`prior art combination renders obvious bidding on domains. Zinn further discloses
`
`placing particular ads related to particular searches ([30, 32]).
`
`Zinn teaches wherein the determination to display the advertisement is based on
`
`a bid price and a quality score (i.e. web analytics data) ([0027], [0049]; also, [0026],
`
`[0029], [0037], [0039], [0041]). Zinn does not explicitly disclose wherein the quality
`
`score is based on at least one of searcher preference or relevance score However,
`
`Gottfurcht discloses bidding on advertisements for individual searches ([87, 88, 89]) and
`
`Gottfurcht further discloses ranking ads based on ad relevance score related to
`
`relevance of time and location of ads or other relevance (claims 1, 21, 22, “ranking the
`
`content based on a bid amount, the bid amount correlated to the time and the location”,
`
`“ranking navigation options based on a one of merchant feedback and user feedback”;
`
`[88]). Gottfurcht also discloses tracking searcher preference ([68, 89, 91]). Therefore, it
`
`would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to add Gottfurchts relevance score to Zinns bids and quality measurements .
`
`One would have been motivated to do this in order to better place relevant ads before
`
`the user.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/734,294
`
`Page 17
`
`Art Unit: 3622
`
`Also, note that Zinn discloses that ad lists are old and well known ([6, 7]) and
`
`Gottfurcht discloses that ad lists are obvious ([87, 88, 90, 92]).
`
`Additionally, on 9/7/10, Applicant added the following new features to the
`
`independent claim 1: “wherein a bid of the bids relates to an advertisement channel”;
`
`and to independent claims 13, 19: “wherein a bid of the bids relates to an advertisement
`
`channel and the bid relates to all of the advertisements in a list that match the domain,
`
`where the list is displayed on a web page and includes a plurality of advertisements.”
`
`On 9/7/10, Applicant stated in Applicant’s arguments: “However, the claim refers
`
`to "the bid" in the singular that is related to the advertisement channel or, more
`
`specifically in claim 19, all advertisement in a list that match a domain. The cited
`
`references do not teach a single bid that is related to an advertisement channel or all
`
`advertisements in a list that match a domain. Therefore, the cited references do not
`
`teach the claimed invention...”.
`
`As guidance for how to interpret these features and bidding on an ad channel,
`
`Examiner turns to Applicant’s Spec at ([46, 51] and Fig. 9 and [20,71]). Based on
`
`Applicant's Spec, Examiner interprets these features to function as a bid to be the
`
`advertiser for a page or for a domain for the page.
`
`Zinn does not explicitly disclose wherein a bid of the bids relates to an
`
`advertisement channel and the bid relates to all of the advertisements in