`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`14/607,686
`
`01/28/2015
`
`MARK UNAK
`
`CU—100219
`
`1049
`
`”4057
`
`7590
`
`05W”
`
`FLENER 1P LAW, LLC
`77 West Washington Street
`Suite 800
`
`Chicago, IL 60602
`
`
`
`
`WEINER, AR ‘LLE E
`
`3625
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`05/19/2017
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`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.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`info @ fleneriplaw.c0m
`fleneriplaw_d0cketing @ cardinal-ip.c0m
`zflener @ fleneriplaw.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 14/607,686 UNAK ET AL.
`
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`AIA (First Inventorto File)
`Office Action Summary
`
`3625ARIELLE WEINER $233
`
`-- 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 01/28/2015.
`[I A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)lX| This action is non-final.
`2a)I:| 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.
`
`3) I] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`2) E Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/Osb)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date 05/29/2015.
`4) D Other: —-
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20170504
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)|XI Claim(s) M is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`6 III Claim s) _ is/are allowed.
`s M is/are rejected.
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`) )
`
`_
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`9)|:l Claim(s
`)
`* 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 PF"I-Ifeedback{<‘buspto.qov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:I The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)|Z| The drawing(s) filed on 01/28/2015 is/are: a)IXI 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.
`
`Attach ment(s)
`
`
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 2
`
`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 in reply to the original application filed on 01/28/2015.
`
`Claim(s) 1-21 is/are rejected.
`
`Claim(s) 1-21 is/are currently pending and have been examined.
`
`35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
`
`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.
`
`The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claims 8-14 are directed
`
`to a computer readable medium. Claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent
`
`with the specification during proceedings before the USPTO. See In re Zletz, 893.2d 319 (Fed. Cir.
`
`1989). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium typically
`
`covers forms of non-transitory media and transitory propaganda signals per se in view of the ordinary and
`
`customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is silent. See MPEP
`
`2111.01. Signals per se are non-statutory subject matter, therefore claims 8-14 are non-statutory. See In
`
`re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (See Kappos Memo dated January 26, 2010).
`
`Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a
`
`judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without
`
`significantly more.
`
`Claims 1-21 are directed to an abstract idea (judicial exception).
`
`Representative claim 1 broadly claims a computer-implemented method for creating a catalog
`
`from information from another catalog. Specifically claim 1 requires receiving information from an
`
`electronic catalog, processing product infmmatéon from the electronic catalog, associating product
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 3
`
`information from one catalog to predefined "cations
`
`{:3
`
`t another catalog, and mass-ping a gorduct from one
`
`catalog to a section of another catalog. The limitations of claim 1 represent concepts similar to those
`
`found by courts to be abstract.
`
`The concepts recited in claim 1 also represent "an idea 'of itself'" as they represent an idea
`
`standing alone such as an uninstantiated concept, plan or scheme, as well as a mental process (thinking)
`
`that "can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper” [see USPTO July 2015
`
`Update to Subject Matter Eligibility, section III (0)]. Specifically, the concepts recited in claim 1 seek to
`
`receive information from one catalog and proceed to process, associate, and map said information to
`
`form another catalog for display. These concepts are similar to those analyzed in Electric Power Group
`
`in which the courts found concepts related to collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain
`
`results of the collection and analysis to be abstract [see Electric Power Group, LLC, v. Alstom, 830
`
`F.3d 1350, 119 U.S.P.Q.2d 1739 (Fed. Cir. 2016)].
`
`Additionally, the processes of claim 1, represent process that could be readily performed in the
`
`human mind or by a human using a pen and paper.
`
`Under Step 28 of the Mayo framework, the Examiner acknowledges that the claims contain
`
`additional limitations (e.g. computing device). Although reciting additional elements, the additional
`
`elements merely act as an attempt to further define the field of use of the abstract idea, thus attempting to
`
`generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment e.g. computing
`
`networks and/or the internet. Additionally, the additional limitations recited in the claims are recited in a
`
`broad manner specified at a high level of generality. Similar to those functions cited in Electric Power
`
`Group, claim 1 recites functions without specifying even arguably new physical components or specifying
`
`processes defined other than by the functions themselves. The claimed functions can be carried out in
`
`existing computers long in use, no new machinery being necessary. Claim 1 merely assumes the
`
`availability of physical components for collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of
`
`the collection and analysis [see Electric Power Group, LLC, v. Alstom, 830 F.3d 1350, 119 U.S.P.Q.2d
`
`1739 (Fed. Cir. 2016)].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 4
`
`As an additional consideration, the additional limitations recited in claim 1 do not amount to
`
`significantly more than the abstract idea itself since the additional elements are merely recited in a
`
`generic manner and operate using well-understood, routine and conventional functions [see USPTO July
`
`2015 Update to Subject Matter Eligibility, section IV, pg. 7], such as
`
`.
`
`performing repetitive calculations (e.g. associating product identifiers to a catalog
`
`section)
`
`.
`
`receiving, processing, and storing data (e.g. receiving information from an electronic
`
`oataiog, processing; product intoririation, associating; product intoririation, and mapping
`
`a product)
`
`.
`
`receiving or transmitting data over a network (e.g. receiving information from an
`
`eiecironic catalog)
`
`.
`
`automating mental tasks (e.g. receiving information from an eieotronic cataiog,
`
`processing product information, associating product information, and mapping a
`
`pro-:iuot)
`
`Even considered as an ordered combination, the additional limitations of claim 1 do not add
`
`anything further than when looking at the elements taken individually. As a whole, the claim simply
`
`recites an abstract idea and instructions to “apply it” on generic computer specified at a high level of
`
`generality.
`
`Thus, under Step 28 of the Mayo framework, representative claim 1 does not recite additional
`
`elements which result in significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Claim 1
`
`is therefore ineligible.
`
`Dependent claims 2-7 add little, if anything, to the eligibility of claim 1.
`
`For example, claims 2-7 merely recite more complexities descriptive of the abstract idea that may
`
`be used in conjunction with those recited in claim 1. Such complexities do not provide additional elements
`
`in addition to the abstract ideas themselves.
`
`Thus, claims 2-7 are ineligible for at least similar reasons discussed above.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 5
`
`Lastly, the analysis above applies to all statutory categories of invention. Although literally
`
`invoking a computer program product and a computing system, claims 8-14 and 15-21, respectively,
`
`remain broadly and generally defined, with the claimed functionality paralleling that of process claim 1. As
`
`such, claims 8-21 are rejected under at least similar rationale as discussed above.
`
`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, 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 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
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`Claim 1-2, 5-9, 12-16, and 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
`
`over Wilmsen et al. (US 6,578,030 B1), hereinafter Wilmsen, in view of Dom et al. (US 7,885,859
`
`BZ), hereinafter Dom.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Acton discloses a computer-implemented method, executed on a computing
`
`device, comprising:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 6
`
`-receiving an electronic distributor catalog that defines a plurality of products offered by a product
`
`distributor (Wilmsen, see at least: "an office supply procurement system may contain office supply
`
`catalogs from several different office supply vendors or manufacturers" Col. 1 Ln. 20-22)
`
`- processing a first product, chosen from the plurality of products defined Within the electronic
`
`distributor catalog (Wilmsen, see at least: “initially items are selected for conversion. The selection of the
`
`items can he made on the basis of a search through the first catalog. Typicatly alt items wiil be setecteo,
`
`tom/ever, the seiectioh witt depend on the intended use of the catatog” Col. 3 Ln. 53-57 in accordance
`
`with “it is presentiy preferred that the conversion be performed on each item, one item at a time" Coi. 4
`
`Ln. 5—?)
`
`-associating the one or more identifiers for the first product With a target section of a master
`
`catalog, Wherein the master catalog is divided into a plurality of predefined sections from Which the target
`
`section is chosen (Wilmsen, see at least: "The invention may aiso he applied to catalogs with multiote
`
`categories or muitipie levels of categories or with any other structure of descriptive characteristics that are
`
`associated with each item " Col. 4 Ln. 1-4 as well as “seiected item is then checked against a tattte that
`
`contains the conversion intormation to go from the first catalog format to the second catatcg format 34. it
`
`is presently preferred that the conversion be performed on each item, one item at a time” Col. 4 Ln. 5~9
`
`and “A straighttorwaro conversion is to change the value for an attribute or catet cry for a particular item
`
`to a ditterent value for the same attribute or category for the item” Cot. 4 Ln. 3362 Examiner notes that
`
`the identifiers tor the first product are the attributes and the association of the identitiers is the co version
`
`of the attributes)
`
`-mapping the first product, chosen from the plurality of products defined Within the electronic
`
`distributor catalog, to the target section of the master catalog (Wilmsen, see at least: "The first catalog
`
`may provide a singte category “Batipoint Pens," while the second cataiog inciudes “Baiipoiht Pens” as a
`
`subcategory to “Pens” which is a subcategory to “Office Sueoties.” in this case, there is a one-to-one
`
`mapping for the items with the category vatue “Baiipolnt Pens” into ail three of the tiered categories in the
`
`second catalog. Accordingly, based on the category vaiue “Battpoirtt Pens,” the table will specify a
`
`mapping of the value “Iaiiooint Pens" into the first tier category, “Pens" into the second tier category and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 7
`
`“Cities; Supplies” into the third tier category" Col. 4 Ln. 52-62 Examiner notes that the product “Ballpoint
`
`Pens” is mapped into the target section of “pens”)
`
`Wilmsen does not explicitly disclose:
`
`-to extract one or more identifiers for the product
`
`Wilmsen discloses selecting products based on the needs specific to the catalog where the
`
`“vaiues for the seteeted items are retrieved from the catalog 232.
`
`in a preferred embodiment, each item in
`
`the catalog has a value for severet attributes, such as price, cotcr, supplier, part number, weight, size,
`
`name, and a value for a category such as pens" (Col. 3 Ln. 63—67}. These values identify each individual
`
`product.
`
`Dom, however, discloses to extract one or more identifiers for the product (Dom, see at least:
`
`"The lexical analysis takes the raw document (i.e. the product record in our application) as input and
`
`produces a stream of tokens and possibly a set of non-text data field values. A token corresponds to a
`
`word, a phrase, a punctuation mark, or a morphological word stem (more generally "lexeme"),
`
`etc....Feature calculation (a.k.a. "extraction") operates on the token stream and non-text data to produce
`
`numerical, binary and categorical features. The numerical value of a feature is usually calculated based
`
`on the frequency that a feature appears in a document, e.g., TF or TFIDF. A document is usually
`
`represented by a feature vector (set of feature values)." Col 13 Ln. 21 -26 & 28-34)
`
`It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to
`
`have included the extraction of one or more identifiers for a first product, as taught by Dom, in the
`
`computer-implemented method of Wilmsen in order to ensure a customer receives the best information
`
`available, data that represents an offer to sell a particular product (see Dom, Col. 2 Ln. 2-10).
`
`Regarding claim 2, Wilmsen in view of Dom disclose the computer-implemented method of
`
`claim 1.
`
`Wilmsen does not explicitly disclose:
`
`- wherein the one or more identifiers for the first product include a product type and associating
`
`the one or more identifiers for the first product with a target section of the master catalog includes:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 8
`
`reviewing historical / current mappings of similar product types within the master catalog to associate the
`
`one or more identifiers for the first product with the target section
`
`Wilmsen discloses identifiers of a product as “vaiuee for the seiected items; are retrieved from the
`
`cataiog 32. in a preferred embodiment, each item in the cataicg has a vaiue for several attributes, such
`
`as price, coier, supplier, part number, weight, size, name, and a vaiue for a categery such as; pens” (Cat.
`
`:3 Ln. 63—67)
`
`Dom, however, teaches wherein the one or more identifiers for the first product include a product
`
`type and associating the one or more identifiers for the first product with a target section of the master
`
`catalog includes: reviewing historical / current mappings of similar product types within the master catalog
`
`to associate the one or more identifiers for the first product with the target section (Dom, see at least:
`
`"Once a product offer record has been assigned a target category in quality assurance 110, the product-
`
`to-category assignment is added to the training set 112, which is used in the training/learning 114 of the
`
`categorizer 102 to improve the accuracy of future automated assignments made by the categorizer 102"
`
`Col. 5 Ln. 42-47 wherein the trainer/learner is utilized to set values for the "the Naive Bayes model to
`
`determine the target category for a product offer record. The classifier may provide, as input to the Naive
`
`Bayes model, a "text“ parameter and "special“ parameters. The text parameter may include, for example,
`
`text from various text fields within the product offer record. Those text fields may include a title field, a
`
`description field, and a merchant category field" Col. 6 Ln. 1-8 Dom Examiner notes that the merchant
`
`category field refers to the product type)
`
`It would have been obvious for one of ordinary at the time the invention was filed to have included
`
`the use of previously mapped product types as a way of associating identifiers to categories, as taught by
`
`Dom, in the computer-implemented method of Wilmsen in view of Dom because it allows for improved
`
`accuracy of future automated assignments (see Dom Col 5 Ln. 45-47).
`
`Regarding claim 5, Wilmsen in view of Dom disclose the computer-implemented method of
`
`claim 1.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Wilmsen further discloses:
`
`Page 9
`
`- processing additional products, chosen from the plurality of products defined Within the
`
`electronic distributor catalog (Wilmsen, see at least: “initially items are selected for conversion. The
`
`selection of the items can be made on the basis of a search through the first catalog. Typicaiiy aii items
`
`wiii be seiected, however, the seiection wiil depend on the intended use of the catalog” Col. 3 Ln. 53-57)
`
`- associating the one or more identifiers for each of the additional products With one or more
`
`target sections of the master catalog (Wilmsen, see at least: “Initially items are selected for
`
`conversion...typical|y all items will be selected" Col. 3 Ln. 53-55 and "The invention may aiso be appiied
`
`to cataiogs with rttuitipie categories or multipie ieveis of categories or with any other structure of
`rx'
`
`scriptive characteristics that are associated with each item " Col. 4 Ln. 1-4 as well as “seiecteo item is
`
`it}
`
`then checked against a tabie that contains the conversion intormatior to go from the first cataiog format to
`
`the second cataiog tormat 34. it is presently preterred that the conversion be performed on each item,
`
`one item at a time” Cot. 4 Ln. S—Q and “A straightforward conversion is to change the vaiue for an attribute
`
`or category for a particular item to a ditterent vaiue tor the same attribute or category for the item” Got. 4
`
`Ln. 30—32 Examiner notes that the identifiers tor the first product are the attributes and the association ot
`
`the identifiers is the cor version of the attributes)
`
`- mapping the additional products, chosen from the plurality of products defined Within the
`
`electronic distributor catalog, to the one or more target sections of the master catalog (Wilmsen, see at
`
`least: “Initially items are selected for conversion...typical|y all items will be selected" Col. 3 Ln. 53-55 and
`
`"The first cataiog may provide a singie category “Baiipoint Pens,” white the second cataiog inciudes
`
`“Baiipoint Pens" as a subcategory to “Pens” which is a subcategory to “Office Suppiies.” in this case,
`
`there is a one--to--ene mapping for the items with the category vaiue “Baitpoint Pens” into ait three of the
`
`tiered categories in the second oataiog. Accordingiy, based on the category vaiue “Baitpoint Pens," the
`
`tahie wiii specify a mapping of the vaiue “Baitpeint Pens” into the first tier category, “Pens” into the second
`
`tier category and “Office Suppiies” into the third tier category" Col. 4 Ln. 52-62 Examiner notes that the
`
`product “Ballpoint Pens” is mapped into the target section of “pens”)
`
`Wilmsen does not explicitly disclose:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 10
`
`- to extract one or more identifiers for each of the additional products
`
`Wilmsen discloses selecting products based on the needs specific to the catalog where the
`
`“values for the selected items are retrieved from the catalog 32. in a preferred embodiment, each item in
`
`the catalog has a value for several attributes, such as price, color, supplier, part number, weight, size,
`
`name, and a value fer a categery such as pens" (Gel. 3 Ln. 63—67). These vaiues identify each individual
`
`product.
`
`Dom, however, discloses to extract one or more identifiers for each of the additional products
`
`(Dom, see at least: "The lexical analysis takes the raw document (i.e. the product record in our
`
`application) as input and produces a stream of tokens and possibly a set of non-text data field values. A
`
`token corresponds to a word, a phrase, a punctuation mark, or a morphological word stem (more
`
`generally "lexeme"), etc....Feature calculation (a.k.a. "extraction") operates on the token stream and non-
`
`text data to produce numerical, binary and categorical features. The numerical value of a feature is
`
`usually calculated based on the frequency that a feature appears in a document, e.g., TF or TFIDF. A
`
`document is usually represented by a feature vector (set of feature values)." Col 13 Ln. 21 -26 & 28-34)
`
`It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to
`
`have included the extraction of one or more identifiers for each of the additional product, as taught by
`
`Dom, in the computer-implemented method of Wilmsen in order to ensure a customer receives the best
`
`information available, data that represents an offer to sell a particular product by a particular party must
`
`be obtained (see Dom, Col. 2 Ln. 2-10).
`
`Regarding claim 6, Wilmsen in view of Dom disclose the computer-implemented method of
`
`claim 1.
`
`Wilmsen further discloses:
`
`- wherein the electronic distributor catalog is provided in a format chosen from the group
`
`consisting of: a spreadsheet format and XML format (Wilmsen, see at least: "The catalog constitutes a list
`
`of items and an associated description of each item. The catalog can be in the format of a database or
`
`any other electronic format, such as a spreadsheet or text" Col. 2 Ln. 44-47)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 11
`
`Regarding claim 7, Wilmsen in view of Dom disclose the computer-implemented method of
`
`claim 1.
`
`Wilmsen further discloses:
`
`- wherein the master catalog is an online catalog (Wilmsen, see at least: "process is preferably
`
`used to create one electronic catalog from an existing electronic catalog" Col 3 Ln. 33-35)
`
`Regarding claim 8, Wilmsen discloses computer program product residing on a computer
`
`readable medium having a plurality of instructions stored thereon which, when executed by a processor,
`
`cause the processor to perform operations comprising:
`
`- receiving an eiectrcrtic distributor cataiog that detines a oirrrarity ot‘ products otterec' try a product
`
`distributor (Wilmsen, see at least: "an office supply procurement system may contain office supply
`
`catalogs from several different office supply vendors or manufacturers" Col. 1 Ln. 20-22)
`
`- processing a first product, chosen from the pier iity of products defined within the electronic
`
`distributor catalog, (Wilmsen, see at least: “initially items are selected for conversion. The selection of the
`
`items can be made on the basis of a search through the first catalog. 'i'ypicaiiy aii items wili be selected,
`
`however, the seiectien wiii depend on the intended use of the cataiog” Col. 3 Ln. 53-57 in accordance
`
`with “it is presentiy preferred that the conversion he performed on each item, one item at a time” Got. 4
`
`Ln. 5—7)
`
`- associating tire one or more identifiers for the first product with a target section of a master
`
`eeteieg, wherein the master catatcg is divided into a eiuraiity of predefined sections from which the target
`
`section is chosen (Wilmsen, see at least: "The invention may arise he appiied to cataiogs with muitiple
`
`categories or muiticie ievels ot categories or with any other structure of descriptive characteristics that are
`
`associated with each item " Col. 4 Ln. 1-4 as well as “seiected item is then checked against a tabie that
`
`contains the conversion information to go from the first catalog format to the second cataiog format 34. it
`
`is presently preferred that the conversion be performed on each item, one item at a time" Get. 4 Ln. 5—9
`
`and “A straightforward conversion is to change the vaiue for an attribute or category for a par‘ticuiar item
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 12
`
`to a different vaiue for the same attribute or category for the item” Got. 4 Ln. 30-32 Examiner notes that
`
`the identifiers for the first product are the attributes and the association of the identifiers is the conversion
`
`of the attributes)
`
`- mapping the first product, chosen from the piuraiitv or” products defined within the eieotronic
`
`distributor cataiog, to the target section of the master catalog (Wilmsen, see at least: "The first cataiog
`
`may provide a sihgie category “Baiiooiht Pens," white the second cataiog inciudes “Baiipoiht Pens" as a
`
`subcategory to “Pens" which is a subcategory to “Office Suppiies.” in this case, there is a one—to—one
`
`mapping for the items with the category vaiue “Baiipoint Pens" into eii three of the tiered categories in the
`
`second cateiog. Accordingiy, based on the category vaiue “Baiipoiht Pens," the tabie wiii specify a
`
`mapping of the vaiue “Baiipoint Pens" into the first tier category, “Pens” into the second tier category and
`
`“Office Suppiies” into the third tier category” Col. 4 Ln. 52-62 Examiner notes that the product “Ballpoint
`
`Pens” is mapped into the target section of “pens”)
`
`Wilmsen does not explicitly disclose:
`
`- to extract one or more identifiers for the pro-duct
`
`Wilmsen discloses selecting products based on the needs specific to the catalog where the
`
`“vaiues tor the seiected items are retrieved from the ca‘tetog 32. in a preferred embodiment, each item in
`
`the catalog has a value for severat attributes, such as price, color, supplier, part number, weight, size,
`
`name, and a vaiue for a category such as pens” (Got. 3 Ln. 83—67). These vaiues identify each individual
`
`product.
`
`Dom, however, discloses to extract one or more identifiers for the product (Dom, see at least:
`
`"The lexical analysis takes the raw document (i.e. the product record in our application) as input and
`
`produces a stream of tokens and possibly a set of non-text data field values. A token corresponds to a
`
`word, a phrase, a punctuation mark, or a morphological word stem (more generally "lexeme"),
`
`etc....Feature calculation (a.k.a. "extraction") operates on the token stream and non-text data to produce
`
`numerical, binary and categorical features. The numerical value of a feature is usually calculated based
`
`on the frequency that a feature appears in a document, e.g., TF or TFIDF. A document is usually
`
`represented by a feature vector (set of feature values)." Col 13 Ln. 21 -26 & 28-34)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/607,686
`
`Art Unit: 3625
`
`Page 13
`
`It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to
`
`have included the extraction of one or more identifiers for a first product, as taught by Dom, in the
`
`computer program product of Wilmsen in order to ensure a customer receives the best information
`
`available, data that represents an offer to sell a particular product (see Dom, Col. 2 Ln. 2-10).
`
`Regarding claim 9, Wimsen in view of Dom disclose the computer program product of claim 8.
`
`Wilmsen does not explicitly disclose:
`
`- wherein the one or more identifiers fer the first product inoiude a product type and the
`
`instructions for associating the one or more identifiers for the first product with a target section of the
`
`rnaster oetaiog inciude instructions tor: reviewing historicai / current mappings of siniiiar product types
`
`within the master cateiog to associate the one or more identifiers for the first product with the target
`
`section
`
`Wilmsen discloses identifiers of a product as “vaiues for the seiected items are retrieved from the
`
`cataiog 32. in a preferred embodiment, each item in the cateicg hes a vaiue tor severai attributes, such
`
`as price, coior, suppiier, part number, weight, size, name, and a veiue for a category such as pens” (Coi.
`
`03
`
`Li‘l. 83-67
`
`Dom, however, teaches wherein the one or more identifiers fer the first product inciude a product
`
`type and the instructions for associating the one or more identifiers tor the first product with a target
`
`section cf the master cateieg include instructions tor: reviewing historicai /’ current mappings of siniiier
`
`product types Within the master cetaiog to associate the one or more identifiers tor the first product wit
`
`the tergetsectien (Dom, see at least: "Once a product offer record has been assigned a target category in
`
`quality assurance 110, the product-to-category assignment is added to the training set 112, which is used
`
`in the training/learning 114 of the categorizer 102 to improve the accuracy of future automated
`
`assignments made by the categorizer 102" Col. 5 Ln. 42-47 wherein the trainer/learner is utilized to set
`
`values for the "the Naive Bayes model to determine the target category for a product offer record. The
`
`cla