`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`14/627,703
`
`02/20/2015
`
`MARK UNAK
`
`09/05/20”
`
`7590
`”4057
`FLENER 1P LAW, LLC
`77 West Washington Street
`Suite 800
`
`Chicago, IL 60602
`
`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
`
`RNEYDOCKETNO-—
`CU- 100221
`1909
`
`W
`
`KUJUNDZIQ DINO
`
`2179
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`09/05/2017
`
`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):
`
`fleneriplaw_d0cketing @ cardinal-ip.c0m
`zflener @ fleneriplaw.c0m
`info @ fleneriplaw.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 14/627,703 UNAK ET AL.
`
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`AIA (First Inventorto File)
`Office Action Summary
`
`2179DINO KUJUNDZIC $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 05/29/2017.
`[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.
`
`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 .
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20170824
`
`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.
`
`I )
`
`_
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`9)|:l Claim(s
`I
`* 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)|: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)|:l 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)
`
`
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/627,703
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2179
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This action is responsive to the following communication: Claim Amendments
`
`and Remarks filed on May 29, 2017. This action is made final.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Claims 1-21 are pending in the case; Claims 1, 8, and 15 are independent.
`
`In the Non-Final Rejection mailed on December 30, 2016 (see pgs. 2-4), Claims
`
`8-14 were rejected under 35 USC § 101 but Claim Amendments filed on May 29, 2017
`
`have rendered this rejection moot; in the Non-Final Rejection it was also noted that
`
`Claims 15-21 were interpreted as being directed to a computing system implemented at
`
`least in part in hardware — in Claim Amendments filed on May 29, 2017, independent
`
`Claim 15 was amended to explicitly recite that the computing system includes hardware.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`4.
`
`Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 4, as
`
`amended, recites “The computer-implemented method of claim wherein
`
`but it does
`
`not specify which Claim it is dependent upon. For the purposes of examination, it is
`
`presumed that Claim 4 depends from Claim 1.
`
`Appropriate correction is required.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`5.
`
`Applicant’s arguments with respect to 35 USC. § 103 Rejection of Claims 1-21
`
`(see Remarks filed May 29, 2017, pgs. 8-9), have been fully considered and are
`
`persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/627,703
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2179
`
`consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Sacco, as discussed
`
`below.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that
`
`form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
`
`A person shall be entitled to a patent unless —
`
`(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use,
`on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed
`invention.
`
`6.
`
`Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
`
`Giovanni Maria Sacco (hereinafter Sacco), “The intelligent e-store: easy
`
`interactive product selection and comparison,” Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE
`
`International Conference on E-Commerce Technology, published in 2005.
`
`As to independent Claim 1, Sacco teaches a eomputenimplemented method,
`
`executed on e oemputer, the computer~ implemented method comprising:
`
`a
`
`rendering a firstulevei menu for an oniine oataiog, wherein the iiistuievei rnenti
`
`defines a plurality of iiret~ievel categories (see Fig. 1, § xiii, showing the initial
`
`taxonomic summary).
`
`as
`
`associating a match quantity with each of the plurality of firstwlevei categories
`
`(see Fig. 1, § 4.1, showing associated quantity with eaoh category corresponding
`
`to e oeunt 0t items classified under each eategei‘y}.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/627,703
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2179
`
`8
`
`receiving e tiret reeeehse trem a user cf the ehiihe eeteicg that defines a eeieeted
`
`tiret~ievei eetegery, cheeeri irem the eiureiity ct tir$t~ievei eetegcriee (see Fig. 2, §
`
`4ft” showing oreoeretieh to mom en a pertieuier cetegory which reetiite iri
`
`eerhptitetieri et eerreeporidirig SLEE'CEiiQQQi’iES ertci mediiicetioh cf the merit
`
`ecrreepohdihg to the category iii focus m a euh~treefeetegcry is expanded arid
`
`oiieoieyeci eh the user interface (ie, first category: zocm [59] is expanded irite
`
`eeeeho eetegery: the): eotieei zeorh [553} (which can he further expended ihte
`
`euh-cetegery: 3x zoerri i25])).
`
`rericieririg e piuraiity ei eecorttt—ievei eategeriee, esseeiatett with the eeiecteci firet—
`
`ievei category, in e subordinate teehieh with respect to the eeieotee firetwievei
`
`ea‘tegery {See Fig. 2, §§ 4.1 and 4.2, ehewihg preparation to perter‘rrt a more).
`
`With reeeeet to deeeheeht State: 2, Sacco teaches wherein the method further
`
`iriciuciee the Step at editietihg the matchihg quantity ier eech oi the eiureiity et
`
`tiret—ievei cetegeriee heeed er: the user response ertci wherein rendering a
`
`eiuraiity ct eeeehduievei categories iheiueee: rendering e oiureiity e’i ricrieeieeted
`
`firet—ievei cetegoriee (eee Fig. :3 {2} 4.1, ehewihg updated taxonomy te reflect the
`
`user‘s iriput {more eperetieh to ioeue or: a perticeier cetegery/ettrihtite); eee eieo
`
`§ 4.2 ehewihg that in Fig. t, there were 63 cameras under “Breed” but in Fig. 3
`
`(eerreseohoihg te the user input iiiuetreted in Fig: 2} there are ertiy SO eerrreree
`
`tiheer “Breed“;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/627,703
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2179
`
`With respect tc depeheeht Cieim 3, Seccc teeches adjusting the matching
`
`quantity for each cf the pieraiity et’ firstutevei categories based on the first
`
`teepehse trerri the ueer; receiving a seeehd response hem the user cf the ehiihe
`
`ca‘taicg that defines a seiected secehd—ievei category, chcseh here the hiereiity
`
`et secer‘rdievet categories; adjusting the matching gtiehtity fer each at the
`
`eteraiity et secehciwievei categcries teased en the secehct resecnse item the user;
`
`ahd rendering a eiuraiity ei third~ievei categeries, aeeecieted with the seiected
`
`sececdtevei categery, in a suherdihete iashich with respect te the seiected
`
`secehd—ievei categery (see Figs. ‘i—St § 4.2, iiitistratihg zeerh operations},
`
`With respect te depeheeht Cteim rt, Seeee teaches wherein the rhethed further
`
`ihciticies the step et adjustihg the matching quantity for each et the piureiity ct
`
`first~ievei categeries based on the first rescehse item the user and wherein
`
`tehdetihg a piureiity cf third~ievei categcries iriciticies: rendering a piuraiity et‘
`
`heh—eeiecteci tiret—ievei cetegeriee and heh—eeiecteci secehd—ievei cetegeriee (eee
`
`Fig. 2).
`
`With respect tc depeheeht Cieirh 5, Sacco teaches receivihg a third response
`
`from the user cf the ehiihe eateieg that detihee a eeiecteti thirdwievei eategery,
`
`cheseh irerh the eiuraiity et third~ievei categeries; adjusting the matchihg guahtity
`
`fer each at the ciureiity et third~ievei categories based en the third respehse tram
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/627,703
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2179
`
`the user; and rendering e plureiity of fourth—ievet categories, associated with the
`
`selected thii‘d—ievei category, in a subordinate fashion with respect to the
`
`selected thirti~ievei category (see Figs, i~3, §§ 4st and 42, showing that muitipie
`
`zoom operations can be performed).
`
`With respect to eepeneent (Stein: 6, Sacco teaches wherein rendering a ptoraiity
`
`of fourthuievei categories includes: rendering e piuraiity of hon~seiected first~ievei
`
`categories, hoh~seiected secondwievei categories, and hon—seiected third~ievei
`
`categories {see Figs. 1—3).
`
`With respect to depeheeht Cieim 7, Sacco teaches wherein the piuraiity of first"
`
`ievei categories defines a pioreiity of product categories of the oniihe catalog
`
`(see Fig. 1).
`
`With respect to Claims 8-21, these claims are directed to a computer program
`
`product and a computing system comprising steps and/or features corresponding to
`
`those recited in Claims 1-7, respectively, and are thus rejected under the same rationale
`
`as those claims, above.
`
`A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art
`reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is
`well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for all
`that it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the
`art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's
`claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed were
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/627,703
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2179
`
`instead cited. Therefore, the Examiner‘s citation to a specific portion of a single
`prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to
`demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations
`being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed.
`Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA
`1968)). In re: Upsher-Smifh Labs. v. Pam/ab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQZd
`1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264, 23 USPQ2d 1780,
`1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807, 10
`USPQZd 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1,215
`USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278,
`280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA
`1969)
`
`Conclusion
`
`THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time
`
`policy as set forth in 37 CFR1.136(a).
`
`A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
`
`In the event a first reply is filed within
`
`TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not
`
`mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the
`
`shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any
`
`extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of
`
`the advisory action.
`
`In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later
`
`than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to DINO KUJUNDZIC whose telephone number is
`
`(571)270-5188. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8am-5pm EST.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/627,703
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2179
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Weilun Lo can be reached on (571 )272—4847. 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.
`
`/DINO KUJUNDZIC/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2179
`
`