Google Doodle File History

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeAddress: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS

P.o. Box 1450Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450www.uspto.gov

APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

44989 7590

ISSUE DATE

03/22/2011

03/02/2011

PATENT NO.

7912915

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

0026-0002

CONFIRMATION NO.

9916

HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030

ISSUE NOTIFICATION

The projected patent number and issue date are specified above.

Determination of Patent Term Adjustment under 35 U.S.C. 154 (b)(application filed on or after May 29,2000)

The Patent Term Adjustment is 2618 day(s). Any patent to issue from the above-identified application willinclude an indication of the adjustment on the front page.

If a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) was filed in the above-identified application, the filing date thatdetermines Patent Term Adjustment is the filing date of the most recent CPA.

Applicant will be able to obtain more detailed information by accessing the Patent Application InformationRetrieval (PAIR) WEB site (http://pair.uspto.gov).

Any questions regarding the Patent Term Extension or Adjustment determination should be directed to theOffice of Patent Legal Administration at (571)-272-7702. Questions relating to issue and publication feepayments should be directed to the Application Assistance Unit (AAU) of the Office of Data Management(ODM) at (571)-272-4200.

APPLICANT(s) (Please see PAIR WEB site http://pair.uspto.gov for additional applicants):

Sergey Brin, Palo Alto, CA;

IRI03 (Rev. 10/09)

PART B - FEE(S) TRANSMITTAL

Complete and send this form, together with applicable fee(s), to: Mail

or Fax

Mail Stop ISi:'llJE FEECommissioner for PatentsP.O. Box 1450Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450(571)-273-2885

INSTRUCTIONS: This form should be used for transmitting the ISSUE FEE and PUBLICATION FEE (if required). Blocks 1 through 5 should be completed whereappropriate. All further correspondence including the Patent, advance orders and notification of maintenance fees will be mailed to the current correspondence address asindicated unless corrected below or directed otherwise in Block 1, by (a) specifying a new correspondence address; and/or (h) indicating a separate "FEE ADDRESS" formaintenance fee notifications. .

CURRENT CORRES~ONDENCE i\.OORESS (Nato: U,o Block I for any chongo of address) Note: A certificate of mS!hng can only be used for domestic mailings of theFee(s) Transmittal. This certificate cannot be used for any other accompanyingpapers, Each additional paper, such as an assignment or formal drawing, musthave its own certificate of mailing or transmiSSIOn.

HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600

44989 7590 IlII7/2010Certificate of Mailing or Transmission

I hereby certify that this Fee(s) Transmittal is being deposited with the UnitedStates Postal Service with sufficient postage for first class mai I in an envelop'eaddressed to the Mail Stop ISSUE FEE address above, or being facsimiletransmitted to the USPTO (571) 273-2&&5, on the date indicated below.

FAIRFAX, VA 22030 (Depo,itor'. nome)

(Signalure)

(Date)

I APPLICATION NO. I FILlNGDATE I FIRST NAMED INVENTOR IATTORNEY DOCKET NO, I CONFIRMATION NO.

091&43,923 04/30/2001 Sergey Brin

TITLE OF INVENTION: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEB SITE

0026-0002 9916

APPLN. TYPE SMALL ENTITY ISSUE FEE DUE PUBLICATION FEE DUE PREVo PAID ISSUE FEE TOTALFEE(S) DUE DATE DUE

nonprovisional NO $i510 $0 $0 $1510 02117/2011

EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMiN A

ARTUNlT

2442

CLASS-SUBCLASS

709-2i6000

1. Change of correspondence address or indication of "Fee Address" (37CFR 1.363).

o Change of correspondence address (or Change ofCorrespondenceAddress form PTO/SB/I22) attached.

o "Fee Address" indication (or "Fee Address" Indication formPTO/SB/47; Rev 03-02 or more recent) attached. Use of a CustomerNumber is required.

2. For printing on the patent front page, Ust

(I) the names of up to 3 registered patent attorneysor agents OR, alternatively,

(2) the name of a single firm (having as a member aregistered attorney or agent) and the names of up to2 registered patent attorneys or agents, If no name isliste3, no name will be printed.

1 HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP

2 _

3 _

3. ASSIGNEE NAME AND RESIDENCE DATA TO BE PRINTED ON THE PATENT (print or type)

PLEASE NOTE: Unless an assignee is identified below, no assignee data will appear on the patent. If an assignee is identified below, the document has been filed forrecordation as set forth in 37 CFR 3.11. Completion of this form is NOT a substitute for filing an assignment.

(A) NAME OF ASSIGNEE (B) RESIDENCE: (CITY and STATE OR COUNTRY)

GOOGLE INC. Mountain View, California, USA

Please check the appropriate assignee category or categories (will not be printed on the patent) : 0 Individual Corporation or other private group entity 0 Government

4~;Jollowing fee(s) are submitted:

~ssucFee

o Publication Fee (No small entity discount permitted)o Advance Order - # of Copies _

4b. Payment ofFee(s): (Please first reapply any previously paid issue fee shown above)

o A check is enclosed.

·'Q'Payment by credit card. Form PTO-2038 is attached,'~e Director is hereby authOlized to charge the required fee(s), any deficiency, or credit any

overpayment, to Deposit Account Number (enclose an extra copy of this form).

5. Change in Entity Statns (from status indicated above)

o a. Applicant claims SMALL ENTITY status. See 37 CFR 1.27. 0 b. Applicant is no longer claiming SMALL ENTITY status. See 37 CFR 1.27(g)(2).

NOTE: The Issue Fee and Publication Fee (if required) will not be accepted from anyone other than the applicant; a registered attorney or agent; or the assignee or other party ininterest as shown by the records of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

AuthorizedSignature /Paul A. Harrity, Reg. No. 39,574/

Typed or printed name Paul A. Ha.~r_r_i_t_y _

Date ~F_e_b_r_u_a_r_y__l_5_,_2_0_1_1 _

Registration No. __~_9_,_5_7_4 _

This collection of information is required by 37 CFR 1.31 J. The information is required to obtain or retain a benefit by the public which is to file (and by the USPTO to process)an appljcation. Confidentiality.is governed by 35 U.S.C. 122.and 37 CFR 1.14. Th,is collection \s e~tjmated to take 12 minutes to complete, includipg gathering,.prepanng, andsubmlttmg the completed applicatIOn form to the USPTO. Time Will vary dependmg upon the mdlVldual case. Any comments on the amount of time you reqUlre to completethis form and/or suggestions for reducing this burden, should be sent to the Chief Information Officer, U,S, Patent and Trademark Office, U.S. Department of Commerce, P.O.Box J450, Alexandna, Virginia 22313-1450. DO NOT SEND FEES OR COMPLETED FORMS TO THIS ADDRESS. SEND TO: Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450,Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450.Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.

PTOL-&5 (Rev. 08/07) Approved for use through 0&/31/2010. OMB 0651-0033 U.S. Pntentand Trademark Office; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Electronic Patent Application Fee Transmittal

Application Number: 09843923

Filing Date: 30-Apr-2001

Title of Invention: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEB SITE

First Named Inventor/Applicant Name: Sergey Brin

Filer: Paul Harrity/Brooke Fredrick

Attorney Docket Number: 0026-0002

Filed as Large Entity

Utility under 35 USC 111 (a) Filing Fees

Description Fee Code Quantity AmountSub-Total in

USD($)

Basic Filing:

Pages:

Claims:

Miscellaneous-Filing:

Petition:

Patent-Appeals-and-Interference:

Post-Allowance-and-Post-Issuance:

Utility Appl issue fee 1501 1 1510 1510

Extension-of-Time:


USD($)

Miscellaneous:

Total in USD ($) 1510

Electronic Acknowledgement Receipt

EFSID: 9446492


International Application Number:

Confirmation Number: 9916

Title of Invention: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEB SITE


Customer Number: 44989

Filer: Paul Harrity/Brooke Fredrick

Filer Authorized By: Paul Harrity


Receipt Date: 15-FEB-2011

Filing Date: 30-APR-2001

TimeStamp: 18:14:43

Application Type: Utility under 35 USC 111 (a)

Payment information:

Submitted with Payment yes

Payment Type Credit Card

Payment was successfully received in RAM $1510

RAM confirmation Number 5546

Deposit Account

Authorized User

File Listing:

Document I Document DescriptionI

File NameI

File Size(Bytes)/ I Multi ,I PagesNumber Message Digest Part /.zip (ifappl.)

75217

1 Fee Worksheet (PTO-87S)0026-0002_IFCoverSheet_02-1

1S-ll.pdf

no1509c18609ce6920d2e3ffel e8edfcc945ee

eall

Warnings:

Information:

127781

2 Issue Fee Payment (PTO-8SS)0026-0002JeeTrans_02-1S-11.

1pdf

noc28a8e85 216bO1dc0255 73a822b989a651

de594

Warnings:

Information:

30234

3 Fee Worksheet (PTO-87S) fee-info.pdf no 2Sf426741 a4530ebbe9613ef8fcb8e6099a42

d2ad

Warnings:

Information:

Total Files Size (in bytes) 233232

This Acknowledgement Receipt evidences receipt on the noted date by the USPTO of the indicated documents,characterized by the applicant, and including page counts, where applicable. It serves as evidence of receipt similar to aPost Card, as described in MPEP 503.

New Applications Under 35 U.S.c. 111If a new application is being filed and the application includes the necessary components for a filing date (see 37 CFR1.53(b)-(d) and MPEP 506), a Filing Receipt (37 CFR 1.54) will be issued in due course and the date shown on thisAcknowledgement Receipt will establish the filing date of the application.

National Stage of an International Application under 35 U.S.c. 371If a timely submission to enter the national stage of an international application is compliant with the conditions of 35U.S.c. 371 and other applicable requirements a Form PCT/DO/EO/903 indicating acceptance of the application as anational stage submission under 35 U.S.c. 371 will be issued in addition to the Filing Receipt, in due course.

New International Application Filed with the USPTO as a Receiving OfficeIf a new international application is being filed and the international application includes the necessary components foran international filing date (see PCT Article 11 and MPEP 1810), a Notification of the International Application Numberand of the International Filing Date (Form PCT/RO/l 05) will be issued in due course, subject to prescriptions concerningnational security, and the date shown on this Acknowledgement Receipt will establish the international filing date ofthe application.

PATENTAttorney Docket No. 0026-0002

IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

In re Patent Application of:

SergeyBRIN

Application No.: 09/843,923

Filed: April 30, 2001

For: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FORENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEBSITE

) Mail Stop Issue Fee)) Group Art Unit: 2442)) Examiner: B. Ailes))))))

ISSUE FEE TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET

U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Service Window, Mail Stop Issue FeeRandolph Building401 Dulany StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

Sir:

The Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge any other appropriate fees that may be

required regarding the attached Issue Fee Transmittal (Form PTOL-85) to Deposit Account No.

50-1070.

Respectfully submitted,

HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP

By: IPaul A. Harrity, Reg. No. 39,5741Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574

11350 Random Hills RoadSuite 600Fairfax, Virginia 22030(571) 432-0800CUSTOMER NUMBER: 44989Date: February 15,2011

UNITED STAlES PAlENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeAddress: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS

P.o. Box 1450Alexandria., Virginia 22313-1450www.uspto.gov

NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE AND FEE(S) DUE

44989 7590 11117/2010EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN AHARRITY & HARRITY, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030

ART UNIT

2442

DATE MAILED: 11/17/2010

PAPER NUMBER

APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.

09/843,923 04/30/2001 Sergey Brin


0026-0002 9916

APPLN. TYPE SMALL ENTITY ISSUE FEE DUE PUBLICATION FEE DUE PREV. PAID ISSUE FEE TOTAL FEE(S) DUE DATE DUE

nonprovisiona1 NO $1510 $0 $0 $1510 02/17/2011

THE APPLICATION IDENTIFIED ABOVE HAS BEEN EXAMINED AND IS ALLOWED FOR ISSUANCE AS A PATENT.PROSECUTION ON THE MERITS IS CLOSED. THIS NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE IS NOT A GRANT OF PATENT RIGHTS.THIS APPLICATION IS SUBJECT TO WITHDRAWAL FROM ISSUE AT THE INITIATIVE OF THE OFFICE OR UPONPETITION BY THE APPLICANT. SEE 37 CFR 1.313 AND MPEP 1308.

THE ISSUE FEE AND PUBLICATION FEE (IF REQUIRED) MUST BE PAID WITHIN THREE MONTHS FROM THEMAILING DATE OF THIS NOTICE OR THIS APPLICATION SHALL BE REGARDED AS ABANDONED. THISSTATUTORY PERIOD CANNOT BE EXTENDED. SEE 35 U.S.C. 151. THE ISSUE FEE DUE INDICATED ABOVE DOESNOT REFLECT A CREDIT FOR ANY PREVIOUSLY PAID ISSUE FEE IN THIS APPLICATION. IF AN ISSUE FEE HASPREVIOUSLY BEEN PAID IN THIS APPLICATION (AS SHOWN ABOVE), THE RETURN OF PART B OF THIS FORMWILL BE CONSIDERED A REQUEST TO REAPPLY THE PREVIOUSLY PAID ISSUE FEE TOWARD THE ISSUE FEE NOWDUE.

HOW TO REPLY TO THIS NOTICE:

I. Review the SMALL ENTITY status shown above.

If the SMALL ENTITY is shown as YES, verify your currentSMALL ENTITY status:

A. If the status is the same, pay the TOTAL FEE(S) DUE shownabove.

B. If the status above is to be removed, check box 5b on Part B Fee(s) Transmittal and pay the PUBLICATION FEE (if required)and twice the amount of the ISSUE FEE shown above, or

If the SMALL ENTITY is shown as NO:

A. Pay TOTAL FEE(S) DUE shown above, or

B. If applicant claimed SMALL ENTITY status before, or is nowclaiming SMALL ENTITY status, check box Sa on Part B - Fee(s)Transmittal and pay the PUBLICATION FEE (if required) and 1/2the ISSUE FEE shown above.

II. PART B - FEE(S) TRANSMITTAL, or its equivalent, must be completed and returned to the United States Patent and Trademark Office(USPTO) with your ISSUE FEE and PUBLICATION FEE (if required). If you are charging the fee(s) to your deposit account, section "4b"of Part B - Fee(s) Transmittal should be completed and an extra copy of the form should be submitted. If an equivalent of Part B is filed, arequest to reapply a previously paid issue fee must be clearly made, and delays in processing may occur due to the difficulty in recognizingthe paper as an equivalent of Part B.

III. All communications regarding this application must give the application number. Please direct all communications prior to issuance toMail Stop ISSUE FEE unless advised to the contrary.

IMPORTANT REMINDER: Utility patents issuing on applications filed on or after Dec. 12, 1980 may require payment ofmaintenance fees. It is patentee's responsibility to ensure timely payment of maintenance fees when due.

Page 1 of 3PTOL-85 (Rev. 08/07) Approved for use through 08/31/2010.

PART B - FEE(S) TRANSMITTAL

Complete and send this form, together with applicable fee(s), to: Mail

or Fax

Mail Stop ISSUE FEECommissioner for PatentsP.O. Box 1450Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450(571)-273-2885

INSTRUCTIONS: This form should be used for transmitting the ISSUE FEE and PUBLICATION FEE (if required). Blocks I through 5 should be completed whereappropriate. All further correspondence including the Patent, advance orders and notification of maintenance fees will be mailed to the current correspondence address asindicated unless corrected below or directed otherwise in Block I, by (a) specifying a new correspondence address; and/or (b) indicating a separate "FEE ADDRESS" formaintenance fee notifications.

CURRENT CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS (Note: Use Block 1 for any change of address)

HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600

44989 7590 11117/2010

Note: A certificate of mailing can only be used for domestic mailings of theFee(s) Transmittal. This certificate cannot be used for any other accompanyingpapers. Each additional paper, such as an assignment or formal drawing, musthave its own certificate of mailing or transmission.

Certificate of Mailing or TransmissionI hereby certify that this Fee(s) Transmittal is being deposited with the UnitedStates Postal Service with sufficient postage for first class mail in an envelopeaddressed to the Mail Stop ISSUE FEE address above, or being facsimiletransmitted to the USPTO (571) 273-2885, on the date indicated below.

FAIRFAX, VA 22030(Depositor's name)

(Signature)

(Date)

I APPLICATION NO. I FILING DATE I FIRST NAMED INVENTOR IATTORNEY DOCKET NO. I CONFIRMATION NO.

09/843,923 04/30/2001 Sergey Brin


0026-0002 9916

APPLN. TYPE

nonprovisional

SMALL ENTITY

NO

ISSUE FEE DUE

$1510

PUBLICATION FEE DUE PREVo PAID ISSUE FEE

$0 $0

TOTAL FEE(S) DUE

$1510

DATE DUE

02/17/2011

EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN A

ART UNIT

2442

CLASS-SUBCLASS

709-216000

1. Change of correspondence address or indication of "Fee Address" (37CFR 1.363).

o Change of correspondence address (or Change of CorrespondenceAddress form PTO/SB/122) attached.

o "Fee Address" indication (or "Fee Address" Indication formPTO/SB/47; Rev 03-02 or more recent) attached. Use ofa CustomerNumber is required.

2. For printing on the patent front page, list

(I) the names of up to 3 registered patent attorneysor agents OR, alternatively,

(2) the name of a single firm (having as a member aregistered attorney or agent) and the names of up to2 registered patent attorneys or agents. If no name islisted, no name will be printed.

2 _

3 _

3. ASSIGNEE NAME AND RESIDENCE DATA TO BE PRINTED ON THE PATENT (print or type)

PLEASE NOTE: Unless an assignee is identified below, no assignee data will appear on the patent. If an assignee is identified below, the document has been filed forrecordation as set forth in 37 CFR 3.11. Completion of this form is NOT a substitute for filing an assignment.

(A) NAME OF ASSIGNEE (B) RESIDENCE: (CITY and STATE OR COUNTRY)

Please check the appropriate assignee category or categories (will not be printed on the patent) : 0 Individual 0 Corporation or other private group entity 0 Government

4a. The following fee(s) are submitted:

o Issue Fee

o Publication Fee (No small entity discount permitted)

o Advance Order - # of Copies _

4b. Payment of Fee(s): (Please first reapply any previously paid issue fee shown above)

o A check is enclosed.

o Payment by credit card. Form PTO-2038 is attached.

o The Director is hereby authorized to charge the required fee(s), any deficiency, or credit anyoverpayment, to Deposit Account Number (enclose an extra copy of this form).

5. Change in Entity Status (from status indicated above)

o a. Applicant claims SMALL ENTITY status. See 37 CFR 1.27. 0 b. Applicant is no longer claiming SMALL ENTITY status. See 37 CFR 1.27(g)(2).

NOTE: The Issue Fee and Publication Fee (if required) will not be accepted from anyone other than the applicant; a registered attorney or agent; or the assignee or other party ininterest as shown by the records of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Authorized Signature _

Typed or printed name _

Date _

Registration No. _

This collection of information is required by 37 CFR 1.311. The information is required to obtain or retain a benefit by the public which is to file (and by the USPTO to process)an application. Confidentiality is governed by 35 U.S.c. 122 and 37 CFR 1.14. This collection is estimated to take 12 minutes to complete, including gathering, preparing, andsubmitting the completed application form to the USPTO. Time will vary depending upon the individual case. Any comments on the amount of time you require to completethis form and/or suggestions for reducing this burden, should be sent to the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, U.S. Department of Commerce, P.O.Box 1450, Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450. DO NOT SEND FEES OR COMPLETED FORMS TO THIS ADDRESS. SEND TO: Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450,Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450.Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.

PTOL-85 (Rev. 08/07) Approved for use through 08/3112010. OMB 0651-0033 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE



APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

44989 7590

FILING DATE

04/30/2001

11117/2010

FIRST NAMED INVENTOR

Sergey Brin

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.

0026-0002 9916

EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN AHARRITY & HARRITY, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030

ART UNIT

2442


PAPER NUMBER

Determination of Patent Term Adjustment under 35 U.S.C. 154 (b)(application filed on or after May 29,2000)

The Patent Term Adjustment to date is 2024 day(s). If the issue fee is paid on the date that is three months after themailing date of this notice and the patent issues on the Tuesday before the date that is 28 weeks (six and a halfmonths) after the mailing date of this notice, the Patent Term Adjustment will be 2024 day(s).

If a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) was filed in the above-identified application, the filing date thatdetermines Patent Term Adjustment is the filing date of the most recent CPA.

Applicant will be able to obtain more detailed information by accessing the Patent Application Information Retrieval(PAIR) WEB site (http://pair.uspto.gov).

Any questions regarding the Patent Term Extension or Adjustment determination should be directed to the Office ofPatent Legal Administration at (571)-272-7702. Questions relating to issue and publication fee payments should bedirected to the Customer Service Center of the Office of Patent Publication at 1-(888)-786-0101 or(571)-272-4200.

Page 3 of 3

PTOL-85 (Rev. 08/07) Approved for use through 08/31/2010.

Notice ofAllowability

Application No.

09/843,923Examiner

BENJAMIN AILES

Applicant(s)

BRIN, SERGEYArt Unit

2442

-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address-Ail claims being allowable, PROSECUTION ON THE MERITS IS (OR REMAINS) CLOSED in this application. If not includedherewith (or previously mailed), a Notice of Allowance (PTOL-85) or other appropriate communication will be mailed in due course. THISNOTICE OF ALLOWABILITY IS NOT A GRANT OF PATENT RIGHTS. This application is subject to withdrawal from issue at the initiativeof the Office or upon petition by the applicant. See 37 CFR 1.313 and MPEP 1308.

1. IZI This communication is responsive to BPAI decision rendered 23 September 2010.

2. IZI The allowed c1aim(s) islare 26, 30, 31, 35 (fe-numbered 1-4).

3. D Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).

a) D All b) D Some* c) D None of the:

1. D Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.

2. D Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. __ .

3. D 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)).

* Certified copies not received: __.

Applicant has THREE MONTHS FROM THE "MAILING DATE" of this communication to file a reply complying with the requirementsnoted below. Failure to timely comply will result in ABANDONMENT of this application.THIS THREE-MONTH PERIOD IS NOT EXTENDABLE.

4. D A SUBSTITUTE OATH OR DECLARATION must be submitted. Note the attached EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT or NOTICE OFINFORMAL PATENT APPLICATION (PTO-152) which gives reason(s) why the oath or declaration is deficient.

5. D CORRECTED DRAWINGS ( as "replacement sheets") must be submitted.

(a) D including changes required by the Notice of Draftsperson's Patent Drawing Review ( PTO-948) attached

1) D hereto or 2) D to Paper No./Mail Date __.

(b) D including changes required by the attached Examiner's Amendment I Comment or in the Office action ofPaper No./Mail Date __.

Identifying indicia such as the application number (see 37 CFR 1.84(c)) should be written on the drawings in the front (not the back) ofeach sheet. Replacement sheet(s) should be labeled as such in the header according to 37 CFR 1.121(d).

6. D DEPOSIT OF andlor INFORMATION about the deposit of BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL must be submitted. Note theattached Examiner's comment regarding REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEPOSIT OF BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL.

Attachment(s)1. D Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)

2. D Notice of Draftperson's Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948)

3. D Information Disclosure Statements (PTO/SB/08),Paper No./Mail Date __

4. D Examiner's Comment Regarding Requirement for Depositof Biological Material

IKEVIN BATESIPrimary Examiner, Art Unit 2456

5. D Notice of Informal Patent Application

6. D Interview Summary (PTO-413),Paper No./Mail Date __ .

7. ~ Examiner's AmendmenUComment

8. D Examiner's Statement of Reasons for Allowance

9. D Other __.

lB. A.IExaminer, Art Unit 2442

u.s. Patent and Trademark Office

PTOL-37 (Rev. 08-06) Notice of Allowability Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20101110

Application/Control Number: 09/843,923

Art Unit: 2442

Examiner's Amendment

Page 2

1. An examiner's amendment to the record appears below. Should the changes

and/or additions be unacceptable to applicant, an amendment may be filed as provided

by 37 CFR 1.312. To ensure consideration of such an amendment, it MUST be

submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee.

Authorization for this examiner's amendment was given in a telephone interview

with Paul Harrity (39,574) on 10 November 2010 in view of the SPAI decision rendered

23 September 2010.

The application has been amended as follows:


Art Unit: 2442

Listing of claims:

1-25. (canceled)

26. (currently amended) A non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores

Page 3

instructions executable by one or more processors to perform a method for attracting

users to a web page, comprising:

instructions for creating a special event logo by modifying a standard company

logo for a special event, where the instructions for creating the special event logo

includes instructions for modifying the standard company logo with one or more

animated images;

instructions for associating a link or search results with the special event logo,

the link identifying a document relating to the special event, the search results relating

to the special event;

instructions for uploading the special event logo to the web page;

instructions for receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and

instructions for providing the document relating to the special event or the search

results relating to the special event based on the user selection.

27-29. (canceled)

30. (currently amended) The computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the

instructions for creating a special event logo further include:

instructions for modifying the standard company logo with at least one of video or

audio data.


Art Unit: 2442

Page 4

31. (currently amended) The computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the

instructions for creating a special event logo further include: instructions for modifying

the standard company logo with information associated with a holiday.

32-34. (canceled)

35. (previously presented) The computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the

instructions for uploading the special event logo include: instructions for replacing the

standard company logo with the special event logo on the web page.

36-41. (canceled)


Art Unit: 2442

Conclusion

Page 5

Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the

examiner should be directed to Benjamin Ailes whose telephone number is (571 )272-

3899. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, IFP Hoteling schedule.

If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's

supervisor, Glenton Burgess can be reached on 571-272-3949. 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.

/B. A. A./Examiner, Art Unit 2442

/KEVI N BATES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2456

BIB DATA SHEET

Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeAddress: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS


CONFIRMATION NO. 9916

SERIAL NUMBER FILING or 371(c) CLASS GROUP ART UNIT ATTORNEY DOCKETDATE NO.

09/843,923 04/30/2001 709 2442 0026-0002

RULE

APPLICANTSSergey Brin, Palo Alto, CA;

** CONTINUING DATA *************************This appln claims benefit of 60/200,957 05/01/2000

** FOREIGN APPLICATIONS *************************

** IF REQUIRED, FOREIGN FILING LICENSE GRANTED **06/21/2001

Foreign Priority claimed DYes ~No STATE OR SHEETS TOTAL INDEPENDENT35 USC 119(a-d) conditions met 0 Yes ~ No o Metafter COUNTRY DRAWINGS CLAIMS CLAIMSAllowanceVerified and /BENJAMIN A AILES/ baa

CA 10 27 8Acknowledged Examiner's Signature Initials

ADDRESS

HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030UNITED STATES

TITLE

Systems and methods for enticing users to access a web site

10 All Fees 1FEES: Authority has been given in Paper

10 1.16 Fees (Filing) 1FILING FEE 10 1.17 Fees (Processing Ext. of time) 1RECEIVED No. to charge/credit DEPOSIT ACCOUNT

1236 No. for following: 10 1.18 Fees (Issue) 110 Other 110 Credit 1

BIB (Rev. 05/07).

Index of Claims

Application/Control No.

09843923

Examiner

Ailes, Benjamin A

Applicant(s)/Patent UnderReexamination

BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit

2142

=

Rejected

Allowed

Cancelled

Restricted

N Non-Elected

Interference

A

o

Appeal

Objected

D Claims renumbered in the same order as presented by applicant D CPA D T.D. D R.1.47

CLAIM DATEFinal Original 11/07/2007 11/10/2010

1 - -

2 - -

3 - -

4 - -

5 - -

6 - -

7 - -

8 - -

9 - -

10 - -

11 - -

12 - -

13 - -

14 - -

15 - -

16 - -

17 - -

18 A -

19 A -

20 A -

21 A -

22 A -

23 A -

24 A -

25 A -

1 26 A =27 A -

28 A -

29 A -

2 30 A =3 31 A =

32 A -

33 A -

34 A -

4 35 A =36 A -

u.s. Patent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No.: 20101110

Index of Claims


09843923

Examiner

Ailes, Benjamin A


BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit

2142

=

Rejected

Allowed

Cancelled

Restricted

N Non-Elected

Interference

A

o

Appeal

Objected


CLAIM DATEFinal Original 11/07/2007 11/10/2010

37 A -

38 A -

39 A -

40 A -

41 A -


Application/Control No. Applicant(s)/Patent Under Reexamination

Issue Classification 09843923 BRIN, SERGEY

Examiner Art Unit

BENJAMIN AILES 2442

ORIGINAL INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION

CLASS SUBCLASS CLAIMED NON-CLAIMED

709 216 G 0 6 F 15 / 167 (2006.01.01 )

CROSS REFERENCE(S)

CLASS SUBCLASS (ONE SUBCLASS PER BLOCK)


Final Original Final Original Final Original Final Original Final Original Final Original Final Original Final Original

1 17 33

2 18 34

3 19 4 35

4 20 36

5 21 37

6 22 38

7 23 39

8 24 40

9 25 41

10 1 26

11 27

12 28

13 29

14 2 30

15 3 31

16 32

IBENJAMIN AILESIExaminer.Art Unit 2442 11/10/2010 Total Claims Allowed:

4(Assistant Examiner) (Date)

IKEVI N BATESIPrimary Examiner.Art Unit 2456 11/15/2010 O.G. Print Claim(s) O.G. Print Figure

(Primary Examiner) (Date) 1 3

u.s. Patent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No. 20101110

Search Notes


09843923

Examiner

BENJAMIN AILES


BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit

2442

SEARCHED

Class Subclass Date Examiner709 204,216 11/10/2010 baa705 26 11/10/2010 baa345 473, 730, 738 11/10/2010 baa

SEARCH NOTES

Search Notes Date ExaminerEAST - updated class/subclass and text search of USPAT, USPGPub; 11/10/2010 baaupdated inventor name and assignee search of USPAT, USPGUb, EPO,JPO, DERWENT and IBM TDB;

INTERFERENCE SEARCH

Class Subclass Date ExaminerUPAD, PGPub, USPAT text search - see Interference 11/10/2010 baasearch printout

u.s. Patent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No. : 20101110

EAST Search History

EAST Search History

EAST Search History (Prior Art)

.IR~T#"".[H'i't'~"".!S~'~~~h"Q'~~~'t""""""""""""""""":·!,D'B~"""""""""rD~f'~~'lt"""""""""·[p'I~'~~I'~":·fri'~'~"St~'~'P"""""·1

1:: ! :Operator: 1 I: ~ : : ~ 1 : ~ ~

.1'82"""""" !'1"""""'" !('('image"g'rapil'ic''bi'im'ap''icon'''''' [uS:"""""""""'" !'OR"""""""""""""""" !OFF"""""" [20'1'07'1''1'7'1'0'''''''''''''' II j!iconic metaphor avatar!PGPUB;I!120:5711 ! !emoticon) adj5 (keyword !USPAT! ! 1 1I I Iterm word phrase text) adj5 I I I I I.~ , '( h ) d' ' ~ " ~.~ i i searc query a J3 iii ~ ~

I I I(command$4 request$4 I I I I I.~ , "$ ,~ " ~.~ i iretnev )) and iii ~ ~

I ! !(@ad<"2001 0430" or ! I ! I II ! !@rlad<"2001 0430") and! I ! I II : :@pd>"20060817" : : : I I

: ~ '.• : : ' ; ............................• 1 ' : ' ~ ~

.1&3"""""" [0"""'''''' !nciickab'le"~se'r'=seiec'ia'bler"'''''· [uS:"""""""""" lOR""""""""""""""'''' [OFF"""'''''' [20'1'0;''1''1;''1'0'''''''''''''' I1 ! !adj3 (image graphic bitmap !PGPUB;! ! 121 :00 1I ! !icon iconic metaphor avatar !USPAT I ! I II ! !emoticon) adj5 (search! : ! 1 II ! !query)) and ! I ! 1 II ! !(@ad<"2001 0430" or ! I ! I II ! !@rlad<"2001 0430") and! I ! I II : :@pd>"20060817" : : : I I:~ : .: ; ~ : ~ J.1'84""""'''' [0"""""" Ini'mage'g'r'ap'il'ic"i)i'im'ap"icon"'"!,uS:"""""""""" lOR""""""""""""""'''' [OFF""""'''' f20'1'0;''1''1'7'1'0''''''''''''''II ! !iconic metaphor avatar !PGPUB;: ! 121 :01 II ! !emoticon) adj5 !USPAT I ! I II ! !predetermined adj (search! : ! 1 II ! !query)) and ! I ! 1 II ! !(@ad<"2001 0430" or ! I ! I II ! !@rlad<"2001 0430") and! I ! I II : :@pd> "20060817" : : : I I:~ ' .. : : ' ; ............................• ~ '. ; ' ~ ..........................................• ~

.rS5""""'''' ['1'0""'"'' Ini'mage'g'r'ap'il'ic"i)i'im'ap"icon""" fuS:"""""""""" lOR""""""""""""""'''' [OFF"""'''''' f20'1'0;''1''1'7'1'0'''''''''''''' II ! !iconic metaphor avatar !PGPUB;: ! 121 :01 II ! !emoticon) adj3 (search !USPAT I ! I II ! !query) adj3 (command$4! : ! 1 II ! !request$4)) and ! I ! 1 II ! !(@ad< "2001 0430" or ! I ! I II ! !@rlad< "2001 0430") and! I ! I II : :@pd> "20060817" : : : I I:~ : .: ; ~ ; ~ J.1'8'6""""'''' [24""'"'' Inp~edet'er'mi'~'ed"em'b'edd'ed"""" fuS:"""""""""" lOR""""""""""""""'''' [OFF"""'''''' f20'1'0;''1''1'7'1'T'''''''''''''I1 ! !prestored predefined) adj3 !PGPUB;! ! 107:20 1

.~ , '( h ) d' 'USPAT ~ " ~I : : searc query a J3 : : : I II ! !(command$4 request$4! : ! 1 I. ~ , , ,~,,, ~

1 ! !string instruction ! ! ! 1 1I ! !parameters)) and ! : ! 1 II ! !(@ad< "2001 0430" or ! I ! I II ! !@rlad< "2001 0430") and! : ! 1 II ! !@pd> "20060817" ! I ! 1 I:~ : : : ~ : ~ ~

~~~~~,

file:!//CI/Documents%20and%20Settings/baileslMy%20Doc...3923/EASTSearchHistory.09843923_AccessibleVersion.htm (I of 2) 11/12/20 I0 4:32:22 PM

EAST Search History

EAST Search History

EAST Search History (I nterference)

11/12/2010 4 :52 :39 PMC:\ Documents and Settings\ bailes\ My Documents\ EAST\ Workspaces\ 09843923.wsp

file:1Ilel/Documents%20and%20Settings/baileslMy%20Docume...9843923IEASTSearchHistory.09843923_AccessibleVersion.html1l12/20 I0 4:52:41 PM



APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

FILING DATE

04/3012001


Sergey Brin

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

0026-0002

CONFIRMATION NO.

9916

EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN A

44989 7590 09/23/2010

HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUIlE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030 ART UNIT

2442

MAIL DATE

09/23/2010

PAPER NUMBER

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)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALSAND INTERFERENCES

Ex parte SERGEY BRIN

Appeal 2009-000777Application 09/843,923Technology Center 2400

Before JOHN A. JEFFERY, LANCE LEONARD BARRY, andST. JOHN COURTENAY III, Administrative Patent Judges.

COURTENAY, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL1

1 The two-month time period for filing an appeal or commencing a civilaction, as recited in 37 C.F.R. § 1.304, or for filing a request for rehearing,as recited in 37 C.P.R. § 41.52, begins to run from the "MAIL DATE"(paper delivery mode) or the "NOTIFICATION DATE" (electronic deliverymode) shown on the PTOL-90A cover letter attached to this decision.

Appeal 2009-000777Application 09/843,923

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Appellant seeks our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) of the

Examiner's non-final decision rejecting claims 18-41. Claims 1-17 are

cancelled. We have jurisdiction over the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).

We Affirm-In-Part.

BACKGROUND

Appellant's invention relates generally to client/server networks.

More particularly, the invention on appeal is directed to systems and

methods that provide mechanisms for attracting users to a site on a network.

(Spec. 1).

Claim 18 is illustrative:

18. A method for enticing users to access a web page,compnsmg:

modifying a standard company logo for a special event tocreate a special event logo;

associating one or more search terms with the specialevent logo, the one or more search terms relating to the specialevent;

uploading the special event logo to the web page;

receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and

invoking a search relating to the special event based onthe one or more search terms in response to the user selection.

2


The Examiner relies on the following prior art references as evidence

of unpatentability:

Wolff US 6,247,047 B1 Jun. 12,2001

Yahoo! Main page, (1996), available at http://web.Archive.org/web/199612231506211http://www8.yahoo.com/

Appellant appeals the following rejections:

1. Claims 18, 19,21-29, and 31-41 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as

unpatentable over Wolff and Yahoo.

2. Claims 20 and 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Wolff,

Yahoo and Official Notice.

FACTUAL FINDINGS

We adopt the Examiner's findings in the Answer and Non-final Office

Action as our own, except as to those findings that we expressly overturn or

set aside in the Analysis that follows. Additional findings of fact may

appear in the Analysis that follows.

1. Wolff teaches that after finding and retrieving a record, the host

server sends a dynamically generated form page 108 over the

Internet 16 for display. The page 108 is displayed by opening a

new browser or new window on the user node 14. (Col. 9,11.9-

15).

2. Wolff teaches a banner 102 that includes graphics relating to a

particular product or service being advertised. (Col. 8, 11. 41

43; Fig. 2).

3


3. Wolff teaches that a URL and a unique indicia that identifies

the product or service is embedded within banner 102. (Col. 8,

11. 43-49; Fig. 2).

4. Wolff teaches that the host server 12 receives the unique indicia

embedded within banner 102 and "uses the indicia to search the

on-line product/service database for a record containing

information specific to the advertised product or service." (Col.

9,11.4-7).

ISSUES

We decide the issues raised by Appellant seriatim in the Analysis

below.

ANALYSIS

Claims 18, 19, 21, 23-25, 342

Issue 1: Did the Examiner err in finding that the cited combination of

references would have taught or suggested associating one or more search

terms with a special event logo that was created by modifying a standard

company logo for a special event, where the one or more search terms relate

to the special event, within the meaning of representative claim 18? (App.

Br. 7).

Appellant asserts that "Yahoo does not disclose or remotely suggest

... 'associating one or more search terms with the special event logo, let

2 Based on Appellant's arguments in the Appeal Brief (7 et seq.), wedecide the appeal of claims 18, 19, 21, 23-25, and 34 on the basis ofrepresentative claim 18. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(I)(vii).

4


alone one or more search terms that relate to the special event, as required by

claim 18'." (App. Br. 8-9). However, we note that the Examiner relied on

Wolff to disclose the association of search terms with a logo, as claimed.

(Ans. 3, 18). The Examiner relied on Yahoo for teaching "a special event

logo." (Ans. 3).

Wolff teaches a banner 102 that includes graphics relating to a

particular product or service being advertised (FF 2), where a URL and a

unique indicia that identifies the product or service is embedded within

banner 102 (FF 3). Regarding the search limitation, Wolff teaches that host

server 12 receives the unique indicia embedded within banner 102 and "uses

the indicia to search the on-line product/service database for a record

containing information specific to the advertised product or service." (FF 4)

(Emphasis added).

As pointed out by the Examiner, we agree that Yahoo teaches a

special event logo. (Ans. 4). Because the Examiner's rejection is based on

the combined teachings of Wolff and Yahoo, we do not find persuasive

Appellant's arguments attacking each reference in isolation regarding

Issue 1.

Issue 2: Did the Examiner err by improperly combining the cited

references under § 103?

Appellant contends that Wolff "teaches away" from associating one or

more search terms with static banners because the static banners involve

only one-way communication and do not take advantage of Interactive

capabilities. (App. Br. 9). However, we find this argument unconvincing

because the portion of Wolff noted by Appellant does not discourage or

5


disavow associating one or more search terms with static banners even if

arguendo the static banners involve one-way communication.3 (See Wolff

col. 2, 11. 30-35)

Appellant further contends that the Examiner provided no motivation

for modifying Wolff's advertisement banner with the prior art seasonal or

one-time use static banner. (App. Br. 13). Appellant asserts that replacing

Wolff's advertisement banner with the prior art seasonal or one-time use

static banner would be directly contrary to the whole purpose of Wolff's

system which provides information regarding an advertised product or

service in response to a selection of a banner advertisement relating to the

product or service. (Id.).

We disagree. As pointed out by the Examiner, we agree that the

Yahoo logo is altered to commemorate the Christmas holiday. (Ans. 18;

Yahoo 1). We also agree with the Examiner's findings that Yahoo

evidences that it was well known in the art to modify an existing logo to one

associated with a special event. (Ans. 4; Yahoo 1). We further agree with

the Examiner that it would have been obvious to an artisan that the search

terms would relate to what is being displayed by the image in some manner.

(Id.).

3 "A reference may be said to teach away when a person of ordinary skill,upon reading the reference, would be discouraged from following the pathset out in the reference, or would be led in a direction divergent from thepath that was taken by the applicant." In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977,990 (Fed.Cir. 2006) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). See also In reFulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (noting that merely disclosingmore than one alternative does not teach away from any of these alternativesif the disclosure does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage thealternatives).

6


Moreover, we are of the view that Appellant's purported improvement

over the prior art represents no more than the predictable use of prior art

elements according to their established functions, and thus would have been

obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Telejlex Inc.

550 U.S. 398,417 (2007) ("when a patent 'simply arranges old elements

with each performing the same function it had been known to perform' and

yields no more than one would expect from such an arrangement, the

combination is obvious.") (citing Sakraida v. AG Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273,

282 (1976).

Based on the record before us, we find the Examiner did not err in

rejecting representative claim 18. Accordingly, we sustain the Examiner's

§ 103 rejection of independent claim 18, as well as claims 19, 21, 23-25, and

34 which fall therewith. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(I)(vii).

Claims 28 and 36

Regarding independent claim 28 and dependent claim 36, Appellant's

arguments are based on essentially the same grounds as previously

submitted for independent claim 18. (App. Br. 24-25). Therefore, we

sustain the Examiner's § 103 rejection of claims 28 and 36 for the same

reasons discussed supra regarding claim 18.

Dependent Claims 40 and 41

Issue 3: Did the Examiner err in finding that the cited references

would have taught or suggested searching the Internet, as recited in claim

40, or invoking a search for web pages related to a special event, as recited

in claim 41?

7


Appellant contends that just because Wolff discloses a product/service

database available over the Internet does not mean that searching the

database is equivalent to searching the Internet. (App. Br. 15). We observe

that Appellant essentially restates this same argument regarding claim 41.

(App. Br. 24-25).

Based upon our review of the record, we agree with the Examiner's

findings regarding claims 40 and 41. (Ans. 16, 19, and 20). We agree that

an "Internet" search (claim 40) is a search of databases or other resources

connected to the Internet, as evidenced by the Internet search box in the

Yahoo reference. Moreover, we find that Wolff discloses the use of the

Internet to complete product/service searches and requests. (FF 1). As

discussed above, the Examiner relies on Yahoo for teaching "a special event

logo." (Ans. 3). Thus, we find Yahoo at least suggests invoking a search for

web pages related to a special event, within the meaning of claim 41. On

this record, we find that the Examiner did not err in rejecting claims 40 and

41. Accordingly, we affirm the Examiner's § 103 rejection of claims 40 and

41.

Independent Claim 26


would have taught or suggested "instructions for uploading a special event

logo to a web page." (Emphasis added).4 Appellant contends that the

modified Yahoo logo is merely an end product and does not serve to teach or

4 Appellant's arguments regarding the limitations of claim 26 that werepreviously discussed regarding claim 18 are applicable here and will not berepeated.

8


suggest instructions for uploading the special event logo to the web page.

(Reply Br. 5-6).

However, on this record, we agree with the Examiner's finding (which

Appellant has not rebutted) that a logo that is viewable on a webpage must

have been uploaded via computer instructions. (Ans. 7, 20-21). Moreover,

we will not endeavor to read the word "automated" into the claim language

as argued by Appellant on page 5 of the Reply Brief.

On this record, we find the Examiner did not err in rejecting

independent claim 26. Accordingly, we affirm the Examiner's rejection of

claim 26.

Dependent claim 29


would have taught or suggested instructions for modifying the standard logo

with one or more animated images, as recited in dependent claim 29? (App.

Br. 17).

Based upon our review of the record, we agree with Appellant that the

Examiner has not established that instructions for modifying the standard

logo with one or more animated images is fairly taught or suggested by the

cited combination of references. (App. Br. 18). In particular, we see no

"animated" image in the evidence before us. Therefore, we reverse the

Examiner's § 103 rejection of claim 29.

Dependent Claims 31 and 35


would have taught or suggested instructions for modifying the standard

9


company logo with information associated with a holiday, as recited in

dependent claim 31. Appellant contends that the Examiner has not provided

any evidence that the Yahoo logo "was modified by executing instructions

for modifying a standard company logo with information associated with a

holiday, as required by claim 31." (App. Br. 18) (Emphasis added).

However, we observe that claim 31 does not recite "executing"

instructions. Instead, claim 31 is directed to instructions that are stored on a

medium that could be executed, but are not positively recited as actually

being executed. See the preamble of claim 26, from which claim 31

depends. Therefore, we sustain the Examiner's rejection of claim 31

because Appellant argues limitations that are not expressly claimed. (Ans.

22). Because Appellant relies on the same "executing instructions"

argument regarding the rejection of claim 35 ("executing instructions" are

not recited in claim 35), we likewise sustain the Examiner's rejection of

claim 35. (See App. Br. 19).

Independent Claim 27


would have taught or suggested a processor configured to determine a home

page of a web page on a network, or identifying a standard company logo, as

recited in representative claim 27?

Appellant contends that the Examiner's findings have no support in

either the Wolff or Yahoo references. (App. Br. 20 et. seq.). According to

Appellant, the mere fact that Yahoo shows a modified Yahoo logo in no way

means that a processor executed instructions to determine the home page or

identify a standard company logo for the Yahoo web site. (App. Br. 21-22).

10


The Examiner contends that Wolff teaches the inherent use of a

computer processor. (Ans.23). The inherent features of Wolff are not

contested by Appellant. Further, we agree with the Examiner that Yahoo

teaches an uploaded image that is an altered version of the company logo on

a home page (www.yahoo.com). (Ans.23). Therefore, we find the cited

combination of references strongly suggestive of a processor that executes

instructions to determine (i.e., display) a home page on a network, and also

instructions to identify a standard company logo by virtue of displaying the

home page. Because we find the weight of the evidence supports the

Examiner's position, we affirm the Examiner's § 103 rejection of

independent claim 27.

Claims 32 and 33

Regarding dependent claims 32 and 33, Appellant's arguments are

based on essentially the same grounds as previously submitted for

independent claims 18 and 27. (App. Br. 23). Therefore, we sustain the

Examiner's § 103 rejection of claims 32 and 33 for the same reasons

discussed supra regarding independent claims 18 and 27.

Claims 37-39

Regarding claims 37-39, Appellant's arguments are based on

essentially the same grounds as previously submitted for independent claims

18 and 41. (App. Br. 26). Therefore, we sustain the Examiner's § 103

rejection of claims 37-39 for the same reasons discussed supra regarding

claims 18 and 41.

11


Dependent Claim 22

Regarding claim 22, Appellant's arguments are based on the same

grounds as previously submitted for independent claims 18 and 37. (App.

Br. 26). Therefore, we sustain the Examiner's § 103 rejection of claim 22

for the same reasons discussed supra regarding independent claims 18 and

37.

Dependent Claims 20 and 30 (2nd § 103 rejection)


would have taught or suggested modifying the standard company logo with

at least one of video or audio, as recited in dependent claim 20 and

instructions for modifying the standard company logo with at least one of

video or audio, as recited in dependent claim 30.

Regarding the Examiner's reliance on "Official Notice," Appellant

contends that the Examiner has merely stated a conclusion without providing

any evidence or reasoned explanation as support. (App. Br. 27-28).

Regarding the Examiner's taking of "Official Notice" that it was well

known to use video or audio data to modify a web page, we find no

statement in Appellant's Briefs that it was not well known to use video or

audio data to modify a web page. Instead, Appellant merely states that the

Examiner has not provided evidence. (App. Br. 27-28). Thus, we find

Appellant has not made an express demand for evidence from the Examiner,

as required to challenge the Examiner's finding. (See MPEP § 2144.03).

We note that to adequately traverse the Examiner's finding, Appellant must

specifically point out the supposed errors in the Examiner's action, which

would include stating why the noticedfact is not considered to be common

12


knowledge or well-known in the art. See 37 C.F.R. 1.111 (b). See also

MPEP § 2144.03. Accordingly, because Appellant has not met the requisite

burden, we sustain the Examiner's rejection of claims 20 and 30 as being

obvious over the combination of Wolff, Yahoo, and "Official Notice."

DECISION

We reverse the Examiner's § 103 rejection of claim 29.

We affirm the Examiner's § 103 rejections of claims 18-28 and 30-41.

No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with

this appeal may be extended under 37 C.P.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.P.R.

§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (2009).

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

rwk

HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030

13



APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

FILING DATE

04/3012001


Sergey Brin

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

0026-0002

CONFIRMATION NO.

9916

EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN A

44989 7590 10/24/2008

HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUIlE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030 ART UNIT

2442

MAIL DATE

10/24/2008

PAPER NUMBER

DELIVERY MODE

PAPER



PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

Page 1

United States Patent and Trademark Office

Und er Secretary of Comm erce for Intellectual Property an dDirecto r ofthe United States Patent an d Tradem ark Office

P.O. Bo x 1450Alexandria, Virg in ia 22313-1450

WI/IIIN. usPto.90 v

HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP11350 RANDOM HILLS ROAD Appeal No:SUITE 600 Application:FAIRFAX, VA 22030 Appellant:

2009-077709/843,923Sergey Brin

Board of Patent Appeals and InterferencesDocketing Notice

Application 09/843,923 was received from the Technology Center at the Board on September29,2008 and has been assigned Appeal No: 2009-0777.

A review of the file indicates that the following documents have been filed by appellant:

Appeal Brief filed on: July 09, 2007Reply Brief filed on: January 14, 2008Request for Hearing filed on: NONE

In all future communications regarding this appeal, please include both the application numberand the appeal number.

The mailing address for the Board is:

BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCESUNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

P.O. BOX 1450ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA 22313-1450

The facsimile number of the Board is 571-273-0052. Because of the heightened security in theWashington D.C. area, facsimile communications are recommended. Telephone inquiries can bemade by calling 571-272-9797 and should be directed to a Program and ResourceAdministrator.

By order of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

PatentAttorney's Docket No. 0026-0002


In re Patent Application of

SergeyBRIN



For: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FORENTICING USERS TO ACCESS AWEBSITE

)))))))))))

Group Art Unit: 2142

Examiner: AILES, B

u.s. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Service WindowRandolph Building401 Dulany StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

Sir:

STATUS INOUIRY

Please notify the undersigned attorney of the status of the above-identified application. A reply brief wasfiled on January 14,2008 and we have not received any PTO communication since.


HARRITY SNYDER, L.L.P.

By: IPaul A. Harrity, Reg. No. 39,5741Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574

11350 Random Hills RoadSuite 600Fairfax, Virginia 22030(571) 432-0800

CUSTOMER NUMBER: 44989

Date: August 1,2008


EFSID: 3710133




Title of Invention: Systems and methods for enticing users to access a web site



Filer: Paul Harrity/Sara Dodge



Receipt Date: 01-AUG-2008


Time Stamp: 16:38:32



Submitted with Payment I no

File Listing:

Document Document Description File Name File Size(Bytes) Multi PagesNumber /Message Digest Part /.zip (if appl.)

61496

1 Request for status of Application 07-31-08_status_inquiry.pdf no 19cc4dbab578bbff8999c55619c8eOb9da

aOO23ed

Warnings:

Information:

Total Files Size (in bytes): 61496

This Acknowledgement Receipt evidences receipt on the noted date by the USPTO of the indicated documents,characterized by the applicant, and including page counts, where applicable. It serves as evidence of receiptsimilar to a Post Card, as described in MPEP 503.

New Applications Under 35 U.S.C. 111If a new application is being filed and the application includes the necessary components for a filing date (see37 CFR 1.53(b)-(d) and MPEP 506), a Filing Receipt (37 CFR 1.54) will be issued in due course and the dateshown on this Acknowledgement Receipt will establish the filing date of the application.

National Stage of an International Application under 35 U.S.C. 371If a timely submission to enter the national stage of an international application is compliant with the conditionsof 35 U.S.C. 371 and other applicable requirements a Form PCT/DO/EO/903 indicating acceptance of theapplication as a national stage submission under 35 U.S.C. 371 will be issued in addition to the Filing Receipt,in due course.

New International Application Filed with the USPTO as a Receiving OfficeIf a new international application is being filed and the international application includes the necessarycomponents for an international filing date (see PCT Article 11 and MPEP 1810), a Notification of theInternational Application Number and of the International Filing Date (Form PCT/RO/105) will be issued in duecourse, subject to prescriptions concerning national security, and the date shown on this AcknowledgementReceipt will establish the international filing date of the application.

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark OrticeAddress: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS

P.O. Box 1450Alexandria. Virgioia 22313-1450WWW.usplO.gOY

APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

FILING DATE

04/30/2001


Sergey Srin

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

0026-0002

CONFIRMAnON NO.

9916

EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN A

44989 7590 01/18/2008

HARRITY SNYDER, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030 ART UNIT

2142

MAIL DATE

01/18/2008

PAPER NUMBER

DELIVERY MODE

PAPER



PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF C0:1'RCEU.S. Patent and Trademark Office IhAddress: COMMISSIONER FOR PAlENTS "j

P.O. Box 1450Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450

APPLICATION NO.1CONTROL NO.09843923

. FILING DATE

4/30/01

FIRST NAMED INVENTOR IPATENT IN REEXAMINATION

BRIN, SERGEY

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

0026-0002

EXAMINER

HARRITY SNYDER, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX. VA 22030

Benjamin A. Ailes

ART UNIT I_PA_P_E_R _

2142 20080116

DATE MAILED:

Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application orproceeding. .

Commissioner for Patents

The reply brief filed 16 January 2008 has been entered and,considered. The application has been forwarded to the Board of PatentAppeals and Interferences for decision on the appeal. No response to this letter is required.

~~Af\!I)REW CALDWELL '

SU?~RVISCRY P,\T::NT E~_~~!~jER

PTO-90e (Rev.04-03)

PATENTDocket No. 0026-0002

IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEBEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES

In re Patent Application of ))

Sergey BRIN ) MIS: Appeal Brief - Patents)

Application No.: 09/843,923 ) Group Art Unit: 2142)

Filed: April 30, 2001 ) Examiner: B. Ailes)

For: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR )ENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A )WEB SITE )

U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Window, Mail Stop Appeal Brief - PatentsRandolph Building401 Dulany StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

REPLY BRIEF UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 41.41

This Reply Brief is submitted in response to the Examiner's Answer, mailed November

16,2007.

REPLY BRIEF

I. STATUS OF CLAIMS

Claims 18-41 are pending in this application.

PATENTSerial No. 09/843,923

Docket No. 0026-0002

Claims 18, 19,21-29, and 31-41 stand rejected under 35 U.S.c. § 103(a) as allegedly

unpatentable over Wolff (U.S. Patent No. 6,247,047) in view of Yahoo

(www.archive.org/web/1996l223l5062l/http://www8.yahoo.com, dated December 23, 1996).

Claims 20 and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.c. § 103(a) as allegedly unpatentable over

Wolff in view of Yahoo and what was allegedly "well known at the time of the applicant's

invention. "

Claims 1-17 were previously canceled without prejudice or disclaimer.

Claims 18-41 are the subject of the present appeal. These claims were reproduced in the

Claim Appendix of the Appeal Brief.

- 2 -

REPLY BRIEF

II. GROUNDS OF REJECTION TO BE REVIEWED ON APPEAL



A. Claims 18, 19,21-29, and 31-41 stand rejected under 35 U.S.c. § 103(a) as


B. Claims 20 and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.c. § 103(a) as unpatentable over

Wolff, Yahoo, and what was allegedly "well known at the time of applicant's invention."

- 3 -

REPLY BRIEF PATENTSerial No. 09/843,923


III. RESPONSE TO ARGUMENT SECTION OF EXAMINER'S ANSWER

A. The Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) Based on Wolff (U.S. Patent No.6,247,047) in View of Yahoo(www.archive.orglwebI19961223150621lhttp://www8.yahoo.com. datedDecember 23, 1996) Should be Reversed.

1. Claim 40.

Dependent claim 40 recites invoking a search of the Internet. In the Appeal Brief,

Appellant provided substantial reasons why Wolff and Yahoo, whether considered alone or in

any reasonable combination, do not disclose or suggest this feature of claim 40. Appeal Brief,

pages 14-15.

In the Examiner's Answer, the Examiner alleged Wolff discloses searching an online

database, which is considered to be part of the Internet. Examiner's Answer, page 20. The

Examiner also alleged that it is known in the art that search engines do not actually search the

Internet but in fact search an indexed database of the Internet. Examiner's Answer, page 20.

Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the Examiner's second allegation is

accurate, the Examiner has not provided any evidence that the online database described by

Wolff is an indexed database of the Internet or is equivalent to an indexed database of the

Internet. Instead, Wolff discloses on-line and off-line relational databases 36 and 38,

respectively, that include a product or service information database including records for storing

data specific to a plurality of advertising banners or icons, and a transaction database including

records for storing data specific to individual transactions. Figure 1; column 6, lines 60-66.

Wolff does not disclose or suggest that the product/service information relating to advertising

banners or icons or the transaction records are information that is searchable on the Internet, but

- 4 -



merely disclose that the databases containing this information are accessible via the Internet.

Thus, searching these databases would not be equivalent to searching the Internet, as recited in

claim 40.

Therefore, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness with

regard to claim 40.

For at least the foregoing reasons and for those reasons presented in the Appeal Brief,

Appellant submits that the rejection of claim 40 under 35 U.S.c. § 103(a) based on Wolff and

Yahoo is improper. Accordingly, Appellant requests that the rejection of claim 40 be reversed.

2. Claim 26.

Independent claim 26 recites, among other things, instructions for uploading the special

event logo to the web page. In the Appeal Brief, Appellant provided substantial reasons why

Wolff and Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, do not disclose or

suggest this feature of claim 26. Appeal Brief, pages 16-17.

In the Examiner's Answer, the Examiner alleged that Appellant failed to accurately

describe how a logo or any image can be viewable on a web page without performing an upload

operation. Examiner's Answer, page 22. Appellant submits that the Examiner is misconstruing

Appellant's claim language. Claim 26 does not simply recite uploading a special event logo to a

web page. Instead, claim 26 explicitly recites instructions for uploading a special event logo to a

web page. The "instructions for" language clearly indicates that this uploading operation is

automated (e.g., performed by "one or more processors" as recited in the preamble of claim 26).

The Examiner has not provided any evidence that either Wolff or Yahoo discloses or suggests

instructions for uploading a special event logo to a web page. Instead, the Examiner has only

- 5 -



shown an end product (i.e., the modified Yahoo logo on the Yahoo web page). Thus, the

Examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 26.




3. Claim 29.

Dependent claim 29 recites instructions for modifying the standard company logo with

one or more animated images. In the Appeal Brief, Appellant provided substantial reasons why

Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest this feature of claim 29. Appeal Brief, pages 17-18.

In the Examiner's Answer, the Examiner alleged that Yahoo discloses:

the modification of a logo using instructions wherein Yahoo shows a modified Yahoo logodone by computer means. The computer is required to be fed instructions in order to workat all and therefore reads on the aspect of executing instructions as required by dependentclaim 29.

Examiner's Answer, page 22. Appellant submits that the Examiner's allegation lacks merit.

Yahoo simply shows an end product (i.e., a modified Yahoo logo). Yahoo does not disclose or

remotely suggest that the Yahoo logo was modified by executing instructions for modifying a

standard company logo with one or more animated images. The "instructions for" language

clearly indicates that this modifying operation is automated (e.g., performed by "one or more

processors" as recited in the preamble of claim 26). The Examiner has not provided any

evidence that either Wolff or Yahoo discloses or suggests instructions for modifying the standard

company logo with one or more animated images. Instead, the Examiner has only shown an end

product (i.e., the modified Yahoo logo). Thus, the Examiner has not established a prima facie

- 6 -

REPLY BRIEF

case of obviousness with regard to claim 29.






4. Claim 31.


information associated with a holiday. In the Appeal Brief, Appellant provided substantial

reasons why Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest this feature of claim 31. Appeal Brief,

pages 18-19.

For at least the reasons given above with regard to claim 29 and for those reasons

presented in the Appeal Brief, Appellant submits that the rejection of claim 31 under 35 U.S.c. §

103(a) based on Wolff and Yahoo is improper. Accordingly, Appellant requests that the

rejection of claim 31 be reversed.

5. Claim 35.

Dependent claim 35 recites instructions for replacing the standard company logo with the

special event logo on the web page. In the Appeal Brief, Appellant provided substantial reasons

why Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest this feature of claim 35. Appeal Brief, pages

19-20.

In the Examiner's Answer, the Examiner alleged that a computer is required to be fed

instructions in order to work properly. Examiner's Answer, page 23. Appellant submits that the

Examiner has provided no evidence that Yahoo discloses feeding a computer with instructions

for replacing a standard company logo with a special event logo on a web page, as recited in

- 7 -



claim 35. The "instructions for" language clearly indicates that this replacing operation is

automated (e.g., performed by "one or more processors" as recited in the preamble of claim 26).

The Examiner has not provided any evidence that either Wolff or Yahoo discloses or suggests

instructions for replacing a standard company logo with a special event logo on a web page, as

recited in claim 35. Instead, the Examiner has only shown an end product (i.e., the modified

Yahoo logo). Thus, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness with

regard to claim 35.




6. Claim 27.

Independent claim 27 recites, among other things, a processor configured to determine a

home page for a web page on a network. In the Appeal Brief, Appellant provided substantial

reasons why Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest this feature of claim 27. Appeal Brief,

pages 20-21.

In the Examiner's Answer, the Examiner alleged:

WoUf teaches the inherent use of a computer processor by way of having an imageuploaded to a web site wherein the uploading of an image would not be possible in anyway without the use of a computer processor. Yahoo! teaches the uploading of an imageto a web page, coincidentally to a home page as indicated (www.yahoo.com) and thealtered image is actually being displayed where the standard company logo is customarilypresented. By having the uploading being done to the home page it is therefore taught byYahoo the functionality of determining the home page.

Examiner's Answer, pages 23-24. Appellant submits that the Examiner's conclusion regarding

the Yahoo reference finds no support in the Yahoo reference. The mere fact that Yahoo shows a

- 8 -



modified Yahoo logo on the www.yahoo.com web page in no way means that a processor

executed instructions to determine the home page for the Yahoo web site. Thus, the Examiner

has provided absolutely no evidence that Yahoo, or Wolff, discloses or suggests a processor that

executes instructions to determine a home page for a web page on a network, as recited in claim

27.




7. Claim 41.

Dependent claim 41 recites invoking a search for web pages relating to the special event.

In the Appeal Brief, Appellant provided substantial reasons why Wolff and Yahoo do not

disclose or suggest this feature of claim 41. Appeal Brief, pages 24-25.

In the Examiner's Answer, the Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses searching an online

database that is considered part of the Internet. Examiner's Answer, page 26. Appellant submits

that Wolff does not disclose or remotely suggest invoking a search for web pages relating to a

special event, as recited in claim 41.

Wolff discloses on-line and off-line relational databases 36 and 38, respectively, that

include a product or service information database including records for storing data specific to a

plurality of advertising banners or icons, and a transaction database including records for storing

data specific to individual transactions. Figure 1; column 6, lines 60-66. Wolff does not disclose

or suggest that the product/service information relating to advertising banners or icons or the

transaction records are web pages, let alone web pages relating to a special event, as recited in

- 9 -



claim 41. Thus, searching these databases would not be equivalent to invoking a search for web

pages relating to a special event, as recited in claim 41.

Therefore, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness with

regard to claim 41.




8. Claims 37-39.

Independent claim 37 recites, among other things, invoking a search for web pages

relating to the special event in response to a received selection of a special event logo. In the

Appeal Brief, Appellant provided substantial reasons why Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or

suggest this feature of claim 37. Appeal Brief, pages 25-26.

For at least the reasons given above with regard to claim 41 and for those reasons

presented in the Appeal Brief, Appellant submits that the rejection of claim 37 under 35 U.S.c. §

103(a) based on Wolff and Yahoo is improper. Accordingly, Appellant requests that the

rejection of claim 37 be reversed.

Claims 38 and 39 depend from claim 37. Appellant submits that the rejection of claims

38 and 39 under 35 U.S.c. § 103(a) based on Wolff and Yahoo is improper for at least the

reasons given with regard to claim 37. Accordingly, Appellant requests that the rejection of

claims 38 and 39 be reversed.

- 10 -

REPLY BRIEF

IV. CONCLUSION



In view of the foregoing arguments and the arguments presented in the Appeal Brief,

Appellant respectfully solicits the Honorable Board to reverse the Examiner's rejections of

claims 18-41 under 35 U.S.c. § 103.

To the extent necessary, a petition for an extension of time under 37 c.F.R. § 1.136 is

hereby made. Please charge any shortage in fees due in connection with the filing of this paper,

including extension of time fees, to Deposit Account No. 50-1070 and please credit any excess

fees to such deposit account.

Respectfully submitted,HARRITY SNYDER, LLP

IPaul A. Harrity, Reg No 395741Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574

Date: January 14, 200811350 Random Hills RoadSuite 600Fairfax, Virginia 22030(571) 432-0800

- 11 -


EFSID: 2709208







Filer: Paul Harrity/Melissa Garrison



Receipt Date: 14-JAN-2008






File Listing:

Document Document Description File Name File Size(Bytes) Multi PagesNumber /Message Digest Part /.zip (if appl.)

39309

1 Reply Brief Filed 0026-0002_RepILBrief.pdf no 1155f7ec1 df6693341 e83b8fa586af1 a83c

Od37910

Warnings:

Information:







P.O. Box 1450Alexandria. Virginia 22313·1450www.uspto.gov

APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

FILING DATE

04/30/2001


Sergey Brio

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

0026-0002

CONFIRMATION NO.

9916

EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN A

44989 7590

HARRITY SNYDER, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030

11/16/2007

ART UNIT

2142

MAIL DATE

11/16/2007

PAPER NUMBER

DELIVERY MODE

PAPER



PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

I 1


Commissioner for PatentsUnited States Patent and Trademark Office

P.O. Box 1450Alexandria, VA 22313-1450

www.uspto.gov

MAILEDNOV 16 2007

TeChnology Center 2100

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALSAND INTERFERENCES

Application Number: 09/843,923Filing Date: April 30, 2001Appellant(s): BRIN, SERGEY

Paul A. HarrityFor Appellant

EXAMINER'S ANSWER

This is in response to the appeal brief filed 09 July 2007 appealing from the

Office action mailed 07 February 2007

-I l'

Application/Control Number:09/843,923Art Unit: 2142

(1) Real Party in Interest

Page 2

A statement identifying by name the real party in interest is contained in the brief.

(2) Related Appeals and Interferences

The examiner is not aware of any related appeals, interferences, or judicial

proceedings which will directly affect or be directly affected by or have a bearing on the

Board's decision in the pending appeal.

(3) Status of Claims

The statement of the status of claims contained in the brief is correct.

(4) Status of Amendments After Final

The appellant's statement of the status of amendments after final rejection

contained in the brief is correct. .

(5) Summary of Claimed Subject Matter

The summary of claimed subject matter contained in the brief is correct.

(6) Grounds of Rejection to be Reviewed on Appeal

The appellant's statement of the grounds of rejection to be reviewed on appeal is

correct.

(7) Claims Appendix

The copy of the appealed claims contained in the Appendix to the brief is correct.

(8) Evidence Relied Upon

6,247,047 WOLFF 6-2001

-, ~ I ...


Yahoo! Main page, December 23,1996;

Page 3

http://web.archive.org/web/19961223150621/http://www8.yahoO.com; accessed 07 May

2006.

(9) Grounds of Rejection

The following ground(s) of rejection are applicable to the appealed claims:

Claim Rejections· 35 USC § 103

1. 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 setforth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented andthe prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time theinvention 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.

2. Claims 18, 19,21-28,29,31-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being

unpatentable over Wolff (US 6,247,047 81) in view of Yahoo! (Yahoo!,

http://www.archive.org/web/19961223150621/http:/Iwww8.yahoo.com/).

3. Regarding claim 18, Wolff teaches a method for enticing users to access a web

page comprising the use of a graphical icon image (i.e. an advertisement banner)

wherein the icon image is uploaded for display to a user on a web page. A keyword

(search term) (indicia) is associated with the icon image wherein when the user selects

the icon image a search is invoked to search an online database and then the search

results are presented to the user on a web page (see Wolff, column 8, Iirie 56 - column

9, line 15). Wolff does not explicitly teach that the graphical icon image is a standard

company logo that can be modified to become a special event logo. However, in related

art, Yahoo! teaches wherein a company logo can be modified to commemorate a

... .,


Page 4

special event (see Yahoo!). Wolff provides an environment wherein different icon

images can be displayed to a user on a web page and therefore it is deemed an

obvious variation to present to a user an altered image. Yahoo! demonstrates this

functionality wherein Yahoo! has altered their own company logo to celebrate the

Christmas season. Wolff teaches that is known in the prior art to use different types ofI

images for seasonal and one time use (column 2, II. 27-28). It would have been obvious

to one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the teachings of Wolff wherein the ability to

display c1ickable images to a user on a web page in combination with the functionalities

of Yahoo! wherein it is taught that one of ordinary skill can alter an image and upload it

for display to a user on a web page. Further, it would have been obvious to associate

the "search term" to relate to the graphical icon image as taught by Wolff because the

keyword associated with the icon image is supposed to directly identify the product or

service being represented by use of the icon image and when a use interacts (clicks) on

the icon image (see Wolff, col. 8, II. 43-49), it is deemed obvious that search results

should be directly related to whatever the icon rep~esents instead of erroneous data.

One of ordinary skill would not find it desirable to provide search results that are totally

unrelated to what is being displayed by the icon image. Therefore, in view of Yahoo!, if

an image is altered in some sort of way, the keyword associated with the image should

be changed accordingly so that the keyword corresponds to the image in some sort of

way. One or ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's invention would have

found it obvious to combine the teachings of Yahoo! with what is taught by Wolff as

outlined above. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such

· .~

Application/Control Number:09/843,923 .Art Unit: 2142

Page 5

a combination due to being from the same field of endeavor (client-server network

systems) and for the reasons stated above, particularly teaching the use of displaying

images to user that are deemed c1ickable by Wolff and Yahoo! for teaching the use of

altered images which may commemorate a special event and the use of different

images to be displayed to a user is deemed an obvious variation in the art. In view of

Wolff, the use of different images is clearly taught as a motivation in the prior'art

wherein one of ordinary skill in the art may find it useful to use different image types for

seasonal use (col. 2. II. 27-28).

4. Regarding claim 19, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein the modifying a

standard company logo includes creating the special event logo by modifying the,

standard company logo with one or more animated images (Yahoo!).

5. Regarding claims 21, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein the special

event includes a holiday (Yahoo!).

6. Regarding claim 22, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the processor further configured to:

associating one or more search terms relating to the special event with the

special event logo (Wolff, col. 8, II. 42-46, it is deemed obvious that search results

should be directly related to whatever the icon represents instead of erroneous data.


unrelated to what is being displayed by the icon image. Therefore, in view of Yahoo!" if



way.); and

I" ' '.


wherein invoking a search includes:

Page 6

performing the search based on the one or more search terms (Wolff, col. 8, II.

43-47).

7. Regarding claim 23, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein the uploading

the special event includes displaying the special event logo bn the web page during the

special event (Yahoo! displayed the altered logo during the holiday season.).

8. Regarding claim 24, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein the invoking a

search includes:

generating a search query using the one or more search terms (Wolff, col. 9, II.

3-13);

using the search query to search at least one of a network, an index, or a

directory (Wolff, col. 9, II. 3-13); and

obtaining search results based on the search (Wolff, col. 9, II. 9-13).


standard company logo includes:

determining a home page for the web page on a network (Yahoo!,

http://www.yahoo.com);

identifying the standard company logo on the home page (Yahoo!, standard

Yahoo! logo); and

modifying the standard company logo with special event information to create the

special event logo (Yahoo!, the addition of the reindeer to the standard logo creates a

modified logo).

•• • <~


Page 7


page comprising the use of a graphical icon image (Le. an advertisement banner)




results are presented to the user on a web page (see Wolff, column 8, line 56 - column

9, line 15). The search results are then returned to the user in the form of a web page

(col. 9, II. 9-13). Wolff does not explicitly teach that the graphical icon image is a

standard company logo that can be modified to become a special event logo. However,

in related art, Yahoo! teaches wherein a company logo can be modified to

commemorate a special event (see Yahoo!). Wolff provides an environment wherein

different icon images can be displayed to a user on a web page and therefore it is

deemed an obvious variation to present to a user an altered image. Yahoo!

demonstrates this functionality wherein Yahoo! has altered their own company logo to

celebrate the Christmas season. Wolff teaches that is known in the prior art to use

different types of images for seasonal and one time use (column 2, II. 27-28). It would

have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the teachings of Wolff

wherein the ability to display c1ickable images to a user on a web page in combination

with the functionalities of Yahoo! wherein it is taught that one of ordinary skill can alter

an image and upload it for display to a user on a web page. Further, it would have been

obvious to associate the "search term" to relate to the graphical icon image as taught by

Wolff because the keyword associated with the icon image is supposed to directly

•


Page 8

identify the product or service being represented by use of the icon image and when a

use interacts (clicks) on the icon image (see Wolff, col. 8, II. 43-49), it is deemed

obvious that search results should be directly related to whatever the icon represents

instead of erroneous data. One of ordinary skill would not find it desirable to provide

search results that are totally unrelated to what is being displayed by the icon image.

Therefore, in view of Yahoo!, if an image is altered in some sort of way, the keyword

associated with the image should be changed accordingly so that the keyword

corresponds to the image in some sort of way. One or ordinary skill in the art at the time

of the applicant's invention would have found it obvious to combine the teachings of

Yahoo! with what is taught by Wolff as outlined above. One of ordinary skill in the art

would have been motivated to make such a combination due to being from the same

field of endeavor (client-server network systems) and for the reasons stated above,

particularly teaching the use of displaying images to user that are deemed clickable by

Wolff and Yahoo! for teaching the'use of altered images which may commemorate a

special event and the use of different images to be displayed to a user is deemed an

obvious variation in the art. In view of Wolff, the use of different images is clearly taught

as a motivation in the prior art wherein one of ordinary skill in the art may find it useful to

use different image types for seasonal use (col. 2, II. 27-28).





, '.


Page 9










Christmas season. Wolff teaches that is known in the prior art to use different types of





for display to a user on a web page.. Further, it would have been obvious to associate








\


Page 10



way. Yahoo! clearly teaches the uploading of an image to a web page in this case the

uploading has been done to the home page as indicated (www.yahoo.com) and the

altered image ~s act.ually being displayed where the standard company logo is

customarily presented. By way of actually uploading the image to the home page by

Yahoo! then it is taught by Yahoo! the functionality of home page determination. One or

ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's invention would have found it

obvious to combine the teachings of Yahoo! with what is taught by Wolff as outlined

above. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a

combination due to being from the same field of endeavor (client-server network





Wolff, the use of different images is clearly taught as a motivation in the prior art


seasonal use (col. 2, II. 27-28).






Page 11












to one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the teachings 9f Wolff wherein the ability to











•


Page 12















standard company logo includes creating the special event logo by modifying the


14. Regarding claim 31, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the medium includes instructions for

modifying the standard company logo with information associated with a holiday

(Yahoo!).

15. Regarding claim 32, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the processor further configured to:

associate one or more search terms relating to the special event with the special

event logo (Wolff, col. 8, II. 42-46, it is deemed obvious that search results should be

...


Page 13

directly related to whatever the icon represents instead of erroneous data. One of

ordinary skill would not find it desirable to provide search results that are totally

unrelated to what is being displayed by the icon image. Therefore, in view of Yahoo!, if.



way.).

16. Regarding claim 33, Wolff and Yahoo! teach wherein the processor is further

configured to:

detect a selection associated with the special event logo (Wolff, col. 9, II. 3-13);

generate a search query based on the one or more search terms (Wolff, col. 9, II.

3-13);

perform a search based on the search query (Wolff, col. 9, II. 3-13); and

provide a result ofthe search (Wolff, col. 9, II. 3-13).

17. Regarding claim 34, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein uploading the

special event logo includes replacing the standard company logo with the special event

logo on the web page (Yahoo!, page is from 12/23/1996).

18. Regarding claim 35; Wolff and Yahoo! teach the medium wherein the instructions

for uploading the special event logo include:

instructions for replacing the standard company logo with the special event logo

on the web page (Yahoo!, page is from 12/23/1996).

19. Regarding claim 36, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method further comprising:


Page 14

replacing the standard company logo with the special event logo (Yahoo!, page is

from 12/23/1996).





















• >


Page 15














images to user that are deemed clickable by Wolff and Yahoo! for teaching the use of



Wolff, the use of different images is Clearly taught as a motivation in the prior art



21. Regarding claim 38, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein one or more

search terms are associated with the special event logo (Wolff, col. 8, II. 42-46, it is

deemed obvious that search results should be directly related to whatever the icon


Page 16

represents instead of erroneous data. One of ordinary skill would not find it desirable to

provide search results that are totally unrelated to what is being displayed by the icon

image. Therefore, in view of Yahoo!, if an image is altered in some sort of way, the

keyword associated with the image should be changed accordingly so that the keyword

corresponds to the image in some sort of way.); and

wherein the invoking a search relating to the special event includes:

causing a search to be performed based on the one or more search terms (Wolff,

col. 9, II. 3-13).

22. Regarding claim 39, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein the presenting

a special event logo includes:

displaying the special event logo on the web page during the special event

(Yahoo! image was displayed over the holiday season).

23. Regarding claim 40, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein invoking a

search includes:

invoking a search of the Internet (col. 9, II. 3-7).


search includes:

invoking a search for web pages relating to the special event (Wolff, col. 9, II. 3-7,

a search is invoked of online content.).

25. Claims 20 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable

over Wolff, Yahoo! and what was well known at the time of the applicant's invention.


Page 17

26. Regarding claim 20, official notice is taken that the use of video or audio data to

be displayed to a user on a web page was old and well known in the art. It would have

been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's invention to

include video or audio data in the special event logo because one of ordinary skill would

have recognized the advancement of using different types of media to catch the interest

of the user viewing a page.


be displayed to a user on a web page was ol~ and well known in the art. It would have





(10) Response to Argument

A. Rejection under 35 USC 103(a) based on Wolff (US 6,247,047) in view of

Yahoo!

1. Appellant argues with respect to independent claim 18 that neither Wolff nor

Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, discloses or suggests

the combination of features recited in claim 18 because Wolff and Yahoo do not

disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms with a special event logo that

was created by modifying a standard company logo for a special event, where the one

or more search terms relate to the special event. Examiner submits that it is best

understood in the broadest sense that the "standard company logo" and the "special

· .


Page 18

event logo" in the field of the invention are images that are displayed on a web page

that are viewable by a user using a web browser application. The image can have a

search term associated with it and the image can be "clickable" wherein when a user

"clicks" on the image a search is invoked utilizing the search term. Examiner submits

that Wolff is relied upon for teaching this aspect in the art wherein Wolff teaches the

displaying of an image to a user (figure 2, part 102, banner icon), the association of a

search term associated with the icon based on what the icon represents through

imaging means (column 8, lines 43-46, unique indicia) and the invocation of a search

related to the search term (column 8, line 65 - col. 9, line 7, invoking a search based on

a selection of the icon by a user utilizing the unique indicia). Examiner submits that

Wolff does not explicitly teach the image being a company logo that is altered to

become a special event logo and submits that in view of Yahoo, it is well known in the

art that company logos can be displayed as images on web pages and the image can

be altered to commemorate a special event wherein Yahoo has altered their logo to

commemorate the Christmas. holiday season on December 23, 1996. In view of the

combination the search term would always relate to what is being displayed by the

image to the user because it would not make reasonable sense to one of ordinary skill

for the search term to be totally unrelated to what the image represents and therefore

the obvious variant of imaging use wherein the image could be a special event company

logo would be related to the topic of what the special event company logo image is

portraying to a user through graphical means.

Appl ication/Control Number:09/843,923Art Unit: 2142

Page 19

Appellant argues further with respect to independent claim 18 that it would not

have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of appellant's invention

to replace Wolff's advertisement banner with the prior art seasonal or C?ne-time use

static banner because it would be directly contrary to the whole purpose of the system

of Wolff to provide information regarding an advertised product or service in response to

selection of a banner advertisement relating to the product or service.. Examiner

submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the

teachings of Wolff wherein the ability to display c1ickable images to a user on a web

page in combination with the functionalities of Yahoo! wherein it is taught that one of

ordinary skill can alter an image and upload it for display to users on a web page.

Appellant argues further that the examiner's allegations are unfounded and

based solely on impermissible hindsight because one of ordinary skill would not have

been motivated, contrary to the examiner's hindsight reasoning, to associate a search

term relating to a special event with the Yahoo logo shown in the Yahoo document. The

examiner submits that In view of the combination the search term would always relate to

what is being displayed by the image to the user because it would not make reasonable

sense to one of ordinary skill for the search term to be totally unrelated to what the

image represents and therefore the obvious variant of imaging use wherein the image

could be a special event company logo would be related to the topic of what the special

event company logo image is portraying to a user through graphical means.

2. Appellant argues with respect to dependent claim 40 that Wolff and Yahoo,

whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, do not disclose or suggest the

..


Page 20

combination of features recited in claim 40 which recites invoking a search of the

Internet. Examiner submits and maintains that Wolff teaches in column 9, lines 3-15 the

searching of an online database which is considered to be a part of the Internet and is

therefore within the scope of the appellant's claim 40. As is known in the art, search

engines do not actually search the Internet but in fact search an indexed database of

the Internet. Therefore, Wolff's searching of an online database is deemed equivalent

to the searching conducted by the appellant's dependent claim 40.

3. Appellant argues with respect to independent claim 26 that Wolff and Yahoo

do not disclose or suggest instructions for creating a special event logo by modifying a

standard company logo for a special event. Examiner submits that Wolff does not

explicitly teach the image being a company logo that is altered to become a special

event logo and submits that in view of Yahoo, it is well known in the art that company

logos can be displayed as images on web pages and the image can'be altered to

commemorate a special event wherein Yahoo has altered their logo to commemorate

the Christmas holiday season on December 23, 1996. It is submitted by the examiner

that the Yahoo's logo had to be modified utilizing a computer because it is a computer

generated image and it is inherent that a computer must contain instructions in order to

function at all. Therefore the combination of Wolff and Yahoo does teach the creating of

a special event logo by modifying a standard company logo for a special event.

Appellant argues further with respect to independent claim 26 that Wolff and

Yahoo do not disclose or suggest instructions for associating a link or search results

with a special event logo created by modifying a standard company logo for a special


Page 21

event logo. the link identifying a document relating to the special event, and the search

results relating to the special event for at least reasons 'similar to reasons given with

regard to claim 18. Examiner submits that it is best understood in the broadest sense

that the "standard company logo" and the "special event logo" in the field of the

invention are images that are displayed on a web page that are viewable by a user

using a web browser application. The image can have a search term associated with it

and the image can be "c1ickable" wherein when a user "clicks" on the image a search is

invoked utilizing the search term. Examiner submits that Wolff is relied upon for

teaching this aspect in the art wherein Wolff teaches the displaying of an image to a

user (figure 2, part 102, banner icon), the association of a search term associated with

the icon based on what the icon represents through imaging means (column 8, lines 43-

46, unique indicia) and the invocation of a search related to the search term (column 8,

line 65 - col. 9, line 7, invoking a search based on a selection of the icon by a user

utilizing the unique indicia). Examiner submits that Wolff does not explicitly teach the

image being a company logo that is altered to become a special event logo and submits

that in view of Yahoo, it is well known in the art that company logos can be displayed as

images on web pages and the image can be altered to commemorate a special event

wherein Yahoo has altered their logo to commemorate the Christmas holiday season on

December 23, 1996. In view of the combination the search term would always relate to

what is being displayed by the image to the user because it would· not make reasonable




Page 22



Appellant argues further that Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest

instructions for uploading the special event logo to the web page. The examiner

submits that the appellant has failed to accurately describe how a logo or any image for

that matter can be viewable on a web page without performing an upload operation.

The examiner submits that at least Yahoo teaches on this aspect of the appellant's

invention wherein Yahoo clearly illustrates the display of an altered company logo to a

user.



combination of features recited in claim 29. Claim 29 recites instructions for modifying

the standard company logo with one or more animated images. Examiner submits that

Yahoo teaches the modification of a logo using instructions wherein Yahoo shows a

modified Yahoo logo done by computer means. The computer is required to be fed

instructions in order to work at all and therefore reads on the aspect of executing

instructions as required by dependent claim 29.



combination of features recited in claim 31. Dependent claim 31 recites instructions for

modifying the standard company logo with information associated with a holiday.

Examiner submits that the modified Yahoo company logo taught by the Yahoo


Page 23

reference is a clear commemoration of the Christmas holiday and is therefore within the

scope of being associated with a holiday.



combination of features recited in claim 35. Dependent claim 35 recites instructions for

replacing the standard company logo with the special event logo on the web page.

Examiner submits, as mentioned previously, that a computer is required to be fed

instructions in order to work properly. Examiner maintains that the Yahoo reference

teaches the utilization of a temporary logo, a Christmas holiday logo, in place of the

regular Yahoo logo and therefore teaches the replacing of a standard logo with a

special event logo.

7. Appellant argues with respect to independent claim 27 that neither Wolff nor


the combination of features recited fn claim 27 because Wolff and Yahoo do not

disclose or suggest a processor configured to determine a ~ome page for a web page

on a network. Examiner submits that Wolff teaches the inherent use of a computer

processor by way of having an image uploaded to a web site wherein the uploading of

an image would not be possible in any way without the use of a computer processor.

Yahoo! teaches the uploading of an image to a web page, coincidentally to a home

page, wherein the uploading has been done to the home page as indicated

(www.yahoo.com) and the altered image is actually being displayed where the standard

company logo is customarily presented. By having the uploading being done to the


Page 24

home page it is therefore taught by Yahoo the functionality of determining the home

page.

8. Appellant argues with respect to dependent claims 32 and 33 that Wolff and

Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, do not disclose or

suggest the combination of features recited in claim 32. Dependent claim 32 recites a

processor configured to associate one or more search terms reiating to the special

event with the special event logo. Examiner submits that Wolff is relied upon for

teaching this aspect in the art wherein Wolff teaches the displaying of an image to a

user (figure 2, part 102, banner icon), the association of a search term associated with

the icon based on what the icon represents through imaging means (column 8, lines 43-

46, unique indicia) and the invocation of a search related to the search term (column 8,

line 65 - col. 9, line 7, invoking a search based on a selection of the icon by a user

utilizing ~he unique indicia). Examiner submits that Wolff does not explicitly teach the

image being a company logo that is altered to become a special event logo and submits

that in view of Yahoo, it is well known in the art that company logos can be displayed as



December 23, 1996. In view of the combination the search term would always relate to

what is being displayed by the image to' the user because it would not make reasonable




Page 25



9. Appellant argues with respect to claims 28 and 36 that neither Wolff nor


the combination of features recited in claim 28 because Wolff and Yahoo do not

disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms relating to a special event

with a special event logo created by modifying a standard company logo with at least

one or image, video, or audio data relating to the special event for at least reasons

similar to reasons given with regard to claim 18. Examiner submits that Wolff is relied

upon for teaching this aspect in the art wherein Wolff teaches the displaying of an image

to a user (figure 2, part 102, banner icon), the association of a search term associated

with the icon based on what the icon represents through imaging means (column 8,

lines 43-46, unique indicia) and the invocation of a search related to the search term

(column 8, line 65 - col. 9, line 7, invoking a search based on a selection of the icon by

a user utilizing the unique indicia). Examiner submits that Wolff does not explicitly teach

the image beil")g a company logo that is altered to become a special event logo and

submits that in view of Yahoo, it is well known in the art that company logos can be

displayed as images on web pages and the image can be altered to commemorate a

special ev~nt wherein Yahoo has altered their logo to commemorate the Christmas

holiday season on December 23, 1996. In view of the combination the search term

would always relate to what is being displayed by the image to the user because it

would not make reasonable sense to one of ordinary skill for the search term to be


Page 26

totally unrelated to what the image represents and therefore the obvious variant of

imaging use wherein the image could be a special event company logo would be related

to the topic of what the special event company logo image is portraying to a u~er

through graphical means.



combination of features recited in claim 41. Claim 41 recites invoking a search for web

pages relating to the special event. Examiner submits and maintains that Wolff teaches

in column 9, lines 3-15 the searching of an online database which is considered to be a

part of the Internet and is therefore within the scope of the appellant's claim 40. As is

known in the art, search engines do not actually search the Internet but in fact search

an indexed database of the Internet. Therefore, Wolff's searching of an online database

is deemed equivalent to the searching conducted by the appellant's dependent claim

41.

11. Appellant argues with respect to claims 37-39 that neither Wolff nor Yahoo,

whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, discloses or suggests the

combination of features recited in claim 37 because Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or

suggest invoking a search for web pages relating to the special event in response to a

received selection of a special event logo. Examiner submits and maintains that Wolff

teaches in column 9, lines 3-15 the searching of an online database which is considered

to be a part of the Internet and is therefore within the scope of the appellant's claim 40.

As is known in the art, search engines do not actually search the Internet but in fact


Page 27

search an indexed database of the Internet. Therefore, Wolff's searching of an online

database is deemed equivalent to the searching conducted by the appellant's claims.



combination of features recited in claim 22. Dependent claim 22 recites associating one

or more search terms relating to the special event, and performing the search based on

the one or more search terms. Examiner submits that Wolff is relied upon for teaching

this aspect in the art wherein Wolff teaches the displaying of an image to a user (figure

2, part 102, banner icon), the association of a search term associated with the icon

based on what the icon represents through imaging means (column 8, lines 43-46,

unique indicia) and the invocation of a search related to the search term (column 8, line

65 - col. 9, line 7, invoking a search based on a selection of the icon by a user utilizing

the unique indicia). Examiner submits that Wolff does not explicitly teach the image

being a company logo that is altered to become a special event logo and submits that in

view of Yahoo, it is well known in the art that company logos can be displayed as



December 23, 1996. In view of the combination the search term would always ,relate to

what is being displayed by the image to the user because it would not make reasonable



,


Page 28



B. Rejection under 35 USC '103(a) based on Wolff (US 6,247,047) in view of

Yahoo! and what was well known at the time of the applicant's invention.

1. Appellant argues with respect to dependent claim 20 that Wolff and Yahoo do

not disclose or suggest the combination of features recited in claim 20. Dependent

claim 20 recites creating the special event logo by modifying the standard company logo

with at least one of video or audio data. The examiner had taken official notice with

respect to use of video or audio data on a web page. The examiner submits that it

would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's

invention to include video or audio data in the special event logo because one of

ordinary skill would have recognized the advancement of using different types of media

to catch the interest of the user viewing a page.

2. Appellant argues with respect to dependent claim 30 that Wolff, Yahoo and

what was well known at the time of the appellant's invention do not disclose or suggest

the combination of features recited in claim 30. Dependent claim 30 recites instructions

fro modifying the standard company logo with at least one of video or audio data. The

examiner had taken official notice with respect to use of video or audio data on a web

page. The examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in

the art at the time of the applicant's invention to include video or audio data in the

special event logo because one of ordinary skill would have recognized the


Page 29

advancement of using different types of media to catch the interest of the user viewing a

page.

(11) Related Proceeding(s) Appendix

No decision rendered by a court or the Board is identified by the examiner in the

Related Appeals and Interferences section of this examiner's answer.

For the above reasons, it is believed that the rejections should be sustained.


Benjamin A. Ailes ~~

Conferees:

Andrew Caldwell

QrnMuJC~ANDREW CALDWELL

SUPERVISORY PATENT EXAMINER

~-~~ARDONESUPERVISORY PATENT EXAMINER

, ..~

Application/Control No. Applicant(s)/Patent UnderReexamination

Index of Claims 09843923 BRIN, SERGEY

II I II II I I IIExaminer Art Unit

Ailes, Benjamin A 2142

=

Rejected

Allowed

Cancelled

Restricted

N Non-Elected

Interference

A

o

Appeal

Objected

0 Claims renumbered in the same order as presented by applicant D CPA D T.D. D R.1.47

CLAIM DATEFinal Original 11/07/2007

1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 -7 -8 -9 -10 -11 -12 -13 -14 -15 -16 -17 -18 A

19 A

20 A

21 A

22 A

23 A

24 A

25 A

26 A

27 A

28 A

29 A

30 A

31 A

32 A

33 A

34 A

35 A

36 A



Index of Claims 09843923 BRIN, SERGEY

11111 I II II III II

Examiner Art Unit

Ailes, Benjamin A 2142

=

Rejected

Allowed

Cancelled

Restricted

N Non-Elected

Interference

A

o

Appeal

Objected


CLAIM DATEFinal Original 11/07/2007

37 A

38 A

39 A

40 A

41 A

U.S. Palent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No.: 20071107


IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEBEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES


SergeyBRIN



For: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FORENTICING USERS TO ACCESS AWEB SITE

))) ATTN: APPEAL BRIEF - PATENTS)) Group Art Unit: 2142)) Examiner: B. Ailes))))

U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Window, Mail Stop Appeal Brief - PatentsRandolph Building401 Dulany StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

APPEAL BRIEF

This Appeal Brief is submitted in response to the non-final Office Action, dated February

7,2007, and in support of the Notice of Appeal, filed May 8, 2007.

1. REAL PARTY IN INTEREST

The real party in interest in this appeal is Google Inc.

II. RELATED APPEALS, INTERFERENCES, AND WDICIAL PROCEEDINGS

Appellant is unaware of any related appeals, interferences, or judicial proceedings.

APPEAL BRIEF

III. STATUS OF CLAIMS

Claims 18-41 are pending in this application.



Claims 18, 19,21-29, and 31-41 stand rejected under 35 US.C. § 103(a) as allegedly

unpatentable over Wolff (US. Patent No. 6,247,047) in view ofYahoo

(www.archive.org/web/19961223150621/http://www8.Yahoo.com. dated December 23, 1996).

Claims 20 and 30 stand rejected under 35 US.c. § 103(a) as allegedly unpatentable over

Wolff in view ofYahoo and what was allegedly "well known at the time of the applicant's

invention."

Claims 1-17 were previously canceled without prejudice or disclaimer.

Claims 18-41 are the subject of the present appeal. These claims are reproduced in the

Claim Appendix of this Appeal Brief.

IV. STATUS OF AMENDMENTS

No claim amendments were filed subsequent to the non-final Office Action, dated

February 7,2007.

V. SUMMARY OF CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER

In the paragraphs that follow, a concise explanation of the independent claims and the

claims reciting means-pIus-function or step-pIus-function language that are involved in this

appeal will be provided by referring, in parenthesis, to examples ofwhere support can be found

in the specification and drawings.

Claim 18 recites a method for enticing users to access a web page (Fig. 10). The method

- 2 -

APPEAL BRIEF PATENTSerial No. 09/843,923


comprises modifying a standard company logo for a special event to create a special event logo

(Fig. 10, 1010; page 11, line 19 - page 12, line 5; page 13, lines 9-20); associating one or more

search terms with the special event logo (Fig. 10, 1020; page 12, lines 9-14; page 14, lines 1-5),

the one or more search terms relating to the special event (page 12, lines 9-14); uploading the

special event logo to the web page (Fig. 10, 1030; page 14, lines 6-10); receiving a user selection

of the special event logo (Fig. 10, 1040; page 14, lines 11-13); and invoking a search relating to

the special event based on the one or more search terms in response to the user selection (Fig. 10,

1050; page 14, lines 13-15).

Claim 20 recites creating the special event logo by modifying the standard company logo

with at least one of video or audio data (page 11, line 20 - page 12, line 5).

Claim 22 recites associating one or more search terms relating to the special event (page

12, lines 9-14; page 14, lines 1-5); and wherein invoking a search includes performing the search

based on the one or more search terms (page 14, lines 11-15).

Claim 26 recites a computer-readable medium (Fig. 2, 230-250) that stores instructions

executable by one or more processors (Fig. 2, 220) to perform a method for attracting users to a

web page (Fig. 10; page 15, lines 1-2). The computer-readable medium comprises instructions

for creating a special event logo by modifying a standard company logo for a special event (Fig.

10, 1010; page 11, line 19 - page 12, line 5; page 13, lines 9-20); instructions for associating a

link or search results with the special event logo (Fig. 10, 1020; page 12, lines 9-14; page 14,

lines 1-5), the link identifying a document relating to the special event (page 12, lines 9-14), the

search results relating to the special event (page 12, lines 9-14); instructions for uploading the

special event logo to the web page (Fig. 10, 1030; page 14, lines 6-10); instructions for receiving

- 3 -



a user selection of the special event logo (Fig. 10, 1040; page 14, lines 11-13); and instructions

for providing the document relating to the special event or the search results relating to the

special event based on the user selection (Fig. 10, 1050; page 12, lines 15-18; page 14, lines 13-

19).

Claim 27 recites a server (Fig. 1, 120) connected to a network (Fig. 1, 130). The server

comprises a memory (Fig. 2, 230-250) configured to store instructions (page 7, lines 13-18); and

a processor (Fig. 2, 220) configured to execute the instructions (page 7, lines 12-18) to determine

a home page for a web page on the network (page 13, lines 17-18), identify a standard company

logo on the home page (page 13, lines 18-19), modify the standard company logo with special

event information corresponding to a special event to create a special event logo (page 11, line

19 - page 12, line 8; page 13, lines 19-20), and replace the standard company logo with the

special event logo during the special event (page 12, lines 6-8; page 14, lines 6-10).

Claim 28 recites a method comprising identifying a standard company logo associated

with a web site (page 13, lines 17-19); modifying the standard company logo with at least one of

image, video, or audio data relating to a special event to create a special event logo (page 12,

lines 1-5; page 13, lines 9-12; page 13, lines 19-20); associating one or more search terms

relating to the special event with the special event logo (page 12, lines 9-14; page 14, lines 1-5);

detecting a selection associated with the special event logo (page 14, lines 11-13); and invoking

a search relating to the special event based on the one or more search terms in response to the

detected selection (page 14, lines 13-15).

Claim 29 recites that the instructions for creating a special event logo include instructions

for modifying the standard company logo with one or more animated images (page 8, lines 7-11;

- 4 -

APPEAL BRIEF

page 13, lines 9-16).




for modifying the standard company logo with at least one of video or audio data (page 8, lines

7-11; page 11, line 20 - page 12, line 5).


for modifying the standard company logo with information associated with a holiday (page 8,

lines 7-11; page 12, lines 6-8; page 12, line 19 - page 13, line 5).

Claim 32 recites that the processor is further configured to associate one or more search

terms relating to the special event with the special event logo (page 12, lines 9-14; page 14, lines

1-5).

Claim 35 recites that the instructions for uploading the special event logo include

instructions for replacing the standard company logo with the special event logo on the web page

(Figure 9; page 14, lines 6-10).

Claim 37 recites a method may include presenting a special event logo on a web page

(page 14, lines 6-10), the special event logo being associated with a standard company logo that

has been modified or replaced for a special event (page 12, lines 1-5; page 13, lines 9-12);

receiving selection of the special event logo (page 14, lines 11-13); invoking a search for web

pages relating to the special event in response to the received selection (page 14, lines 13-15);

and presenting results based on the invoked search (page 12, lines 15-18; page 14, lines 14-15).

Claim 40 recites that invoking a search includes invoking a search of the Internet (page

14, lines 13-14).

Claim 41 recites that invoking a search includes invoking a search for web pages relating

- 5 -

APPEAL BRIEF

to the special event (Figure 8; page 12, lines 9-18).

VI. GROUNDS OF REJECTION TO BE REVIEWED ON APPEAL



A. Claims 18, 19,21-29, and 31-41 stand rejected under 35 U.S.c. § 103(a) as


B. Claims 20 and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.c. § 103(a) as unpatentable over

Wolff, Yahoo, and what was allegedly "well known at the time of applicant's invention."

VII. ARGUMENT

A. The Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) Based on Wolff (U.S. Patent No.6,247,047) in View of Yahoo(www.archive.org/web/19961223150621/http://www8.Yahoo.com. datedDecember 23, 1996) Should be Reversed.

The initial burden of establishing a prima facie basis to deny patentability to a claimed

invention is always upon the Examiner. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443,24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed.

Cir. 1992). In rejecting a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the Examiner must provide a factual

basis to support the conclusion of obviousness. In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 154 USPQ 173

(CCPA 1967). Based upon the objective evidence of record, the Examiner is required to make

the factual inquiries mandated by Graham v. John Deere Co., 86 S.Ct. 684, 383 U.S. 1, 148

USPQ 459 (1966). KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. (April 30, 2007).

The Examiner is also required to explain how and why one having ordinary skill in the art would

have been led to modify an applied reference and/or combine applied references to arrive at the

claimed invention. Uniroyal, Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corp., 837 F.2d 1044,5 USPQ2d 1434 (Fed.

- 6 -

APPEAL BRIEF

Cir. 1988).

1. Claims 18, 19,21,23-25, and 34.



Independent claim 18 is directed to a method for enticing users to access a web page.

The method comprises modifying a standard company logo for a special event to create a special

event logo; associating one or more search terms with the special event logo, the one or more

search terms relating to the special event; uploading the special event logo to the web page;

receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and invoking a search relating to the special

event based on the one or more search terms in response to the user selection.

Neither Wolff nor Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination,

discloses or suggests the combination of features recited in claim 18. For example, Wolff and

Yahoo do not disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms with a special event logo

that was created by modifying a standard company logo for a special event, where the one or

more search terms relate to the special event.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses this feature and cited column 8, line 56 -

column 9, line 15, of Wolff for support. Office Action, paragraph 12. Appellant submits that

this section of Wolff provides absolutely no support for the Examiner's allegation.

At column 8, line 56 - column 9, line 15, Wolff discloses:

At step 202, a user uninterested in the advertised product or service may continuebrowsing without selecting banner 102. However, if the user wants to make a transactionor wants more information about the advertised product or service, the user selects banner102 using an input device such as mouse 22 by clicking in geographic area 104. Inresponse, at step 204, user node 14 makes an TCP/IP request using the URL(..www.bannerbuy.com..) embedded within banner 102 to contact host server 12 overInternet 16.

At step 206, host server 12 generates a unique transaction identification number("transaction ID"), and creates a new record in the transaction record database which canbe indexed by the transaction ID. This record will be used to store any input data entered

- 7 -



by the user for this transaction. At step 208, host server 12 receives the unique indicia(e.g., "12345") embedded within banner 102 and uses the indicia to search the on-lineproduct/service database for a record containing information specific to the advertisedproduct or service. This record was previously defined by the merchant, at which time itsunique identification indicia was assigned. After finding and retrieving the record, at step210, host server 12 dynamically generates a presentation/input form page 108 based atleast in part on data stored within the retrieved record, and sends page 108 over Internet16 for display on display 18 of user node 14 at step 212. Page 108 is displayed byopening a new browser or new window on user node 14.

In this section, Wolff discloses that if a user wants more information about an advertised product

or service, the user selects banner 102, which causes host server 12 to perform a search based on

unique indicia embedded within the banner to identify a record containing information specific

to the advertised product or service. In other words, Wolff discloses a banner relating to an

advertised product or service and in response to a user selecting the banner, presenting the user

with information relating to the advertised product or service. Nowhere does Wolff disclose or

suggest a special event logo (created by modifying a standard company logo for a special event)

and, therefore, cannot disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms with the special

event logo, where the one or more search terms relate to the special event, as required by claim

18.

The Examiner admitted that Wolff does not disclose a special event logo that is created

by modifying a standard company logo for a special event. Office Action, paragraph 12. The

Examiner relied upon Yahoo for allegedly disclosing a special event logo that is created by

modifying a standard company logo for a special event. Office Action, paragraph 12. While

Yahoo appears to show the Yahoo logo with a reindeer for the Christmas season, Yahoo does not

disclose or remotely suggest, however, associating one or more search terms with the special

event logo, let alone one or more search terms that relate to the special event, as required by

- 8 -



claim 18. In fact, there is absolutely nothing in the Yahoo document that remotely suggests that

any search terms are associated with the Yahoo logo.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses the use of a graphical icon, as an

advertisement banner, that can be quickly set up for seasonal and one-time use and cited column

2, lines 27-28, of Wolff for support. Office Action, paragraph 12. Appellant submits that the

Examiner has totally misconstrued the disclosure of Wolff.

At column 2, lines 27-28, Wolff discloses "Also, the banner can be quickly set up for

seasonal or one-time use." In this section, Wolff is describing a feature of a prior art technique

for providing a static graphical banner that includes a static image relating to the product or

service being advertised. Column 2, lines 14-35. Wolff specifically discloses that static banners

"involve only one-way communication, and do not take advantage of the Internet's interactive

capabilities." Column 2, lines 30-35. Thus, Wolff teaches away from associating one or more

search terms with these static banners, and clearly does not disclose or suggest associating one or

more search terms that relate to a special event, as would be required by claim 18. Therefore, at

best, this section of Wolff merely discloses putting a seasonal or one-time use static banner on a

web site.

Further, the Examiner provided no motivation for modifying Wolffs advertisement

banner with the prior art seasonal or one-time use static banner. Thus, the Examiner has not

established a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 18. In fact, Appellant submits

that it would not have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time ofAppellant's

invention to replace Wolffs advertisement banner with the prior art seasonal or one-time use

static banner because it would be directly contrary to the whole purpose of the system of Wolff --

- 9 -



to provide information regarding an advertised product or service in response to selection of a

banner advertisement relating to the product or service.

The Examiner appears to allege that combining an advertisement banner, as allegedly

disclosed by Wolff, with the Yahoo logo (modified for the Christmas season), as allegedly

disclosed by Yahoo, and putting a static banner on a web site for seasonal or one-time use, as

allegedly disclosed by Wolff, would somehow correspond to associating one or more search

terms with a special event logo that was created by modifying a standard company logo for a

special event, where the one or more search terms relate to the special event, as required by

claim 18. Appellant submits that even if these disparate pieces could be combined (a point that

Appellant does not concede for the reasons given herein), the combination would not remotely

correspond to associating one or more search terms with a special event logo, where the one or

more search terms relate to the special event, as required by claim 18. Instead, at best, the

combination might motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to associate a search term relating to

the company Yahoo with the Yahoo logo.

The Examiner alleged that:

It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the teachings ofWolff wherein the ability to display clickable images to a user on a web page incombination with the functionalities ofYahoo! wherein it is taught that one of ordinaryskill can alter an image and upload it for display to a user on a web page.

Office Action, paragraph 12. Appellant submits that the Examiner's allegation is merely an

unfounded conclusion. The Examiner has provided absolutely no motivation for combining

these alleged features of Wolff and Yahoo.

The Examiner further alleged that:

Further, it would have been obvious to associate the "search term" to relate to the

- 10 -



graphical icon image as taught by Wolff because the keyword associated with the iconimage is supposed to directly identify the product or service being represented by use ofthe icon image and when a use interacts (clicks) on the icon image (see Wolff, col. 8,11.43-49), it is deemed obvious that search results should be directly related to whatever theicon represents instead of erroneous data. One of ordinary skill would not find it desirableto provide search results that are totally unrelated to what is being displayed by the iconimage. Therefore, in view of Yahoo!, ifan image is altered in some sort ofway, thekeyword associated with the image should be changed accordingly so that the keywordcorresponds to the image in some sort ofway.

Office Action, paragraph 12. Appellant submits that the Examiner's allegations are unfounded

and based solely on impermissible hindsight. In light of the Examiner's reasoning, one of

ordinary skill in the art might, at best, be motivated to associate a search term relating to the

company Yahoo with the Yahoo logo. The Yahoo logo, shown in the Yahoo document, is still

the Yahoo logo even though it includes a reindeer image with the reindeer's head sticking

through the "0." One of ordinary skill would not have been motivated, contrary to the

Examiner's hindsight reasoning, to associate a search term relating to a special event with the

Yahoo logo shown in the Yahoo document. The Examiner has provided absolutely no evidence

to the contrary.

The Examiner further alleged:

One or ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's invention would have foundit obvious to combine the teachings of Yahoo! with what is taught by Wolff as outlinedabove. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such acombination due to being from the same field of endeavor (client-server networksystems) and for the reasons stated above, particularly teaching the use of displayingimages to user that are deemed clickable by Wolff and Yahoo! for teaching the use ofaltered images which may commemorate a special event and the use of different imagesto be displayed to a user is deemed an obvious variation in the art. In view of Wolff, theuse of different images is clearly taught as a motivation in the prior art wherein one ofordinary skill in the art may find it useful to use different image types for seasonal use(col. 2, 11. 27-28).

Office Action, paragraph 12. Appellant submits that the Examiner's motivation statements fall

short of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 18. For example, the

- 11 -



Examiner has provided absolutely no explanation of why one of ordinary skill in the art at the

time of Appellant's invention would have been motivated to associate one or more search terms

relating to a special event with the Yahoo logo. Instead, as explained above, the Examiner has

only provided an allegation as to why one of ordinary skill might have been motivated to

associate a search term that is "directly related to whatever the icon represents" (Office Action,

paragraph 12) -- in other words, the Yahoo company.


Taking broadest reasonable interpretation of what is claimed, it is best understood in thebroadest sense that the "standard company logo" and the "special event logo" in the fieldof the invention are images that are displayed on a web page that are viewable by a userusing a web browser program.

Office Action, paragraph 4. Appellant strenuously objects to the Examiner's attempt to

unreasonably broaden the definition of"company logo." It is apparent that the Examiner

understands the definition of company logo since the Examiner properly pointed to the Yahoo

company logo in the Yahoo document. Appellant uses the term "company logo" consistent with

its well understood definition of a name, symbol, or trademark designed for easy recognition.

The American Heritage College Dictionary, Third Edition, 1997, page 797. Thus, the

Examiner's attempt to broaden the definition of "company logo" to any image displayed on a

web page is unreasonable.

The Examiner also alleged:

Wolff is not relied upon for teaching in the art the image being a company logo that isaltered to become a special event logo. The image being a company logo is deemed anobvious variation in the art.

Office Action, paragraph 4. Appellant submits that the Examiner's allegation that substituting a

company logo for the banner advertisement in Wolff would be an "obvious variation in the art"

- 12 -



is simply a conclusory statement that is unsupported by the disclosures of Wolff and Yahoo. The

Examiner has provided absolutely no evidence to show that substituting a company logo for a

banner advertisement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of

Appellant's invention and, like the rest of the Examiner's allegations, falls short of establishing a

prima facie case of obviousness. In fact, Appellant submits that substituting a company logo for

a banner advertisement in Wolff would be directly contrary to the whole purpose of the system

of Wolff -- to provide information regarding an advertised product or service in response to

selection of a banner advertisement relating to the product or service.


It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the combinationthat the search term would always relate to what is being displayed by the image to theuser because it would not make reasonable sense to one of ordinary skill for the searchterm to be totally unrelated to what the image represents and therefore the obvious variantof imaging use wherein the image could be a special event company logo as taught byYahoo! the search term associated with the special event company logo would be relatedto the topic ofwhat the special event company logo image is portraying to a user throughgraphical means.

Office Action, paragraph 4. These allegations by the Examiner, at best, only attempt to explain

why one of ordinary skill might have been motivated to associate the search term of "Yahoo"

with the Yahoo logo because, as the Examiner states "the search term would always relate to

what is being displayed by the image to the user because it would not make reasonable sense to

one of ordinary skill for the search term to be totally unrelated to what the image represents."

Office Action, paragraph 4. The Yahoo logo in the Yahoo document clearly relates to the Yahoo

company. Thus, contrary to the Examiner's allegations, the combination of Wolff and Yahoo

would not disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms with a special event logo that

was created by modifying a standard company logo for a special event, where the one or more

- 13 -

APPEAL BRIEF

search terms relate to the special event, as required by claim 18.



Because Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest associating one or more search

terms with the special event logo, the one or more search terms relating to the special event,

Wolff and Yahoo cannot disclose or suggest invoking a search relating to the special event based

on the one or more search terms in response to a user selection, as further recited in claim 18.

For at least these reasons, it is respectfully submitted that claims 18, 19,21,23-25, and

34 are patentable over Wolff and Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination,

under 35 U.S.c. § 103. Reversal of the rejection of claims 18, 19,21,23-25, and 34 is

respectfully requested.

2. Claim 40.

Dependent claim 40 recites invoking a search of the Internet.

Initially, claim 40 depends from claim 18. Claim 40 is, therefore, patentable over Wolff

and Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, for at least the reasons given

with regard to claim 18.

Further, Wolff and Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, do not

disclose or suggest the combination of features recited in claim 40.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses invoking a search of the Internet and cited

column 9, lines 3-7, of Wolff for support. Office Action, paragraph 33. Appellant submits that

this section of Wolff provides absolutely no support for the Examiner's allegation.

At column 9, lines 3-15, Wolff discloses:

At step 208, host server 12 receives the unique indicia (e.g., "12345") embedded withinbanner 102 and uses the indicia to search the on-line product/service database for a recordcontaining information specific to the advertised product or service. This record waspreviously defined by the merchant, at which time its unique identification indicia was

- 14 -



assigned. After finding and retrieving the record, at step 210, host server 12 dynamicallygenerates a presentation/input form page 108 based at least in part on data stored withinthe retrieved record, and sends page 108 over Internet 16 for display on display 18 ofuser node 14 at step 212. Page 108 is displayed by opening a new browser or newwindow on user node 14.

In this section, Wolff discloses searching an on-line product/service database, which is

accessible via the Internet. See, e.g., Figure 1. The Examiner appears to be alleging that

invoking a search of a product/service database connected via the Internet is equivalent to

invoking a search of the Internet. These two searches are very different. The product/service

database search would retrieve only records from the set of records in the product/service

database. Just because Wolff discloses that the product/service database is available via the

Internet, does not mean that searching the database is equivalent to searching the Internet.

Accordingly, Appellant submits that the Examiner's allegation lacks merit.

For at least these reasons, it is respectfully submitted that claim 40 is patentable over

Wolff and Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, under 35 U.S.c. § 103.

Reversal of the rejection of claim 40 is respectfully requested.

3. Claim 26.

Independent claim 26 is directed to a computer-readable medium that stores instructions

executable by one or more processors to perform a method for attracting users to a web page.

The computer-readable medium comprises instructions for creating a special event logo by

modifying a standard company logo for a special event; instructions for associating a link or

search results with the special event logo, the link identifying a document relating to the special

event, the search results relating to the special event; instructions for uploading the special event

logo to the web page; instructions for receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and

- 15 -



instructions for providing the document relating to the special event or the search results relating

to the special event based on the user selection.



Yahoo do not disclose or suggest instructions for creating a special event logo by modifying a

standard company logo for a special event.

The Examiner admitted that Wolff does not disclose this feature, but alleged that Yahoo

discloses that a company logo can be modified to commemorate a special event. Office Action,

paragraph 20. Regardless of the accuracy of the Examiner's allegation regarding the Yahoo

document, Appellant submits that the Examiner has not provided any evidence that the Yahoo

logo was modified by executing instructions for creating a special event logo by modifying a

standard company logo for a special event, as required by claim 26. Instead, the Examiner

merely showed an end product (i.e., the modified Yahoo logo), which might have been manually

modified by a web site operator. Thus, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case of

obviousness with regard to claim 26.

Also, Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest instructions for associating a link or

search results with a special event logo created by modifying a standard company logo for a

special event, the link identifying a document relating to the special event, and the search results

relating to the special event, as further recited in claim 26, for at least reasons similar to reasons

given with regard to claim 18.

Also, Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest instructions for uploading the special

event logo to the web page, as further recited in claim 26. The Examiner alleged that Yahoo

- 16 -



discloses a company logo that can be modified to commemorate a special event and uploaded for

display to a user on a web page. Office Action, paragraph 20. Regardless of the accuracy of the

Examiner's allegation regarding the Yahoo document, Appellant submits that the Examiner has

not provided any evidence that the modified Yahoo logo was uploaded on the Yahoo web page

by executing instructions for uploading a special event logo to a web page, as required by claim

26. Instead, the Examiner merely showed an end product (i.e., the modified Yahoo logo on the

Yahoo web page), which might have been manually uploaded by a web site operator. Thus, the





4. Claim 29.


one or more animated images.






The Examiner alleged that Yahoo discloses modifying a standard company logo with one

or more animated images. Office Action, paragraph 23. Regardless of the accuracy of the

Examiner's allegation regarding the Yahoo document, Appellant submits that the Examiner has

- 17 -



not provided any evidence that the Yahoo logo was modified by executing instructions for

modifying the standard company logo with one or more animated images, as required by claim

29. Instead, the Examiner merely showed an end product (i.e., the modified Yahoo logo), which

might have been manually modified by a web site operator. Thus, the Examiner has not

established a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 29.




5. Claim 31.


information associated with a holiday.






The Examiner alleged that Yahoo discloses modifying a standard company logo with

information associated with a holiday. Office Action, paragraph 24. Regardless of the accuracy

of the Examiner's allegation regarding the Yahoo document, Appellant submits that the

Examiner has not provided any evidence that the Yahoo logo was modified by executing

instructions for modifying a standard company logo with information associated with a holiday,

as required by claim 31. Instead, the Examiner merely showed an end product (i.e., the modified

- 18 -



Yahoo logo), which might have been manually modified by a web site operator. Thus, the





6. Claim 35.

Dependent claim 35 recites instructions for replacing the standard company logo with the

special event logo on the web page.






The Examiner alleged that Yahoo discloses replacing a standard company logo with a

special event logo. Office Action, paragraph 28. Regardless of the accuracy of the Examiner's

allegation regarding the Yahoo document, Appellant submits that the Examiner has not provided

any evidence that the Yahoo logo was replaced by executing instructions for replacing a standard

company logo with a special event logo on a web page, as required by claim 35. Instead, the

Examiner merely showed an end product (i.e., the modified Yahoo logo), which might have been

manually replaced by a web site operator. Thus, the Examiner has not established a prima facie

case of obviousness with regard to claim 35.

- 19 -






7. Claim 27.

Independent claim 27 is directed to a server connected to a network. The server

comprises a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to execute the

instructions to determine a home page for a web page on the network, identify a standard

company logo on the home page, modify the standard company logo with special event

information corresponding to a special event to create a special event logo, and replace the

standard company logo with the special event logo during the special event.



Yahoo do not disclose or suggest a processor configured to determine a home page for a web

page on a network.

The Examiner alleged:

Yahoo! clearly teaches the uploading of an image to a web page in this case theuploading has been done to the home page as indicated (www.Yahoo.com) and thealtered image is actually being displayed where the standard company logo is customarilypresented. By way of actually uploading the image to the home page by Yahoo! then it istaught by Yahoo! the functionality of home page determination.

Office Action, paragraph 21. Appellant submits that the Examiner's allegations are merely

conclusory and fall short of establishing prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 27

by failing to show a processor configured to determine a home page for a web page on a

network, as required by claim 27. Instead, the Examiner has merely pointed to what the

- 20-



Examiner alleged is the home page for Yahoo.com and appears to reason that this necessarily

means that a processor determined the home page. Appellant submits that the Examiner has

provided absolutely no evidence to support the Examiner's conclusion. In fact, it is much more

likely that an operator of the Yahoo web site uploaded the Yahoo logo on the Yahoo web page.

Therefore, there would be no need in Yahoo for a processor to be configured to determine a

home page for a web page on a network, as required by claim 27.


Wolff teaches the use of computer processors for example in figure 1, item 14 andYahoo! teaches the inherent use of a computer processor by way of having an imageuploaded to a web site wherein the uploading of an image would not be possible in anyway without the use of a computer processor.

Office Action, paragraph 7. Thus, the Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses a processor and

Yahoo inherently uses a processor to upload an image to a web site. Regardless of the accuracy

of the Examiner's allegations concerning Wolff and Yahoo, the Examiner still has not provided

any evidence that either the Wolff processor or the inherent Yahoo processor is configured to

determine a home page for a web page on a network, as required by claim 27. Thus, the

Examiner still has not established a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 27.

Also, Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest a processor configured to identify a

standard company logo on the home page.

The Examiner alleged:

Yahoo! clearly teaches the uploading of an image to a web page in this case theuploading has been done to the home page as indicated (www.Yahoo.com) and thealtered image is actually being displayed where the standard company logo is customarilypresented. By way of actually uploading the image to the home page by Yahoo! then it istaught by Yahoo! the functionality of home page determination.

Office Action, paragraph 21. Appellant submits that the Examiner's allegations are merely

- 21 -



conclusory and fall short of establishing prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 27

by failing to show a processor configured to identify a standard company logo on the home page,

as required by claim 27. Instead, the Examiner has merely pointed to what the Examiner alleged

is the home page for Yahoo.com and appears to reason that this necessarily means that a

processor identified a standard company logo on the home page. Appellant submits that the

Examiner has provided absolutely no evidence to support the Examiner's conclusion. In fact, it

is much more likely that an operator of the Yahoo web site uploaded the modified Yahoo logo on

the Yahoo web page. Therefore, there would be no need in Yahoo for a processor to be

configured to identify a standard company logo on a home page, as required by claim 27.


Wolff teaches the use of computer processors for example in figure 1, item 14 andYahoo! teaches the inherent use of a computer processor by way of having an imageuploaded to a web site wherein the uploading of an image would not be possible in anyway without the use of a computer processor.

Office Action, paragraph 7. Thus, the Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses a processor and

Yahoo inherently uses a processor to upload an image to a web site. Regardless of the accuracy

of the Examiner's allegations concerning Wolff and Yahoo, the Examiner still has not provided

any evidence that either the Wolff processor or the inherent Yahoo processor is configured to

identify a standard company logo on the home page, as required by claim 27. Thus, the

Examiner still has not established a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 27.

Because Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest a processor configured to determine

a home page for a web page on the network or identify a standard company logo on the home

page, Wolff and Yahoo cannot disclose or suggest a processor that is also configured to modify

the standard company logo with special event information corresponding to a special event to

- 22-



create a special event logo, and replace the standard company logo with the special event logo

during the special event, as further recited in claim 27.




8. Claims 32 and 33.

Dependent claim 32 recites a processor configured to associate one or more search terms

relating to the special event with the special event logo.






The Examiner alleged that the combination of Wolff and Yahoo discloses a processor

configured to associate one or more search terms relating to a special event with a special event

logo. Office Action, paragraph 25. Appellant disagrees for at least reasons similar to reasons


For at least these reasons, it is respectfully submitted that claims 32 and 33 are patentable

over Wolff and Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, under 35 U.S.C. §

103. Reversal of the rejection of claims 32 and 33 is respectfully requested.

9. Claims 28 and 36.

Independent claim 28 is directed to a method comprising identifying a standard company

- 23 -



logo associated with a web site; modifying the standard company logo with at least one of image,

video, or audio data relating to a special event to create a special event logo; associating one or

more search terms relating to the special event with the special event logo; detecting a selection

associated with the special event logo; and invoking a search relating to the special event based

on the one or more search terms in response to the detected selection.



Yahoo do not disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms relating to a special event

with a special event logo created by modifying a standard company logo with at least one of

image, video, or audio data relating to the special event for at least reasons similar to reasons


For at least these reasons, it is respectfully submitted that claims 28 and 36 are patentable


103. Reversal of the rejection of claims 28 and 36 is respectfully requested.

10. Claim 41.

Dependent claim 41 recites invoking a search for web pages relating to the special event.






The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses invoking a search fore web pages relating to a

- 24-



special event and cited column 9, lines 3-7, of Wolff for support. Office Action, paragraph 34.

Appellant submits that this section of Wolff provides absolutely no support for the Examiner's

allegation.

Column 9, lines 3-7, of Wolff is reproduced above. In this section, Wolff discloses

searching an on-line product/service database, which is accessible via the Internet. See, e.g.,

Figure 1. The Examiner appears to be alleging that invoking a search of a database connected

via the Internet is equivalent to invoking a search for web pages relating to a special event.

These two searches are very different. The product/service database search would retrieve only

product/service records from the set of records in the product/service database. Just because

Wolff discloses that the product/service database is available via the Internet, does not mean that

searching the database is equivalent to searching for web pages relating to a special event.

Accordingly, Appellant submits that the Examiner's allegation lacks merit.




11. Claims 37-39.

Independent claim 37 is directed to a method comprising presenting a special event logo

on a web page, the special event logo being associated with a standard company logo that has

been modified or replaced for a special event; receiving selection of the special event logo;

invoking a search for web pages relating to the special event in response to the received

selection; and presenting results based on the invoked search.


- 25 -




Yahoo do not disclose or suggest invoking a search for web pages relating to the special event in

response to a received selection of a special event logo for at least reasons similar to reasons

given with regard to claims 18 and 41.

For at least these reasons, it is respectfully submitted that claims 37-39 are patentable


103. Reversal of the rejection of claims 37-39 is respectfully requested.

12. Claim 22.

Dependent claim 22 recites associating one or more search terms relating to the special

event, and performing the search based on the one or more search terms.





disclose or suggest the combination of features recited in claim 22 for at least reasons similar to

reasons given with regard to claim 18.




B. The Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) Based on Wolff (U.S. Patent No.6,247,047) in View of Yahoo(www.archive.org/web/19961223150621/http://www8.Yahoo.com. dated

- 26-



December 23,1996) and What was Allegedly "Well Known at the Time ofthe Applicant's Invention" Should be Reversed.

1. Claim 20.

Dependent claim 20 recites creating the special event logo by modifying the standard

company logo with at least one ofvideo or audio data.

Initially, claim 20 depends from claim 18. Claim 20 is, therefore, patentable over Wolff,

Yahoo, and what was allegedly "well known at the time of the applicant's invention," whether

taken alone or in any reasonable combination, for at least the reasons given with regard to claim

18.

Further, Wolff, Yahoo, and what was allegedly "well known at the time of the applicant's

invention," whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, do not disclose or suggest the

combination of features recited in claim 20.

The Examiner took official notice that "the use ofvideo or audio data to be displayed to a

user on a web page was old and well known in the art." Office Action, paragraph 36. The

Examiner's official notice fails to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to

claim 20 because the official notice does not establish that it was "old and well known in the art"

to modify a standard company logo with at least one ofvideo or audio data, as required by claim

20.




2. Claim 30.

Dependent claim 30 recites instructions for modifying the standard company logo with at

- 27 -

APPEAL BRIEF

least one ofvideo or audio data.



Initially, claim 30 depends from claim 26. Claim 30 is, therefore, patentable over Wolff,

Yahoo, and what was allegedly "well known at the time of the applicant's invention," whether

taken alone or in any reasonable combination, for at least the reasons given with regard to claim

26.

Further, Wolff, Yahoo, and what was allegedly "well known at the time of the applicant's

invention," whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, do not disclose or suggest the

combination of features recited in claim 30.

The Examiner took official notice that "the use ofvideo or audio data to be displayed to a

user on a web page was old and well known in the art." Office Action, paragraph 37. The

Examiner's official notice fails to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to

claim 30 because the official notice does not establish that it was "old and well known in the art"

to modify a standard company logo with at least one ofvideo or audio data, as required by claim

30.




VIII. CONCLUSION

In view of the foregoing arguments, Appellant respectfully solicits the Honorable Board

to reverse the Examiner's rejections of claims 18-41 under 35 U.S.c. § 103.

To the extent necessary, a petition for an extension of time under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136 is

- 28 -








IPaul A. HarritylPaul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574

Date: July 9, 200711350 Random Hills RoadSuite 600Fairfax, Virginia 22030(571) 432-0800

- 29-

APPEAL BRIEF

IX. CLAIM APPENDIX



18. A method for enticing users to access a web page, comprising:

modifying a standard company logo for a special event to create a special event logo;

associating one or more search terms with the special event logo, the one or more search

terms relating to the special event;



invoking a search relating to the special event based on the one or more search terms in

response to the user selection.

19. The method of claim 18, wherein the modifying a standard company logo

includes:

creating the special event logo by modifying the standard company logo with one or

more animated images.


includes:

creating the special event logo by modifying the standard company logo with at least one

ofvideo or audio data.

21. The method of claim 18, wherein the special event includes a holiday.

- 30 -

APPEAL BRIEF

22. The method of claim 37, further comprising:



associating one or more search terms relating to the special event; and


performing the search based on the one or more search terms.

23. The method of claim 18, wherein the uploading the special event logo includes:

displaying the special event logo on the web page during the special event.

24. The method of claim 18, wherein the invoking a search includes:

generating a search query using the one or more search terms,

using the search query to search at least one of a network, an index, or a directory, and

obtaining search results based on the search.


includes:

determining a home page for the web page on a network,

identifying the standard company logo on the home page, and

modifying the standard company logo with special event information to create the special

event logo.

26. A computer-readable medium that stores instructions executable by one or more

processors to perform a method for attracting users to a web page, comprising:

- 31 -



instructions for creating a special event logo by modifying a standard company logo for a

special event;

instructions for associating a link or search results with the special event logo, the link

identifying a document relating to the special event, the search results relating to the special

event;



instructions for providing the document relating to the special event or the search results

relating to the special event based on the user selection.

27. A server connected to a network, comprising:

a memory configured to store instructions; and

a processor configured to execute the instructions to:

determine a home page for a web page on the network,

identify a standard company logo on the home page,

modify the standard company logo with special event information corresponding

to a special event to create a special event logo, and

replace the standard company logo with the special event logo during the special

event.

28. A method, comprising:

identifying a standard company logo associated with a web site;

- 32 -



modifying the standard company logo with at least one of image, video, or audio data

relating to a special event to create a special event logo;

associating one or more search terms relating to the special event with the special event

logo;

detecting a selection associated with the special event logo; and


response to the detected selection.

29. The computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the instructions for creating

a special event logo include:

instructions for modifying the standard company logo with one or more animated images.



instructions for modifying the standard company logo with at least one ofvideo or audio

data.



instructions for modifying the standard company logo with information associated with a

holiday.

- 33 -



32. The server of claim 27, wherein the processor is further configured to:

associate one or more search terms relating to the special event with the special event

logo.

33. The server of claim 32, wherein the processor is further configured to:

detect a selection associated with the special event logo,

generate a search query based on the one or more search terms,

perform a search based on the search query, and

provide a result of the search.

34. The method of claim 18, wherein uploading the special event logo includes:


35. The computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the instructions for

uploading the special event logo include:

instructions for replacing the standard company logo with the special event logo on the

web page.


replacing the standard company logo with the special event logo.

37. A method, comprising:

- 34 -



presenting a special event logo on a web page, the special event logo being associated

with a standard company logo that has been modified or replaced for a special event;

receiving selection of the special event logo;


selection; and

presenting results based on the invoked search.

38. The method of claim 37, wherein one or more search terms are associated with

the special event logo; and


causing a search to be performed based on the one or more search terms.

39. The method of claim 37, wherein the presenting a special event logo includes:


40. The method of claim 18, wherein invoking a search includes:

invoking a search of the Internet.

41. The method of claim 28, wherein invoking a search includes:

invoking a search for web pages relating to the special event.

- 35 -

APPEAL BRIEF

X. EVIDENCE APPENDIX

None

- 36 -



APPEAL BRIEF

XI. RELATED PROCEEDINGS APPENDIX

None

- 37 -








Filer: Paul Harrity/Julia Cummings



Utility Filing Fees


USD($)

Basic Filing:

Pages:

Claims:

Miscellaneous-Fi Iing:

Petition:

Patent-Appeals-and-lnterference:

Filing a brief in support of an appeal 1402 1 500 500

Post -Allowance-and -Post -Issu ance:

Extension-of-Time:

Description Fee Code Quantity Amount Sub-Total inUSD($)

Miscellaneous:



EFSID: 1952104










Receipt Date: 09-JUL-2007








Deposit Account

File Listing:

DocumentNumber Document Description File Name File Size(Bytes)

/Message Digest

166843

1 Appeal Brief Filed 0026-0002_AppeaIBrief.pdf no 37e9d9aed3f286dc5996b0111142dd33a2

bc175b62

Warnings:

Information:

8154

2 Fee Worksheet (PTO-06) fee-info.pdf no 24a184d5caafb6fb11 a2442535d97cccb2

f954cdc

Warnings:

Information:









Sergey Brin




)))))))))))


Examiner: B. Ailes

U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Service Window, Mail Stop AFRandolph Building401 Dulany StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

Sir:

NOTICE OF APPEAL

All rejected claims in the decision of the Primary Examiner dated Februarv 7, 2007 are hereby appealed to

the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.

D The Appeal fee was previously paid on _.

Therefore, no Appeal fee is now required.

Enclosed is the Appeal fee of D $250.00

Please charge the Appeal fee of D $250.00

D $500.00

[8J $500.00 to Credit Card.

The Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge any other appropriate fees that may be required by this

paper that are not accounted for above, and to credit any overpayment, to Deposit Account No. 50-1070.



By: IPaul A. HarritvlPaul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574


CUSTOMER NUMBER: 44989Date: May 8, 2007




Sergey Brin



For: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FORENTICING USERS TO ACCESSA WEB SITE

))) Group Art Unit: 2142)) Examiner: B. Ailes))))))

PETITION FOR ONE MONTH EXTENSION OF TIME

U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Service Window, Mail Stop AmendmentRandolph Building401 Dulany StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

Sir:

The following extension of time is requested to the Office Action dated February 7,2007:

One month to June 7, 2007; the extension fee is:

D $ 60.00 ~ $ 120.00

D An extension fee in the amount of $ is enclosed.

~ Charge $ 120.00 to Credit Card.

Petition for Extension of TimeAttorney's Docket No.: 0026-0002

U.S. Serial No.: 09/843,923


required by this paper that are not accounted for above, and to credit any overpayment, to

Deposit Account No. 50-1070.



By: IPaul A. Harrity!Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574


CUSTOMER NUMBER: 44989Date: May 8, 2007









Utility Filing Fees


USD($)

Basic Filing:

Pages:

Claims:


Petition:

Patent-Appeals-and-lnterference:

Notice of appeal 1401 1 500 500


Extension-of-Time:


USD($)

Extension - 1 month with $0 paid 1251 1 120 120

Miscellaneous:



EFSID: 1754046










Receipt Date: 08-MAY-2007



Application Type: Utility





Deposit Account

File Listing:

DocumentNumber Document Description File Name File Size(Bytes)

1 Notice of Appeal Filed0026-0002_NoticeofAppeal.p

73292 no 1df

Warnings:

Information:

2 Extension of Time0026-0002 ExtensionofTime

73512 2.pdf

no

Warnings:

Information:

3 Fee Worksheet (PTO-06) fee-info.pdf 8306 no 2

Warnings:

Information:






UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeAdd=s: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS

P.O. Box 1450Alexandria, Virginia 22313·1450www.uspto.gov .

APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

FILING DATE

04130/2001


Sergey Brin

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.

0026·0002 9916

EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN A

44989 7590 0210712007HARRITY SNYDER, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030

SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD OF RESPONSE

3 MONTHS

MAIL DATE

02/07/2007

ART UNIT

2142

PAPER NUMBER

DELIVERY MODE

PAPER


If NO period for reply is specified above, the' maximum statutory period will apply and will expire 6 MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.

PTOL·90A (Rev. 10/06) I

Office Action Summary

Application No.

09/843,923

Examiner

Applicant(s)

BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit

Benjamin A. Ailes 2142

.- 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 ~ MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS,WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.- Extensions of time mey be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, maya reply be timely filed

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 anyearned patentterm adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).

Status

1)121 Responsive to communication(s) filed on 22 November 2006.

2a)0· This action is FINAL. 2b)12I This action is non-final.

3)0 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 Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11,453 O.G. 213.

Disposition of Claims

4)121 Claim(s) 18-41 is/are pending in the application.

4a) Of the above claim(s) __ is/are withdrawn from consideration.

5)0 Claim(s) __ is/are allowed.

6)121 Claim(s) 18-41 is/are rejected.

7)0 Claim(s) __ is/are objected to.

8)0 Claim(s) __ are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.

Application Papers

9)0 The specification is objected to by the Examiner,

10)0 The drawing(s) filed on __ is/are: a)O accepted or b)O 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).

11)0 The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152.

Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119

12)0 Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (t).

a)O All b)O Some * c)O None of:

1.0 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.

2.0 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. __.

3.0 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)

1) 121 Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)

2) 0 Notice of Draftsperson's Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948)

3) 0 Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08)Paper No(s)/Mail Date __.

4) 0 Interview Summary (PT0-413)Paper No(s)/Mail Date. __ .

5) 0 Notice of Informal Patent Application

6) 0 Other: __'

U.s. Patent and Trademar1< Office

PTOL-326 (Rev. 08-06) Office Action Summary Part of Paper No.lMail Date 20070202

'-


Art Unit: 2142

DETAILED ACTION

Page"2

1. This action is in response to correspondence filed 22 November 2006. New

ground(s) of rejection have been set forth and therefore this rejection is NON-FINAL.

2. Claims 18-41 remain pending.

Response to Arguments

3. Applicant's arguments filed 22 November 2006 have been fully considered but

they are not persuasive.

Claim 18

4. Applicant argues that neither Wolff nor Yahoo taken alone or in any reasonable

combination discloses or suggests the combination of features in claim 18 and that

Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms with

the special event logo, the one or more search terms relating to the special event. The

examiner respectfully disagrees in view of the reasons set forth in the rejection below

and in response to arguments presented by applicant outlined below. Applicant argues

on page 10 of the REMARKS that "nowhere does Wolff disclose or suggest a special

event logo (created by modifying a standard company logo for a special event) and,

therefore, cannot disclose or suggest associated one or more search terms with the

special event logo, the one or more search terms relating to the special event, as

required by claim 18." Taking broadest reasonable interpretation of what is claimed, it is

best understood in the broadest sense that the "standard company logo" and the

"special event logo" in the field of the invention are images that are displayed on a web

page that are viewable by a user using a web browser program. The image can have a

r ! ..

Application/~ontrol Number: 09/843,923

Art Unit: 2142

Page 3

search term associated with it and the image can be "c1ickable" wherein when a user

"clicks" on the image a search is invoked utilizing the search term. In view of the

rejection, Wolff is relied upon for teaching this in the art wherein Wolff teaches the

displaying of an image to a user (fig. 2, part 102, banner icon), the association of a

search term associated with the icon and based on what the icon represents through

imaging (col. 8, II. 43-46, unique indicia) and the invocation of a search related to the

search term (col. 8, line 65 - col. 9, line 7, invoking a search based on a selection of the

icon by a user utilizing the unique indicia). Wolff is not relied upon for teaching in the art

the image being a company logo that is altered to become a special event logo. The

image being a company logo is deemed an obvious variation in the art. It is deemed

well known in the art that company logos can be displayed as images on web pages (for

example, Yahoo!). It is also deemed well known in the art that a company would want

to alter their own logo to commemorate a special event (for example, Yahoo! altering

their logo to commemorate the Christmas holiday season on December 23, 1996).

Applicant argued further on page 11 of REMARKS that Yahoo! does not disclose or

remotely suggest "associating one or more search terms with the special event logo

where the one or more search terms relate to the special ev~nt. Examiner did not· rely

on Yahoo! for teaching this aspect of applicant's invention. Yahoo! is merely relied

upon for teaching the display of a special event company logo being displayed on a web

page and viewable by a user using a web browser program. Wolff is relied upon for the

use of a search term that is associated with an image that can be displayed on a web

page as outline above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in


Art Unit: 2142

view of the combination that the search term would always relate to what is being

Page 4

displayed by the image to the user because it would not make reasonable sense to one

of ordinary skill for the search term to be totally unrelated to what the image represents

and therefore the obvious variant of imaging use wherein the image could be a special

event company logo as taught by Yahoo! the search term associated with the special

event company logo would be related to the topic of what the special event company

logo image is portraying to a user through graphical means. Examiner maintains that

one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Wolff,

particularly the ability to display images to users that are clickable, and Yahoo!,

particularly teaching the use of altered images which may commemorate a special

event because the use of different types of images is deemed an obvious variation. In

view of Wolff the use of different images is clearly taught as a motivation in the prior art


seasonal use (col. 2, II. 27-28). For at least these reasons, claim 18 as written is not

deemed patentable over the prior art of record.

Claim 20

5. Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 20 have been consi.dered but are

moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.

Claim 26

6. Applicant argues with respect to claim 26 that Wolff and Yahoo! do not disclose

or suggest "instructions for associating a link or search results with a special event logo

created by modifying a standard company logo for a special event, the link identifying a

Application/Control Numbet: 09/843,923

Art Unit: 2142

Page 5

document relating to the special event, and the search results relating to the special

event." The examiner respectfully disagrees. Based on what is reql:Jired by the claim,

only "a link" or "search results" in the prior art would meet the scope of the claim. Wolff

teaches the association of a search term associated with the icon and based on what

the icon represents through imaging (col. 8, II. 43-46, unique indicia) and the invocation

of a search related to the search term (col. 8, line 65 - col. 9, line 7, invoking a search

based on a selection of the icon by a user utilizing the unique indicia) and returning the

results to the requesting user (Wolff, column 9, lines 9-13). It would have been obvious

to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the combination that the search term would

always relate to what is being displayed by the image to the user because it would not

make reasonable sense to one of ordinary skill for the search term to be totally

unrelated to what the image represents and therefore the obvious variant of imaging

use wherein the image could be a special event company logo as taught by Yahoo! the

search term associated with the special event company logo would be related to the

topic of what the special event company logo image is portraying to a user through

graphical means. For at least these reasons, claim 26 as written is not deemed

patentable over the prior art of record.

Claim 27

7. With respect to claim 27, applicant argues that claim 27 is patentable over Wolff

and Yahoo!, for similar reasons with regard to claim 18. Further, applicant argues that

Wolff and Yahoo! do not disclose or suggest a processor configured to determine a

home page for a web page on a network or identify a standard company logo on the


Art Unit: 2142

Page 6

home page. Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant in view of what is taught

by Wolff and Yahoo!. Wolff teaches the use of computer processors for example in

figure 1, item 14 and Yahoo! teaches the inherent use of a computer processor by way

of having an image uploaded to a web site wherein the uploading of an image would not

be possible in any way without the use of a computer processor. Yahoo! clearly

teaches the uploading of an image to a web page in this case the uploading has been

done to the home page as indicated (www.yahoo.com) and the altered image is actually

being displayed where the standard company logo is customarily presented. By way of

actually uploading the image to the home page by Yahoo! then it is taught by Yahoo!

the functionality of home page determination. Therefore claim 27 is not deemed

patentable over the prior art of record.

Claim 28


and Yahoo!, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, for at least reasons

similar to reasons given with regard to claim 18. Examiner respectfully disagrees for the

same reasons set forth above with respect to claim 18.

Claim 37


-and Yahoo!, for similar reasons given with regard to claim 18. Examiner respectfully

disagrees for the same reasons set forth above with respect to claim 18. Applicant

arguE;!s further that Wolff and Yahoo! do not disclose or suggest invoking a search for

web pages relating to the special event in response to a received selection of a special


Art Unit: 2142

Page 7

event logo. Examiner respectfully disagrees. It would have been obvious to one of

ordinary skill in the art in view of the combination that the search term would always

relate to what is being displayed by the image to the user because it would not make

reasonable sense to one of ordinary skill for the search term to be totally unrelated to

what the image represents and therefore the obvious variant of imaging use wherein the

image could be a special event company logo as taught by Yahoo! the search term

associated with the special event company logo would be related to the topic of what

the special event company logo image is portraying to a user through graphical means.

Wolff teaches in column 9, lines 3-13 the searching of on-line producUservice databases

and returning the results to the user. It is deemed that the online content being sought

after by Wolff falls within the scope of the web pages being claimed and therefore the

search and retrieval system taught by Wolff meets the scope of the claim. Therefore

claim 37 is not deemed patentable over the prior art of record.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103



(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as setforth 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 theinvention 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.

11. Claims 18, 19, 21-28, 29, 31-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being

unpatentable over Wolff (US 6,247,047 81) in view of Yahoo! (Yahoo!,

http://www.archive.org!web/19961223150621 /http://www8.yahoo.coml).


Art Unit: 2142

Page 8



wherein the icon image is uploaded for display to a user on a web page. A .keyword












images for seasonal and one time use (column 2, II. 27-28). It would have been obvious.









Art Unit: 2142

Page 9












images to user-that are deemed clickable by Wolff and Yahoo! for teaching the use of






. 13. Regarding claim 19, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein the modifying a



14. Regarding claims 21, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein the special

event includes a holiday (Yahoo!).


Art Unit: 2142

Page 10

15. Regarding claim 22', Wolff and Yahoo! teach the processor further configured to:

associating one or more search terms relating to the special event with the

special event logo (Wolff, col. 8, II. 42-46, it is deemed obvious that search results






way.); and


performing the search based on the one·or more search terms (Wolff, col. 8, II.

43-47).

16.

17. Regarding claim 23, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein the uploading

the special event includes displaying the special event logo on the web page during the

special event (Yahoo! displayed the altered logo during the holiday season.).

18. Regarding claim 24, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein the invoking a

search includes:

generating a search query using the one or more search terms (Wolff, col. 9, II.

3-13);




Art Unit: 2142

Page 11




determining a home page for the web page on a network (Yahoo!,

http://www.yahoo.com);

identifying the standard company logo on the home page (Yahoo!, standard

Yahoo! logo); and


special event logo (Yahoo!, the addition of the reindeer to the standard logo creates a

modified logo).



wherein the icon image is uploaded for oisplay to a user on a web page. A keyword




9, line 15). The search results are then returned to the user in the form of a web page,

(col. 9, II. 9-13). Wolff does not explicitly teach that the graphical icon image is a

standard company logo that can be modified to become a special event logo. However,

in related art, Yahoo! teaches wherein a company logo can be modified to

commemorate a special event (see Yahoo!). Wolff provides an environment wherein

different icon images can be displayed to a use~ on a web page and therefore it is


Art Unit: 2142

deemed an obvious variatio~ to present to a user an altered image. Yahoo!

Page 12

demonstrates this functionality wherein Yahoo! has altered their own company logo to

celebrate the Christmas season. Wolff teaches that is known in the prior art to use

different types of images for seasonal and one time use (column 2, II. 27-28). It would

have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the teachings of Wolff

wherein the ability to display c1ickable images to a user on a web page in combination

with the functionalities of Yahoo! wherein it is taught that one of ordinary skill can alter

an image and upload it for display to a user on a web page. Further, it would have been

obvious to associate the "search term" to relate to the graphical icon image as taught by

Wolff because the keyword associated with the icon image is supposed to directly

identify the product or service being represented by use of the icon image and when a

use interacts (clicks) on the icon image (see Wolff, col. 8, II. 43-49), it is deemed

obvious that search results should be directly related to whatever the icon represents

instead of erroneous data. One of ordinary skill would not find it desirable to provide

search results that are totally unrelated to what is being displayed by the icon image. '

Therefore, in view of Yahoo!, if an image is altered in some sort of way, the keyword

associated with the image should be changed accordingly so that the keyword

corresponds to the image in some sort of way. One or ordinary skill in the art at the time

of the applicant's invention would have found it obvious to combine the teachings of

Yahoo! with what is taught by Wolff as outlined above. One of ordinary skill in the art,

would have been motivated to make such a combination due t6 being from the same

field of endeavor (client-server network systems) and for the reasons stated above,


Art Unit: 2142

Page 13

particularly teaching the use of displaying images to user that are deemed clickable by

Wolff and Yahoo! for teaching the use of altered images which.may commemorate a

special event and the use of different images to be displayed to a user is deemed an

obvious variation in the art. In view of Wolff, the use of different images is clearly taught

as a motivation in the prior art wherein one of ordinary skill in the art may find it useful to

use different image types for seasonal use (col. 2, II. 27-28).

21. Regarding claim 27, Wolff teaches a method for enticing users to access a web.

page comprising the use of a graphical icon image (i .e. an advertisement banner)
















Art Unit: 2142

Page 14




the "search term" -to relate to the graphical icon image as taught by Wolff because the





One of ordinary skill would not find it desirable to provide search results that are totally.




way. Yahoo! clearly teaches the uploading of an image to a web page in this case the

uploading has been done to the home page as indicated (www.yahoo.com) and the

altered image is actually being displayed where the standard company logo is

customarily presented. By way of actually uploading the image to the home page by

Yahoo! then it is taught by Yahoo! the functionality of home page determination. One or

ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's invention would have found it

obvious to combine the teachings of Yahoo! with what is taught by Wolff as outlined

above. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a

combination due to being from the same field of endeavor (client-server network



Art Unit: 2142

Page 15






seasonal use (co/. 2, I/. 27-28).








company logo that can be lTiodified to become a special event logo. However, in related







images for seasonal and one time use (column 2, I/. 27-28). It would have been obvious



Art Unit: 2142

Page 16






service being represented by use of the icon image anq when a use interacts (clicks) on





an image is altered in some sort of way,· the keyword associated with the image should


way. One or ordinary skill in the a.rt at the time of the applicant's invention would have










Art Unit: 2142

Page 17


seasonal use (col. 2, 11.27-28).




24. Regarding claim 31, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the medium includes instructions for

modifying the standard company logo with information associated with a holiday

(Yahoo!).

25. Regarding claim 32, WOlf! and Yahoo! teach the processor further configured to:

associate one or more search terms relating to the special event with the special

event logo (Wolff, col. 8, II. 42-46, it is deemed obvious that search results should be

directly related to whatever the icon represents instead of erroneous data. One of

ordinary skill would not find it desirable to provide search results that are totally




way.).

26. Regarding claim 33, Wolff and Yahoo! teach wherein the processor is further

configured to:

detect a selection associated with the special event logo (Wolff, col. 9, II. 3-13);

generate a search query based on the one or more search terms (Wolff, col. 9, II.

3-13);


Art Unit: 2142

perform a search based on the search query (Wolff, col. 9, II. 3-13); and

provide a result of the search (Wolff, col. 9, II. 3-13).

Page 18

27. Regarding claim 34, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein uploading the

special event logo includes replacing the standard company logo with the special event

logo on the web page (Yahoo!, page is from 12/23/1996).

28. Regarding claim 35, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the medium wherein the instructions

for uploading the special event logo include:

instructions for replacing the standard company logo with the special event logo

on the web page (Yahoo!, page is from 12/23/1996).

29. Regarding claim 36, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method further comprising:

replacing the standard company logo with the" special event logo (Yahoo!, page is

from 12/23/1996).












Art Unit: 2142


Page 19





to one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the'teachings of Wolff wherein the ability to


















Art Unit: 2142

Page 20








31. Regarding claim 38, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein one or more

search terms are associated with the special event logo (Wolff, col. 8, II. 42-46, it is

deemed obvious tha~ search results should be directly related to whatever the icon

represents instead of erroneous data. One of ordinary skill would not find it desirable to

provide search results that are totally unrelated to what is being displayed by the icon

image. Therefore, in view of Yahoo!, if an image is altered in some sort of way,the

keyword associated with the image should be changed accordingly so that the keyword

corresponds to the image in some sort of way.); and


causing a search -to be performed based on the one or more search terms (Wolff,

col. 9, 11.3-13).

32. Regarding claim 39, Wolff and Yahoo! teach the method wherein the presenting

a special event logo includes:

displaying the special event logo on the web page during the special event

(Yahoo! image was displayed over the holiday season).


Art Unit: 2142

Page 21


search includes:

invoking a search of the Internet (col. 9, II. 3-7).


search includes:

invoking a search for web pages relating to the special event (Wolff, col. 9, II. 3-7,

a search is invoked of online content.).

35. Claims 20 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable

over Wolff, Yahoo! and what was well known at the time of the applicant's invention.














Art Unit: 2142

Conclusion

Page 22

38. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to

applicant's disclosure.

Lawrence et al. (US 6,999,959 B1) teach a meta search engine.

Miloslavsky et al. (US 6,879,586 B2) teach internet' protocol call-in centers and

establishing remote agents.


examiner should be directed to Benjamin A. Ailes whose telephone number is (571 )272- .

3899. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 6:30-4, IFP Work Schedule.


supervisor, Andrew Caldwell can be reached on (571 )272-3868. The fax phone number





Status information for unpublished applications is -available through Private PAIR only.






baa


09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYNotice of References Cited

Examiner Art Unit

Benjamin A. Ailes 2142Page 1 of 1

U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS

*Document Number Date

Name ClassificationCountry Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY

* A US-6,879,586 B2 04-2005 Miloslavskyet al. 370/356

* B US-6,999,959 B1 02-2006 Lawrence et al. 707/5

C US-

D US-

E US-

F US-

G US-

H US-

I US-

J US-

K US-

L US-

M US-

FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS


Country Name ClassificationCountry Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YVYY

N

0

P

Q

R

S

T

NON·PATENT DOCUMENTS

A copy of this reference IS not being furnished with this Office acllon. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).)Dales in MM-YVYV format are pUblication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.

* Include as applicable: Author, Title Date, Publisher, Edition or Volume, Pertinent Pages)

U

V

W

X

.u.s. Patent and Tmdemark Office

PTO-892 (Rev. 01-2001) Notice of References Cited Part of Paper No. 20070202

Search NotesApplication/Control No. Applicant(s)/Patent under

Reexamination

I 1/11111/ IIIII1 II09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit

Beniamin A. Ailes 2142

SEARCHEDSEARCH NOTES

(INCLUDING SEARCH STRATEGY)

Class Subclass Date Examiner DATE EXMR

709 204,216 214/2007 BAA EAST - updated class/subclass,inventor name and assignee search of 214/2007 BAAUSPAT and USPGPub

705 26 214/2007 BAA

345 473, 730 214/2007 BAA

345 738 214/2007 BAA

INTERFERENCE SEARCHED

Class Subclass Date Examiner

u.S. Patent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No. 20070202

Application/Control No. Applicant(s)/Patent underIndex of Claims Reexamination

II 11/111 I III II09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit


...f Rejected - (Through numeral) Non-Elected AppealCancelled N A

= Allowed + Restricted I Interference 0 Objected

Claim Date Claim Date Claim Date

lijlij .... lij

lijlij

lijc e c c

c '6> c '6> c '6>u::: (5 ~ u::: (5 u::: (5

1 51 1012 52 1023 53 1034 54 1045 55 1056 56 1067 57 1078 58 1089 59 10910 60 11011 61 11112 62 11213 63 11314 64 11415 65 11516 66 116

..17 67 1171\.18 ..J 68 118

1"§" 69 11920 70 -12021 71 12122 72 12223 73 12324 74 12425 75 125~i\ 76 126.~ 77 1271i:2 78 128

29 79 12930 80 13031 81 13132 82 13233 83 13334 84 13435 85 13536 86 136

1\Th 87 13738 88 13839 89 13940 90 140- 41 91 1414;'! 92 14243 93 14344 94 14445 95 14546 96 14647 97 14748 98 14849 99 14950 100 150

U,S, Patent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No, 20070202

'p

. EAST Search History

Ref Hits 5earch Query DBs Default Plurals Time 5tamp# Operator

563 0 345/730.cels. and U5-PGPUB OR ON 2007/02/02 14:53(@ad< 1 20000501" or@rlad< 1 20000501") and@pd>"20060821" not 555 not 556not 557 not 558 not 559 not 560not 561 not 562

558 0 709/216.cels. and U5-PGPUB OR ON 2007/02/0214:53(@ad< 1 20000501" or@rlad< 1 20000501") and@pd> 1 20060821" not 555 not 556

566 0 345/738.cels. and U5-PGPUB OR ON 2007/02/02 14:54(@ad< 1 20000501" or@rlad< 1 20000s01") and@pd>"20060821" not 555 not 556not 557 not 558 not 559 not 560not 561 not 562

565 0 345/738.cels. and U5PAT OR ON 2007/02/02 14:54(@ad<"20000s01" or@rlad< 1 20000501") and@pd> 1 20060821" not 555 not 556not 557 not 558 not 5s9 not 560not 561 not 562

564 0 345/730.cels. and U5PAT OR ON 2007/02/02 14:54(@ad<120000501" or@rlad<120000s01") and@pd> 1 20060821" not 555 not 556not 557 not 558 not 559 not 560not 561 not 562

556 21 709/204.cels. and U5PAT OR ON 2007/02/0215:12(@ad< 1 20000s01" or@rlad< 1 20000501") and@pd>"20060821"

555 3 709/204.cels. and U5-PGPUB OR ON 2007/02/02 15:12(@ad<120000s01" or@rlad<"20000s01") and@pd> 1 200G0821"

559 45 705/2G.cels. and U5-PGPUB OR ON 2007/02/0215:13(@ad< 1 20000501" or@rlad< 1 20000s01") and@pd>"20060821" not 555 not 5sGnot 557 not 558

557 1 709/21G.cels. and U5PAT OR ON 2007/02/02 15:13(@ad<"20000501" or@rlad< 1 20000s01") and@pd>1200G0821" not 555 not 5sG

2/5/07 12:39:55 AMC:\Documents and Settings\bailes\My Documents\EAST\Workspaces\09843923.wsp

Page 1

·.....

EAST Search History

560 81 705/26.ccI5. and U5PAT OR ON 2007/02/02 15:14(@ad<120000501" or@rlad<120000501") and@pd>120060821" not 555 not 556not 557 not 558

561 9 345/473.ccl5. and U5PAT OR ON 2007/02/0215:16(@ad<120000501" or@rlad<120000501") and@pd>120060821" not 555 not 556not 557 not 558 not 559 not 560

569 105 567 and (@ad<120000501" or . U5-PGPU8; OR ON 2007/02/02 15:18@rlad<120000501") U5PAT

568 3 567 and (@ad<120000501" or . U5-PGPUB; OR ON 2007/02/02 15:18@rlad<120000501") and U5PAT@pd>120060821" not 555 not 556not 557 not 558 not 559 not 560

567 288 clickable with image U5-PGPUB; OR ON 2007/02/0215:18U5PAT

562 1 345/473.ccI5. and U5-PGPUB OR ON 2007/02/02 15:18(@ad<120000501" or@rlad<120000501") and@pd>120060821" not 555 not 556not 557 not 558 not 559 not 560

2/5/07 12:39:55 AMC:\Documents and Settings\bailes\My Documents\EAST\Workspaces\99843923.wsp

Page 2




Sergey Brin






AMENDMENT

In response to the non-final Office Action, dated August 23,2006, please amend the

above-identified application as follows:

Amendments to the Claims begin on page 2 of this paper.

Remarks begin on page 9 of this paper.

PATENTU.S. Patent Application No. 09/843,923


Amendments to the Claims:

This listing of claims will replace all prior versions, and listings, of claims in the application:

Listing of Claims:

1-17. (canceled)

18. (previously presented) A method for enticing users to access a web page,

compnsmg:








19. (original) The method of claim 18, wherein the modifying a standard company

logo includes:

creating the special event logo by modifying the standard company logo with one or

more animated images.

20. (previously presented) The method of claim 18, wherein the modifying a


2




of video or audio data.

21. (original) The method of claim 18, wherein the special event includes a holiday.

22. (previously presented) The method of claim 37, further comprising:

associating one or more search terms relating to the special event; and



23. (original) The method of claim 18, wherein the uploading the special event logo

includes:


24. (previously presented) The method of claim 18, wherein the invoking a search

includes:





logo includes:

3






event logo.

26. (currently amended) A computer-readable medium that stores instructions

executable by one or more processors to perform a method for attracting users to a web page,

compnsmg:


special event;

instructions for associating at least one of a link or search results with the special event

logo, the link identifying a document relating to the special event, [[or]] the search results

relating to the special event;



instructions for providing the [[link]] document relating to the special event or the search

results associated "'lith relating to the special event [[logo]] based on the user selection.

27. (original) A server connected to a network, comprising:




4







event.

28. (previously presented) A method, comprising:





logo;





instructions for creating a special event logo include:




5



instructions for modifying the standard company logo with at least one of video or audio

data.




holiday.

32. (previously presented) The server of claim 27, wherein the processor is further

configured to:


logo.


configured to:





34. (previously presented) The method of claim 18, wherein uploading the special

event logo includes:

6





instructions for uploading the special event logo include:


web page.

36. (previously presented) The method of claim 28, further comprising:


37. (currently amended) A method, comprising:





selection; and


38. (previously presented) The method of claim 37, wherein one or more search

terms are associated with the special event logo; and



7



39. (previously presented) The method of claim 37, wherein the presenting a special



40. (new) The method of claim 18, wherein invoking a search includes:

invoking a search of the Internet.

41. (new) The method of claim 28, wherein invoking a search includes:

invoking a search for web pages relating to the special event.

8



REMARKS

In the non-final Office Action, the Examiner rejected claims 18-39 under 35 U.S.c. §

103(a) as unpatentable over Wolff (D.S. Patent No. 6,247,047) in view of Yahoo

(www.archive.org/web/19961223150621/http://www8.yahoo.com. dated December 23,1996).

By this Amendment, Applicant amends claims 26 and 37 to improve form and adds new

claims 40 and 41. Applicant respectfully traverses the Examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.c. §

103. Claims 18-41 are pending.

In paragraphs 5-15 of the Office Action, the Examiner rejected claims 18-39 as allegedly

unpatentable over Wolff in view of Yahoo. Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection.

Independent claim 18, for example, is directed to a method for enticing users to access a

web page. The method comprises modifying a standard company logo for a special event to

create a special event logo; associating one or more search terms with the special event logo, the

one or more search terms relating to the special event; uploading the special event logo to the

web page; receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and invoking a search relating to

the special event based on the one or more search terms in response to the user selection.



Yahoo do not disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms with the special event

logo, the one or more search terms relating to the special event.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses this feature and cited column 8, line 56 -

column 9, line 15, of Wolff for support (Office Action, paragraph 6). Applicant respectfully

disagrees.

9




At step 202, a user uninterested in the advertised product or service may continuebrowsing without selecting banner 102. However, if the user wants to make a transactionor wants more information about the advertised product or service, the user selects banner102 using an input device such as mouse 22 by clicking in geographic area 104. Inresponse, at step 204, user node 14 makes an TCP/IP request using the URL(..www.bannerbuy.com..) embedded within banner 102 to contact host server 12 overInternet 16.

At step 206, host server 12 generates a unique transaction identification number("transaction ID"), and creates a new record in the transaction record database which canbe indexed by the transaction ID. This record will be used to store any input data enteredby the user for this transaction. At step 208, host server 12 receives the unique indicia(e.g., "12345") embedded within banner 102 and uses the indicia to search the on-lineproduct/service database for a record containing information specific to the advertisedproduct or service. This record was previously defined by the merchant, at which time itsunique identification indicia was assigned. After finding and retrieving the record, at step210, host server 12 dynamically generates a presentation/input form page 108 based atleast in part on data stored within the retrieved record, and sends page 108 over Internet16 for display on display 18 of user node 14 at step 212. Page 108 is displayed byopening a new browser or new window on user node 14.

In this section, Wolff discloses that if a user wants more information about the advertised

product or service, the user selects banner 102, which causes host server 12 to perform a search

based on unique indicia embedded within the banner to identify a record containing information

specific to the advertised product or service. In other words, Wolff discloses a banner relating to

an advertised product or service and in response to a user selecting the banner, presenting the

user with information relating to the advertised product or service. Nowhere does Wolff disclose

or suggest a special event logo (created by modifying a standard company logo for a special

event) and, therefore, cannot disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms with the

special event logo, the one or more search terms relating to the special event, as required by

claim 18.

The Examiner admitted that Wolff does not disclose a special event logo that is created

by modifying a standard company logo for a special event (Office Action, paragraph 6). The

10



Examiner alleged, however, that Wolff discloses the use of a graphical icon, as an advertisement

banner, that can be quickly set up for seasonal and one-time use and cited column 2, lines 27-28,

of Wolff for support (Office Action, paragraph 6). Applicant respectfully submits that the

Examiner has misconstrued the disclosure of Wolff.

At column 2, lines 27-28, Wolff discloses "Also, the banner can be quickly set up for

seasonal or one-time use." In this section, Wolff is describing a feature of a prior art technique

for providing a static graphical banner that includes an image relating to the product or service

being advertised (col. 2, lines 14-35). The Examiner provided no motivation for combining this

prior art disclosure with the system of Wolff that the Examiner relied upon for allegedly

disclosing other features of Applicant's claims. Therefore, the Examiner has not established a

prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 1.

The Examiner relied upon Yahoo for allegedly disclosing a special event logo that is

created by modifying a standard company logo for a special event (Office Action, paragraph 6).

Yahoo does not disclose or remotely suggest, however, associating one or more search terms

with the special event logo, where the one or more search terms relate to the special event, as

required by claim 18.

The Examiner alleged that:

Therefore, since it is suggested by Wolff to provide a mechanism to easily set up andutilize an icon for seasonal or one-time use, it would have been obvious to one ofordinary skill in the art to provide a logo as demonstrated by Yahoo to be a logo which isdeemed seasonal because the logo has been altered in order to celebrate a special event,in this case Christmas.

(Office Action, paragraph 6). Applicant respectfully submits that the Examiner's allegation lacks

merit. First, as explained above, Wolff disclosed that a banner can be set up for seasonal or one-

time use in connection with a prior art static graphical banner, not the banner disclosed by Wolff

11



and relied upon by the Examiner. Further, Applicant submits that the only motivation to replace

the banner of Wolff with the Yahoo logo is found in Applicant's own disclosure, which, of

course, cannot be relied upon for establishing a prima facie case.

An important concept that should be noted is that in order to reach a proper determination

under 35 U.S.c. § 103, the Examiner must step backward in time and into the shoes of a

hypothetical "person of ordinary skill in the art" at a time when Applicant's invention was

unknown and just before it was made. With this concept in mind, it appears that the Examiner

believes that it is conceivable that, having the Wolff document which is drawn to a system for

facilitating computer network transactions via an advertising banner, one skilled in the art at the

time Applicant's invention was made, having no knowledge of Applicant's invention, would have

replaced the advertising banner in the Wolff document with the Yahoo logo from the Yahoo

document to come up with Applicant's claimed invention. Irrespective of the fact that these

documents are non-analogous (i.e., a system for facilitating computer network transactions and

the home page of a search engine), Applicant finds the Examiner's combination of documents

highly improbable.

The Examiner further alleged that:

it would have been obvious to associate the "search term" to relate the graphical icon astaught by Wolff because the keyword associated with the icon is supposed to directlyidentify the product or service being represented by use of the icon and when a useinteracts (clicks) on the icon (see Wolff, col. 8, 11. 43-49), it is deemed obvious thatsearch results should be directly related to whatever the icon represents instead oferroneous data. Therefore, in view of Yahoo, if a logo is altered in some sort of way, thekeyword associated with the logo should be altered accordingly.

(Office Action, paragraph 6). Applicant respectfully submits that the Examiner's conclusion is

based solely on Applicant's own disclosure, which, of course, cannot be relied upon for

establishing a prima facie case. The Examiner has provided no objective motivation for

12



associating one or more search terms relating to a special event with the Yahoo Christmas logo.

The Examiner also alleged that:

One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combinationdue to being from the same field of endeavor (client-server network systems) and for thereasons stated above, specifically the advantages of providing a banner which is attractiveto a user which would cause a user to want to click on the banner and the ability toprovide a banner which can be used one-time or seasonal.

(Office Action, paragraph 6). The Examiner's motivation of "providing a banner which is

attractive to a user which would cause a user to want to click on the banner" falls short of

establishing an objective reason why one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant's

invention would have been motivated to replace the banner in Wolff with the Yahoo Christmas

logo, or to associate one or more search terms relating to a special event with a special event

logo, as required by claim 18.

Because Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest associating one or more search

terms with the special event logo, the one or more search terms relating to the special event,

Wolff and Yahoo cannot disclose or suggest invoking a search relating to the special event based

on the one or more search terms in response to a user selection, as further recited in claim 18.

For at least these reasons, Applicant submits that claim 18 is patentable over Wolff and

Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination. Claims 19-21,23-25, and 34

depend from claim 18 and are, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Yahoo for at least the

reasons given with regard to claim 18. Claims 19-21,23-25, and 34 are also patentable over

Wolff and Yahoo for reasons of their own.

For example, claim 20 recites creating the special event logo by modifying the standard

company logo with at least one of video or audio data. Neither Wolff nor Yahoo discloses or

suggests this combination of features.

13



The Examiner alleged that both Wolff and Yahoo disclose the ability to modify a logo

with video and/or audio data and cited column 3, lines 39-43, of Wolff for support (Office

Action, paragraph 8). Applicant respectfully disagrees.


Another advantage of the present invention is to provide a banner advertising transactionenabling system which automatically sends messages to merchants in response to theselection of the merchant's banner by a user, either bye-mail or facsimile. The messagemay be a simple notification or a complete purchase order.

In this section, Wolff discloses that the banner advertising system automatically sends messages

to merchants in response to selection of the merchant's banner. Nowhere in this section, or

elsewhere, does Wolff disclose or suggest creating the special event logo by modifying the

standard company logo with at least one ofvideo or audio data, as required by claim 20.

Yahoo discloses a Yahoo Christmas logo. Nowhere does Yahoo disclose or remotely

suggest that the Yahoo Christmas logo includes video and/or audio data, as required by claim 20.

For at least these additional reasons, Applicant submits that claim 20 is patentable over

Wolff and Yahoo.

Independent claim 26 is directed to a computer-readable medium that stores instructions

executable by one or more processors to perform a method for attracting users to a web page.

The computer-readable medium comprises instructions for creating a special event logo by

modifying a standard company logo for a special event; instructions for associating a link or

search results with the special event logo, the link identifying a document relating to the special

event, the search results relating to the special event; instructions for uploading the special event

logo to the web page; instructions for receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and

instructions for providing the document relating to the special event or the search results relating

14



to the special event based on the user selection.



Yahoo do not disclose or suggest instructions for associating a link or search results with a

special event logo created by modifying a standard company logo for a special event, the link

identifying a document relating to the special event, and the search results relating to the special

event.

The Examiner did not specifically address this feature and, therefore, did not establish a

prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 26. Applicant respectfully submits that

neither Wolff nor Yahoo discloses or suggests this feature for at least reasons similar to reasons


Because Wolff and Yahoo do not disclose or suggest instructions for associating a link or

search results with a special event logo created by modifying a standard company logo for a

special event, where the link identifies a document relating to the special event, and the search

results relate to the special event, Wolff and Yahoo cannot disclose or suggest instructions for

providing the document relating to the special event or the search results relating to the special

event based on the user selection, as further recited in claim 26.


Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination. Claims 29-31 and 35 depend

from claim 26 and are, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Yahoo for at least the reasons given



15



comprises a memory configured to store instructions and a processor configured to execute the







Yahoo do not disclose or suggest a processor configured to determine a home page for a web

page on a network or identify a standard company logo on the home page.

The Examiner did not address these features of claim 27 and, therefore, did not establish

a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 27. Wolff discloses nothing remotely

similar to these features. Yahoo discloses a Yahoo Christmas logo, but does not disclose or

remotely suggest a processor configured to determine a home page for a web page on a network

or identify a standard company logo on the home page, as required by claim 27.


Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination. Claims 32 and 33 depend from

claim 27 and are, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Yahoo for at least the reasons given with

regard to claim 27.

Independent claim 28 recites features similar to, but possibly different in scope from,

features recited in claim 18. Claim 28 is, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Yahoo, whether

taken alone or in any reasonable combination, for at least reasons similar to reasons given with

regard to claim 18. Claim 36 depends from claim 28. Claim 36 is, therefore, patentable over

16



Wolff and Yahoo for at least the reasons given with regard to claim 28.

Independent claim 37 is directed to a method comprising presenting a special event logo

on a web page, the special event logo being associated with a standard company logo that has

been modified or replaced for a special event; receiving selection of the special event logo;


selection; and presenting results based on the invoked search.



Yahoo do not disclose or suggest invoking a search for web pages relating to the special event in

response to a received selection of a special event logo for at least reasons similar to reasons

given with regard to claim 18. Instead, Wolff discloses performing a search of a product/service

database for a record containing information specific to the advertised product or service (col. 9,

lines 3-7). Yahoo merely discloses a standard Internet search that can be performed by entering

text into the search box and clicking on the search button.


Yahoo, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination. Claims 22, 38, and 39 depend

from claim 37 and are, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Yahoo for at least the reasons given


New claim 40 depends from claim 18, and new claim 41 depends from claim 28. Claims

40 and 41 are, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Yahoo for at least the reasons given with

regard to claims 18 and 28.

In view of the foregoing amendments and remarks, Applicant respectfully requests the

17



Examiner's reconsideration of the application and the timely allowance of pending claims 18-41.

As Applicant's remarks with respect to the Examiner's rejections overcome the

rejections, Applicant's silence as to certain assertions by the Examiner in the Office Action or

certain requirements that may be applicable to such rejections (e.g., whether a reference

constitutes prior art, motivation to combine references, etc.) is not a concession by Applicant that

such assertions are accurate or that such requirements have been met, and Applicant reserves the

right to dispute these assertions/requirements in the future.

If the Examiner does not believe that all pending claims are now in condition for

allowance, the Examiner is urged to contact the undersigned to expedite prosecution of this

application.







By: /Paul A. Harrity/Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574

Date: November 22,2006


18


EFSID: 1331304










Receipt Date: 22-NOV-2006






"---------------File Listing:

Document Document Description File Name File Size(Bytes) Multi PagesNumber Part /.zip (if appl.)

1 0026-0002_Amendment.pdf 107683 yes 18

Multipart Description/PDF files in .zip description

Document Description Start End

Amendment - After Non-Final Rejection 1 1

Claims 2 8

Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment 9 18

Warnings:

Information:





PATENT APPUCAnON FEE DETERMINAnON RECORD 64.JW31C; 0Effective December 8. 2004. ..

CLAIMS AS FILED - PART I SMALL ENTITY OTHER THANIO"tlumn '\ lColumn2\ TYPE c::J OR SMALL ENT1TY

TOTAL CLAIMS~TE FEE RATE FEE

FOR NUMBERFUO NUMBER EXTRA BASIC FEE 150:00 OR IBASlCFEE .300.00.. ,

TOTAl CHARGEABLE CLAIMS minus 20= • ~25: OR XS5O~

•INDEPENDENT ClAIMS minus 3 = X100= OR X200c.. -MULTlPLE DEPENDENT ClAIM PRESENT

..0 .180= OR ..360=

• " the difference in CXllumn 1 is less than zero. enter ·0· in column 2TOTAL OR TOTAL

CLAIMS AS AMENDED - PART II OTHER THAN(Column 1) tColumn21 lColumn3 SMALL ENTITY OR SMALL ENTITY

1I-'L7-(J~CL,AlMS HIGHEST

ADD'· AOOf·• REMAINING' NUMBER !..eftESENTRATE TlONAl. RATE TIc- .- r-.

~ AFTER PREVIOUSlY- , ~I"", iii'AMENDMENT PAIDFOA FEEau/1.l .~ V:Ii

·~4 ,,~/'a Total Minus • -c:./ XS25= OA f\-.XS50=i5 ...5' Minus ? /' -- ~.IndepeIldent • - • '-c:::;I~ X100= OR

f1FIRST PRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM

1}'6O='\.180= OR

TOTAL 0 TOTAl. \.ADDIT.FEE ADOlf. FeE

\(Column 1) (Column 2) 'Column 31ClAIMS HIGHEST ADOl' . ADDI".til REMAINING NUMBER PRESENT

ti AFTER PREVIOUSLY EXTRA RATE TIO~ RATE nONALAMENOMENT PAfOFOR. FE . R=I=W

:ETotal Minus ~ X$50=c . - := XS25= ORz

w Independent Minus - . ..:E * Xl 00= X200=Cl FIRST PRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM fJ OR

+180= OR +360-

TOTAl. OR TOTAl.ACDrr. FEE ACDff.FEE

" .(Column 1) ICo;umn 21 IColumn 31

ClAIMS HIGHESTADD'· ADO,·u REMA,INING NUMBER PRESENT... AfTER PREVIOUSlY EXTRA RATE TIONAL RA~ nONALz AMENDMENT PAID FOR FEE FEr:w

:IiTo1al Minus0 • ... = XS25= OR X$SO=z

w Independent • Minus - ":Ii Xl00= ~ct 0 ORFIRST PRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM.+180: OR +360=

• If the entry in COlumn I is less .than the entry in COfumn 2. WYile ·0' in tolurm 3..TOTAL. . lOTAi.

-1t1he "Highes1 Number Previousty Paid FCX·IN THIS SPACE Is less tnan 20. JI'lter~: ADDrr.FEE OR ADM. FEE-U the "Highest Number PrevCusly Paid FeY' IN THIS SPACE ille5s IhM 3. enter "3.'

The 'Highest Numbef PnMot~y Paid For (Total or Independent) is the highesl number found In !he appropriale box wi COIumn.t.

FORtoI PTo..n fAtlY. 10/041

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFIC&.;UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeAddress: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS

P.O. Box 1450Alexandria, Virginia 22313·1450www.uspto.gov

APPLICAnON NO.

09/843,923

44989 7590

FILING DATE

0413012001

08/2312006


Sergey Brin

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMAnON NO.

0026-0002 9916

EXAMINER

AILES. BENJAMIN AHARRITY SNYDER, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030

ART UNIT

2142

PAPER NUMBER



PTO-90C (Rev. 10/03)


Application No.

09/843,923

Examiner

Applicant(s)

BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit


-- 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 J MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS,WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.

Extensions of time may be available under. the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, maya reply be timely filedafter 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 anyearned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).

Status

1)~ Responsive to communication(s) filed on 17 Mav 2006.

2a)0 This action is FINAL. 2b)~ This action is non-final.




4)~ Claim(s) 18-39 is/are pending in the application.



6)~ Claim(s) 18-39 is/are rejected.



Application Papers

9)0 The specification is objected to by the Examiner.

10)0 The drawing(s) filed on __ is/are: a)O accepted or b)O 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).


11)0 The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO·152.


12)0 Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (t).J



2.0 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. __._.

'3.0 Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage



Attachment(s)

1) cgJ Notice of References Cited (PTO-892j


3) 0 Information Disciosure'Statement(s) (PTO-1449 or PTO/SB/08)Paper No(s)/Mail Date __.


5) 0 Notice of Informal Patent Application (PTO-152)6) 0 Other: __.

U.s. Patent and Trademarl< OffICe



Art Unit: 2142

DETAILED ACTION

1.. Claims 18-39 remain pending.

Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114

Page 2

2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set

forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this

application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set

forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action

has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 24 April

2006 has been entered.


3. Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are

moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.





5. Claims 18-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over

Wolff (US 6,247,047 81 )in view of Yahoo! (Yahoo!,

http://www.archive.orq/web/19961223150621 /http://\NWw8.yahoo.comJ), hereinafter

referred to as Yahoo.


Art Unit: 2142

6. Regarding claims 1, 22, 26, 28, 32, 33 and 37, Wolff teaches a method for

Page 3 .

enticing users to access a web page comprising the use of a graphical icon (i.e. an

advertisement banner) wherein the icon is displayed to a user on a web page. A

keyword (indicia) is associated with the icon wherein when the user selects the icon a

search is invoked to search an online database and then the search results are

pr,esented to the user (see Wolff, column 8, line 56 - column 9, line 15). These

teachings teach upon the claim limitations "associating one or more search terms with a

logo", "uploading the logo to the web page", "receiving a user selection of the logo", and

"invoking a search based on the one ore more search terms in response to the user

s~lection". Wolff does not explicitly recite "modifying a standard company logo for a

special event to create a special event logo". Wolff teaches the use of the graphical

icon being an advertisement banner utilized to attract a computer user and further

suggests that the graphical icon can be quickly set up for seasonal and one-time use

(col. 2, lines 27-28). In related art, Yahoo taught on the claim limitation of modifying a

logo by altering their logo to celebrate the Christmas holiday on December 23, 1996

(see Yahoo main page NPL). Therefore, since it is suggested by Wolff to proVide a

mechanism to easily set up and utilize an icon for seasonal or one-time use, it would

have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a logo as demonstrated

by Yahoo to be a logo which is deemed seasonal because the logo has been altered in

order to celebrate a special event, in this case Christmas. Further, it would have been

obvious to associate the "search term" to relate the graphical icon as taught by Wolff

because the keyword associated with the icon is supposed to directly identify the


Art Unit: 2142

product or service being represented by use of the icon and when a use interacts

Page 4

(clicks) on the icon (see Wolff, col. 8, II. 43-49), it is deemed obvious that search results


Therefore, in view of Yahoo, if a logo is altered in some sort of way, the keyword

associated with the logo should be altered accordingly. One or ordinary skill in the art at

the time of the applicant's invention would have found it obvious to combine the

teachings of Yahoo with what is taught by Wolff. One of ordinary skill in the art would

have been motivated to make such a combination due to being from the same field of

endeavor (client-server network systems) and for the reasons stated above, specifically

the advantages of providing a banner which is attractive to a user which would cause a

user to want to click on the banner and the ability to provide a banner which can be

used one-tim~ or seasonal.

7. Regarding claims 19 and 29, Wolff and Yahoo teach the method wherein the

m9difying a standard company logo includes creating the special event logo by

modifying the standard company logo with one or more animated images (Yahoo).


modifying a standard company logo includes creating the special event logo by

modifying the standard company logo with at least one of video or audio data (Yahoo

and Wolff, col. 3, II. 39-43).


special event includes a holiday (Yahoo).


Art Unit: 2142

Page 5


uploading the special event includes displaying the special event logo on the web page

during the special event (Yahoo).

11. Regarding claim 24, Wolff and Yahoo teach the method wherein the invoking a

search includes:

generati,ng a search query using the one or more search terms (Wolff, col. 9, II. 3-

13);




12. Regarding claim 25, Wolff and Yahoo teach the method wherein the modifying a


determining a home page for the web page on a network (Yahoo,

http://wwvo/.yahoo.com);

identifying the standard company logo on the home page (Yahoo, standard

Yahoo.! logo); and


special event logo (Yahoo, the addition of the reindeer to the standard logo

creates a modified logo).

13. Regarding claim 27, the claim contains similar subject matter and is rejected

under the same rationale as taught by claim 18 and the additional limitation to

· .


Art Unit: 2142

"determine a home page for a web page on the network" is taught by Yahoo,

http://www.yahoo.com.

Page 6

14. Regarding claims 34,35 and 36, Wolff and Yahoo teach the method wherein

uploading the special event logo includes replacing the standard company logo with the

special event logo on the web page (Yahoo, page is from 12/23/1996).

15. Regarding claim 38, Wolff and Yahoo teach the method wherein one or more

search terms are associated with the special event logo; and wherein the invoking a

search relating to the special event includes: causing a search to be performed based

on the one or more search terms (Wolff, col. 9, II. 9-13).

......


Art Unit: 2142

Conclusion

Page 7


examiner. should be dir~cted to Benjamin A. Ailes whose telephone number is (571 )272














baa.t~~

.'.TRIZ PRIETO:V EXAMINEP

BEATRlZ PRIETOr-HMARV E)! M;ilNER

Application/Control No. Applicant(s)/Patent Under

09/843,923Reexamination

Notice of References CitedBRIN, SERGEY

Examiner Art Unit

Benjamin A. Ailes 2142Page 1 of 1

u.s. PATENT DOCUMENTS


NameCountry Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY Classification

A US-

B US-

C US-

D US-

E US-

F US-

G US-

H US-

I US-

J US-

K US-

L US-

M US-



Country Code·Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY Country Name Classification

N

0

P

Q

R

S

T


* Include as applicable: Author, TiUe Date, Publisher, Edition or Volume, Pertinent Pages)

UYahoo! Main page, December23, 1996; http://web.archive.org/web/19961223150621/http:/1www8.yahoo.com accessed 07 May2006.

V

W

X

A copy of this reference IS not being furnished With this Office action. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).)Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.

U.s. Patent and rrademar1< Office



Reexamination

III I~ III "II II09/843.923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit





709 204,216 8/21/2006 BAAEAST - updated class/subclass searchof USPAT, USPGPub 8/21/2006 BAA

705 26 8/21/2006 BAA

345 473, 730 8/21/2006 BAA

345 738 8/21/2006 BAAWayback machine, Internet Archive,

5/7/2006 BAAhttp://www.archive.org

EIC NPL search 4/27/2006 BAA

Primary Examiner Beatriz Prieto,8/21/2006 BAAsearch assistance and strategy



U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Par1 of Paper No. 20060821


IIII~IIIII IIII II I09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit


.J Rejected - (Through numeral) Non-Elected AppealCancelled N A



~ <0:::

~ :'; ~~ c

~ ~ c ~ cc '8> c '8> ,;. c '8>

u:: (5 ~ u:: (5 u:: (5:::

1 51 :.; 1012 52 1023 53 ':. 1034 54 1045 - . 55 1056 - 56 1067 · 57 1078 - 58 1089 · 59 10910 - 60 11011 - 61 11112 - 62 :. 11213 - 63 11314 - 64 11415 - 65 11516 · 66 11617 - 67 117

'18 .,J 68 .: 11819 69 11920 70 12021 71 12122 72 12223 73 12324 74 12425.. 75 12526,) 76 126~ 77 127~BI 78 12829 79 12930 ,80 130 .31 81 13132 82 13233 83 13334 ... 84 13435 85 13536 86 136

(171 87 137J8 88 13839 89 139..v 90 14041 ': 91 14142 92 14243 93 14344 94 14445 95 14546 96 :: 14647 97 14748 98 14849 99 14950 100 ': 150

U,S, Patent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No, 20060821

PC:-:fV\C-ri f~v-(",-:f\e( ~e,.~4-n' L fr~e-to ~c ~

EAST Search History

Ref Hits Search Query DBs Default Plurals Time Stamp# Operator

L1 26 (image graphic bitmap icon iconic metaphor US-PGPUB; OR ON 2006/08/17 18:30avatar emoticon) adj5 (keyword term word USPAT;phrase text) adj5 (search query) adj3 EPO; JPO;(command$4 request$4 retriev$) DERWENT

; IBM_TDB

L2 18 1 and @ad<=120010430" US-PGPUB; OR ON 2006/08/17 18:25USPAT;EPO; JPO;DERWENT; IBM_TDB

L3 1 (clickable or user-selectable) adj3 (image US-PGPUB; OR ON 2006/08/17 18:24graphic bitmap icon iconic metaphor avatar USPAT;emoticon) adj5 (search query) EPO; JPO;

DERWENT; IBM_TDB

L4 51 (image graphic bitmap icon iconic metaphor US-PGPUB; OR ON 2006/08/17 18:25avatar emoticon) adj5 predetermined adj USPAT;(search query) EPO; JPO;

DERWENT; IBM_TDB

LS 21 4 and @ad<="20010430" US-PGPUB; OR ON 2006/08/17 18:31USPAT;EPO; JPO;DERWENT;IBM_TDB·

L6 217 (image graphic bitmap icon iconic metaphor US-PGPUB; OR ON 2006/08/17 19:05avatar emoticon) adj3 (search query) adj3 USPAT;(command$4 request$4) EPO; JPO;

DERWENT; IBM_TDB

L7 87 6 and @ad<=120010430" US-PGPUB; OR ON 2006/08/17 19:07USPAT;EPO; JPO;DERWENT;,IBM_TDB

L8 300 (predetermined embedded prestored US-PGPUB; OR ON 2006/08/17 19:06predefined) adj3 (search query) adj3 USPAT;(command$4 request$4 string instruction EPO; JPO;parameters) DERWENT

; IBM_TDB

L9 96 8 and @ad<=120010430" US-PGPUB; OR ON 2006/08/1719:07USPAT;

.EPO; JPO;DERWENT;JBM_TDB

') l-\ 'J

/f0"'1/ \ ". \ 0

1 o~ (')li-') [~

8/17/067:53:04 PM Page 1

,

SetSl

S2

S3

S4

S5

S6

S7

S8

S9

S10

Sl1

S12

S13

S14S15S16S17S18S19

S20S21File

File

Items Description303206 HOMEPAGE? OR HOME() PAGE? OR FRONTPAGE? OR ,FRONT() PAGE? OR

SITE? OR HTML()FILE? OR INTERNET? OR WORLDWIDEWEB499527 WEBSITE? OR WEB()SITE? OR WEBPAGE? OR WEB() PAGE? OR WEB()A

DDRESS? OR URL?? OR URI?? OR NETWORK? OR WWW43676 Sl:S2(50N) (LOGO?? OR STANDARD? (2N) LOGO?? OR BANNER? ? OR S

YMBOL? ? OR GRAPHIC? OR SIGN? ? OR BRAND? OR ICON OR ICONS ORIMAGE OR TRADEMARK?)

4013 S3(50N) (MODIF? OR REVIS??? OR REMODEL? OR ADAPT? OR CHANGE?? OR CHANGING? OR UPDATING? OR UP()DATE? ? OR CUSTOM?)

2809 S3(50N) (UPDATE? ? OR TRANSFORM? OR ALTER??? OR REFORMAT? ORREARRANG? OR ADD??? OR DELET??? OR SPECIAL?)

5 S3(50N) (RE() (CREATE? ? OR CREATING? OR CREATION? OR DECORAT? OR FASHION? OR FURBISH? OR CONSTRUCT? OR CONFIG? OR DO OR DOING OR DESIGN?))

2836 S4:S6(50N) (DELIVER? OR SEND??? OR SENT OR UPLOAD? OR DISTRIBUT? OR TRANSFER? OR TRANSMIT? OR BEAM???)

99 S4:S6(50N) (SEARCH? OR RESEARCH? OR RETRIEV? OR INQUIR? OR QUERY? OR QUERIES OR REQUEST?) (5N) (WORD?? OR TERM? ? OR RESULT? ? OR KEYWORD? OR KEY()WORD?)

3 S8(100N) (EMBED? OR FIT OR FITS OR FITTED OR FITTING OR BUILTIN OR (BUILD? OR BUILT) ()IN OR INLAY? OR INLAID? OR INGRAIN?

OR IMPLANT? OR INCULCAT?)o S9(100N) (DELIVER? OR SEND??? OR SENT OR UPLOAD? OR DISTRIB

UT? OR TRANSFER? OR TRANSMIT? OR BEAM???)4787 (INTEREST??? OR COMMEMORAT? OR ANNUAL? OR SPECIAL? OR INAU

GURA?) (5N) (EVENT? ? OR OCCASION? OR PARTY? OR PARTIES OR FUNCTION? ? OR ANNlVERSAR? OR HOLIDAY?)

1024 S7(50N) (AFFILIAT? OR ASSOCIAT? OR BOUND? OR CONNECT? OR LINK? OR COOPERAT? OR CORRELAT? OR RELAT?)

570 S7(50N) (COMBIN? OR CONJUNCT? OR PARTNER? OR COUPL? OR JOIN?OR CORRESPOND? OR SPONSOR? OR ATTACH?)

1399 S4:S6 AND S12:S13o S14 AND S9

39 S14 AND S839 S16 NOT PR>200039 IDPAT (sorted in duplicate/non-duplicate order)

7 S14 AND (LOGO OR STANDARD(2N)LOGO OR COMPANY (2N) (LOGO OR TRADEMARK?) )

8 AU=(BRIN S? OR BRIN, S?)o SERGEY(2N)BRIN

347:JAPIO Dec 1976-2005/Dec(Updated 060404)(c) 2006 JPO & JAPIO

350:Derwent WPIX 1963-2006/UO,UM &UP=200626(e) 2006 Thomson Derwent

,SetSl

S2

S3

S4

S5

S6

S7

S8

S9

S10

Sl1S12S13S14S15S16S17File

File

Items Description1544819 LOGO?? OR BANNER? ? OR SYMBOL? ? OR GRAPHIC? OR SIGN? ? OR

BRAND? OR ICON OR ICONS'OR IMAGE OR TRADEMARK?649 (COMPAN? OR STANDARD) (3N) (LOGO? ? OR BRAND? OR ICON? ? OR

TRADEMARK? )52181 Sl:S2(5N) (MODIF? OR REVIS??? OR REMODEL? OR ADAPT? OR CHAN

GE? ? OR CHANGING? OR UPDATING? OR UP()DATE? ? OR CUSTOM?)39251 Sl:S2(5N) (UPDATE? ? OR TRANSFORM? OR ALTER??? OR REFORMAT?

OR REARRANG? OR ADD??? OR DELET??? OR SPECIAL?)143 Sl:S2(5N) (RE() (CREATE? ? OR CREATING? OR CREATION? OR DECO

RAT? OR FASHION? OR FURBISH? OR CONSTRUCT? OR CONFIG? OR DO ORDOING OR DESIGN?»

2270 S3:S5(10N) (EVENT? ? OR OCCASION? OR PARTY? OR PARTIES OR FUNCTION? ? OR ANNlVERSAR? OR HOLIDAY?)

128 S3:S5(10N) (SEARCH? OR RESEARCH? OR RETRIEV? OR INQUIR? OR QUERY? OR QUERIES OR REQUEST?) (3N) (WORD?? OR TERM? ? OR RESULT? ? OR KEYWORD? OR KEY () WORD?)

971626 S3:S5(10N)SOFTWARE? OR SOFTWARE()AGENT? ? OR APPLICATION? OR SOFT()WARE? OR APP? ? OR OS OR OPERATING()SYSTEM? OR MACRO?

? OR EXECUT?()FILE?6852 S7:S8(10N) (EMBED? OR FIT OR FITS OR FITTED OR FITTING OR B

UILTIN OR (BUILD? OR BUILT) ()IN OR INLAY? OR INLAID? OR INGRAIN? OR IMPLANT? OR INCULCAT?)

7504 S3:S5(10N) (DELIVER? OR SEND??? OR SENT OR UPLOAD? OR DISTRIBUT? OR TRANSFER? OR TRANSMIT? OR BEAM???)

2 S3:S5 AND S6 AND S92270 S3:S5 AND S6

o S12 AND S2 AND S56 S12 AND S2

36 S3:S5 AND S936 S15 NOT PR>200036 IDPAT (sorted in duplicate/non-duplicate order)

347:JAPIO Dec 1976-2005/Dec(Updated 060404)(c) 2006 JPO & JAPIO

350:Derwent WPIX 1963-2006/UO,UM &UP=200627(c) 2006 Thomson Derwent

.,SetSl

S2

S3

S4

SS

S6

S7

S8

S9

S10

SllS12S13S14SlSS16S17File

File

Items Description1544819 LOGO?? OR BANNER? ? OR SYMBOL? ? OR GRAPHIC? OR SIGN? ? OR

BRAND? OR ICON OR ICONS OR IMAGE OR TRADEMARK?649 (COMPAN? OR STANDARD) (3N) (LOGO? ? OR BRAND? OR ICON? ? OR

TRADEMARK?)52181 Sl:S2(SN) (MODIF? OR REVIS??? OR REMODEL? OR ADAPT? OR CHAN

GE? ? OR CHANGING? OR UPDATING? OR UP()DATE? ? OR CUSTOM?)39251 Sl:S2(SN) (UPDATE? ? OR TRANSFORM? OR ALTER??? OR REFORMAT?

OR REARRANG? OR ADD??? OR DELET??? OR SPECIAL?)143 Sl:S2(SN) (RE() (CREATE? ? OR CREATING? OR CREATION? OR DECO

RAT? OR FASHION? OR FURBISH? OR CONSTRUCT? OR CONFIG? OR DO ORDOING OR DESIGN?))

2270 S3:SS(10N) (EVENT? ? OR OCCASION? OR PARTY? OR PARTIES OR FUNCTION? ? OR ANNlVERSAR? OR HOLIDAY?)

128 S3:SS(10N) (SEARCH? OR RESEARCH? OR RETRIEV? OR INQUIR? OR QUERY? OR QUERIES OR REQUEST?) (3N) (WORD?? OR TERM? ? OR RESULT? ? OR KEYWORD? OR KEY()WORD?)

971626 S3:SS(10N)SOFTWARE? OR SOFTWARE()AGENT? ? OR APPLICATION? OR SOFT()WARE? OR APP? ? OR OS OR OPERATING() SYSTEM? OR MACRO?

? OR EXECUT?()FILE?6852 S7:S8(10N) (EMBED? OR FIT OR FITS OR FITTED OR FITTING OR B


7504 S3:SS(10N) (DELIVER? OR SEND??? OR SENT OR UPLOAD? OR DISTRIBUT? OR TRANSFER? OR TRANSMIT? OR BEAM???)

2 S3:SS AND S6 AND S92270 S3:SS AND S6

o S12 AND S2 AND SS6 S12 AND S2

36 S3:SS AND S936 SlS NOT PR>200036 IDPAT (sorted in duplicate/non-duplicate order)

347:JAPIO Dec 1976-200S/Dec(Updated 060404)(c) 2006 JPO & JAPIO

3S0:Derwent WPIX 1963-2006/UO,UM &UP=200627(c) 2006 Thomson Derwent

8et Items Description81 402154 HOMEPAGE? OR HOME() PAGE? OR FRONTPAGE? OR FRONT()PAGE? OR -

SITE? OR HTML() FILE? OR INTERNET? OR WORLDWIDEWEBS2 352836 WEBSITE? OR WEB()SITE? OR WEBPAGE? OR WEB() PAGE? OR WEB()A-

DDRESS? OR URL?? OR URI?? OR NETWORK? OR WWW83 113362 Sl:S2(50N).(LOGO?? OR STANDARD? (2N) LOGO?? OR BANNER? ? OR S-


S4 31175 S3(50N) (MODIF? OR REVIS??? OR REMODEL? OR ADAPT? OR CHANGE?? OR CHANGING? OR UPDATING? OR UP()DATE? ? OR CUSTOM?)

85 23800 S3(50N) (UPDATE? ? OR TRANSFORM? OR ALTER??? OR REFORMAT? ORREARRANG? OR ADD??? OR DELET??? OR SPECIAL?)

S6 150 S3(50N) (RE() (CREATE? ? OR CREATING? OR CREATION? OR DECORA-T? OR FASHION? OR FURBISH? OR CONSTRUCT? OR CONFIG? OR DO OR DOING OR DESIGN?))

S7 2355 S4:S6(100N) (INTEREST??? OR COMMEMORAT? OR ANNUAL? OR SPECI-AL? OR INAUGURA?) (5N) (EVENT? ? OR OCCASION? OR PARTY? OR PARTIES OR FUNCTION? ? OR ANNIVER8AR? OR HOLIDAY?)

88 1499 S7(50N) (AFFILIAT? OR A880CIAT? OR BOUND? OR CONNECT? OR LI-NK? OR COOPERAT? OR CORRELAT? OR RELAT?)

89 839 87(50N) (COMBIN? OR CONJUNCT? OR PARTNER? OR COUPL? OR JOIN?OR CORRESPOND? OR SPONSOR? OR ATTACH?)

811 214 88:S9(100N) (SEARCH? OR RESEARCH? OR RETRIEV? OR INQUIR? ORQUERY? OR QUERIES OR REQUEST?) (5N) (WORD?? OR TERM? ? OR RESULT? ? OR KEYWORD? OR KEY()WORD?)

812 40 Sll(100N) (EMBED? OR FIT OR FIT8 OR FITTED OR FITTING OR BU-ILTIN OR (BUILD? OR BUILT) ()IN OR INLAY? OR INLAID? OR INGRAIN? OR IMPLANT? OR INCULCAT?)

813 32 812 (lOON) (DELIVER? OR 8END??? OR SENT OR UPLOAD? OR DISTRI-BUT? OR TRANSFER? OR TRANSMIT? OR BEAM???)

814 17 813 NOT AD=2001:2006S15 3 S14 NOT AD>2000816 2 86(5N)88:S9817 1784 84:86(5N)S8:89818 40 817(100N)S12819 6 818 NOT AD>2000S20 42 S14:S16 OR S18:S19821 1742 817 NOT 820S22 0 S21 AND (LOGO OR 8TANDARD(2N)LOGO OR COMPANY (2N) (IMAGE OR -

BRAND OR SYMBOL OR TRADEMARK))/TIS23 292 S21 AND (LOGO OR LOG08 OR STANDARD (2N) (LOGO OR LOGOS) OR C-

OMPAN???(2N) (IMAGE? ? OR BRAND??? OR SYMBOL? ? OR TRADEMARK? ?) )

S24 62 S23 NOT AD>2000S25 62 S24 NOT AD=2001:2006S26 62 825(5N)84:S6S27 62 IDPAT (sorted in duplicate/non-duplicate order)828 4 AU=(BRIN S? OR BRIN, S?)S29 18 SERGEY (2N) BRIN830 18 S28:S29831 0 S30 NOT AD>2000File 348:EUROPEAN PATENTS 1978-2006/ 200616

(c) 2006 European Patent OfficeFile 349:PCT FULLTEXT 1979-2006/UB=20060420,UT=20060413

(c) 2006 WIPO/Univentio

•

Set Items DescriptionSl 2798856 HOMEPAGE? OR HOME() PAGE? OR FRONTPAGE? OR FRONT(YPAGE? OR -

SITE? OR HTML() FILE? OR INTERNET? OR WORLDWIDEWEBS2 3176350 WEBSITE? OR WEB()SITE? OR WEBPAGE? OR WEB () PAGE? OR WEB()A-

DDRESS? OR URL?? OR URI?? OR NETWORK? OR WWWS3 168891 Sl:S2(50N) (LOGO?? OR STANDARD? (2N) LOGO?? OR BANNER? ? OR S-


S4 20669 S3(50N) (MODIF? OR REVIS??? OR REMODEL? OR ADAPT? OR CHANGE?? OR CHANGING? OR UPDATING? OR UP()DATE? ? OR CUSTOM?)

S5 16788 S3(50N) (UPDATE? ? OR TRANSFORM? OR ALTER??? OR REFORMAT? ORREARRANG? OR ADD??? OR DELET??? OR SPECIAL?)

S6 61 S3(100N) (RE() (CREATE? ? OR CREATING? OR CREATION? OR DECOR-AT? OR FASHION? OR FURBISH? OR CONSTRUCT? OR CONFIG? OR DO ORDOING OR DESIGN?»

S7 766 S4:S6(100N) (INTEREST??? OR COMMEMORAT? OR ANNUAL? OR SPECI-AL? OR INAUGURA?) (5N) (EVENT? ? OR OCCASION? OR PARTY? OR PARTIES OR FUNCTION? ? OR ANNlVERSAR? OR HOLIDAY?)

S8 294 S7(50N) (AFFILIAT? OR ASSOCIAT? OR BOUND? OR CONNECT? OR LI-NK? OR COOPERAT? OR CORRELAT? OR RELAT?)

S9 172 S7(50N) (COMBIN? OR CONJUNCT? OR PARTNER? OR COUPL? OR JOIN?OR CORRESPOND? OR SPONSOR? OR ATTACH?)

S10 5923 S4:S6(50N) (DELIVER? OR SEND??? OR SENT OR UPLOAD? OR DISTR-IBUT? OR TRANSFER? OR TRANSMIT? OR BEAM???)

Sll 1134 S4:S6(50N) (SEARCH? OR RESEARCH? OR RETRIEV? OR INQUIR? OR -QUERY? OR QUERIES OR REQUEST?) (5N) (WORD?? OR TERM? ? OR RESULT? ? OR KEYWORD? OR KEY()WORD?)

S12 55 Sll(100N) (EMBED? OR FIT OR FITS OR FITTED OR FITTING OR BU-ILTIN OR (BUILD? OR BUILT) ()IN OR INLAY? OR INLAID? OR INGRAIN? OR IMPLANT? OR INCULCAT?)

S13 7 S12(100N) (DELIVER? OR SEND??? OR SENT OR UPLOAD? OR DISTRI-BUT? OR TRANSFER? OR TRANSMIT? OR BEAM???)

S14 1 S4:S6 AND S8:S9 AND S12S15 14 S4:S6 AND S8:S9 AND SllS16 389 S4:S6 AND S8:S9S17 8 S15 NOT PY>2000S18 5 RD (unique items)S19 21 S13:S15 OR S17:S18S20 375 S16 NOT S19S21 233 S20 NOT PY>2000S22 179 RD (unique items)S23 1 S22 AND (LOGO?? OR STANDARD? (2N) LOGO?? OR COMPAN???(3N) (Sy-

MBOL? ? OR GRAPHIC? OR SIGN? ? OR BRAND? OR ICON OR ICONS OR IMAGE OR TRADEMARK?»

S24 79 AU=(BRIN S? OR BRIN, S?)S25 36 SERGEY(2N)BRINS26 1 S24:S25 AND S4:S6S27 56 S24:S25 NOT PY>2000File 2:INSPEC 1898-2006/Apr W3

(c) 2006 Institution of Electrical EngineersFile 6:NTIS 1964-2006/Apr W2

(c) 2006 NTIS, IntI Cpyrght All Rights ResFile 8:Ei Compendex(R) 1970-2006/Apr W3

(c) 2006 Elsevier Eng. Info. Inc.File 34:SciSearch(R) Cited Ref Sci 1990-2006/Apr W3

(c) 2006 Inst for Sci InfoFile 35:Dissertation Abs Online 1861-2006/Mar

(c) 2006 ProQuest Info&LearningFile 56:Computer and Information Systems Abstracts 1966-2006/Apr

(c) 2006 CSA.File 60:ANTE: Abstracts in New Tech & Engineer 1966-2006/Apr

,I

(c) 2006 CSA.File 62:SPIN(R) 1975-2006/Mar WI

(c) 2006 American Institute of PhysicsFile 65:Inside Conferences 1993-2006/Apr 26

(c) 2006 BLOSC all rts. reserv.File 94:JICST-EPlus 1985-2006/Jan W5

(c)2006 Japan Science and Tech Corp(JST)File 95:TEME-Technology & Management 1989-2006/Apr W4

(c) 2006 FIZ TECHNIKFile 99:Wilson Appl. Sci & Tech Abs 1983-2006/Mar

(c) 2006 The HW Wilson Co.File 111:TGG Natl.Newspaper Index (SM) 1979-2006/Apr 18

(c) 2006 The Gale GroupFile 144:Pascal 1973-2006/Mar W4

(c) 2006 INIST/CNRSFile 239:Mathsci 1940-2006/Jun

(c) 2006 American Mathematical SocietyFile 256:TecInfoSource 82-2006/May

(c) 2006 Info.Sources IncFile 434:SciSearch(R) Cited Ref Sci 1974-1989/0ec

(c) 1998 Inst for Sci InfoFile 583:Gale Group Globalbase(TM) 1986-2002/0ec 13

(c) 2002 The Gale Group

Set Items DescriptionSl 3127530 LOGO?? OR BANNER? ? OR SYMBOL? ? OR GRAPHIC? OR SIGN? ? OR

BRAND? OR ICON OR ICONS OR IMAGE OR TRADEMARK?S2 6772 (COMPAN? OR STANDARD) (3N) (LOGO? ? OR BRAND? OR ICON? ? OR -

TRADEMARK? )S3 97172 Sl:S2(5N) (MODIF? OR REVIS??? OR REMODEL? OR ADAPT? OR CHAN-

GE? ? OR CHANGING? OR UPDATING? OR UP()DATE? ? OR CUSTOM?)S4 95057 Sl:S2(5N) (UPDATE? ? OR TRANSFORM? OR ALTER??? OR REFORMAT?

OR REARRANG? OR ADD??? OR DELET??? OR SPECIAL?)S5 156 Sl:S2(5N) (RE() (CREATE? ? OR CREATING? OR CREATION? OR DECO-

RAT? OR FASHION? OR FURBISH? OR CONSTRUCT? OR CONFIG? OR DO ORDOING OR DESIGN?»

S6 8622 S3:S5(10N) (EVENT? ? OR OCCASION? OR PARTY? OR PARTIES OR F-UNCTION? ? OR ANNlVERSAR? OR HOLIDAY?)

S7 266 S3:S5(10N) (SEARCH? OR RESEARCH? OR RETRIEV? OR INQUIR? OR -QUERY? OR QUERIES OR REQUEST?) (3N) (WORD?? OR TERM? ? OR RESULT? ? OR KEYWORD? OR KEY () WORD?)

88 7117974 S3:S5(10N)SOFTWARE? OR SOFTWARE()AGENT? ? OR APPLICATION? -OR SOFT()WARE? OR APP? ? OR OS OR OPERATING()SYSTEM? OR MACRO?

? OR EXECUT?()FILE?89 56970 S7:S8(10N) (EMBED? OR FIT OR FITS OR FITTED OR FITTING OR B-



811 8622 S3:S5 AND 86812 28 Sll AND S9813 3 S12 AND S10814 18 S12:S13 NOT PY>2000S15 12 RD (unique items)S16 0 Sll NOT SlS17 431 S3:S5 AND S9S18 0 S17 AND (COMPAN? OR STANDARD) (3N) (LOGO? ? OR BRAND? OR ICO-

N? ? OR TRADEMARK?)File 2:INSPEC 1898-2006/Apr W3

(c) 2006 Institution of Electrical EngineersFile 6:NTIS 1964-2006/Apr W2

(c) 2006 NTIS, IntI Cpyrght All Rights ResFile 8:Ei Compendex(R) 1970-2006/Apr W3

(c) 2006 Elsevier Eng. Info. Inc.File 34:SciSearch(R) Cited Ref Sci 1990-2006/Apr W3

(c) 2006 Inst for Sci InfoFile 35:Dissertation Abs Online 1861-2006/Mar

(c) 2006 ProQuest Info&LearningFile 56:Computer and Information Systems Abstracts 1966-2006/Apr

(c) 2006 CSA.File 60:ANTE: Abstracts in New Tech & Engineer 1966-2006/Apr

(c) 2006 CSA.File 62:SPIN(R) 1975-2006/Mar W1

(c) 2006 American Institute of PhysicsFile 65:Inside Conferences 1993-2006/Apr 27

(c) 2006 BLDSC all rts. reserv.File 94:JICST-EPlus 1985-2006/Jan W5

(c)2006 Japan Science and Tech Corp(JST)File 95:TEME-Technology & Management 1989-2006/Apr W4

(c) 2006 FIZ TECHNIKFile 99:Wilson Appl. Sci & Tech Abs 1983-2006/Mar

(c) 2006 The HW Wilson Co.File 111:TGG Natl.Newspaper Index (SM) 1979-2006/Apr 19

(c) 2006 The Gale GroupFile 144:Pascal 1973-2006/Apr W1

(c) 2006 INIST/CNRSFile 239:Mathsci 1940-2006/Jun

(c) 2006 American Mathematical SocietyFile 256:TeclnfoSource 82-2006/May

(c) 2006 Info.Sources IncFile 434:SciSearch(R) Cited Ref Sci 1974-1989/Dec

(c) 1998 Inst for Sci InfoFile 583:Gale Group Globalbase(TM) 1986-2002/Dec 13


~

~

SetSl

S2

S3

S4

S5

S6

S7

S8

S9

S10

Sll

S12

S13S14S15

Items Description14590250 HOMEPAGE? OR HOME()PAGE? OR FRONTPAGE? OR FRONT()PAGE? OR

SITE? OR HTML()FILE? OR INTERNET? OR WORLDWIDEWEB20216735 WEBSITE? OR WEB()SITE? OR WEBPAGE? OR WEB () PAGE? OR WEB()A

DDRESS? OR URL?? OR URI?? OR NETWORK? OR WWW4773104 Sl:S2(50N) (LOGO?? OR STANDARD? (2N) LOGO?? OR BANNER? ? OR S


1576944 S3(50N) (MODIF? OR REVIS??? OR REMODEL? OR ADAPT? OR CHANGE?? OR CHANGING? OR UPDATING? OR UP()DATE? ? OR CUSTOM?)

822796 S3(50N) (UPDATE? ? OR TRANSFORM? OR ALTER??? OR REFORMAT? ORREARRANG? OR ADD??? OR DELET??? OR SPECIAL?)

11972 S3(100N) (RE() (CREATE? ? OR CREATING? OR CREATION? OR DECORAT? OR FASHION? OR FURBISH? OR CONSTRUCT? OR CONFIG? OR DO ORDOING OR DESIGN?»

135752 S4:S6(100N) (INTEREST??? OR COMMEMORAT? OR ANNUAL? OR SPECIAL? OR INAUGURA?) (5N) (EVENT? ? OR OCCASION? OR PARTY? OR PARTIES OR FUNCTION? ? OR ANNlVERSAR? OR HOLIDAY?)

63881 S7(50N) (AFFILIAT? OR ASSOCIAT? OR BOUND? OR CONNECT? OR LINK? OR COOPERAT? OR CORRELAT? OR RELAT?)

40917 S7(50N) (COMBIN? OR CONJUNCT? OR PARTNER? OR COUPL? OR JOIN?OR CORRESPOND? OR SPONSOR? OR ATTACH?)

75030 S4:S6(50N) (SEARCH? OR RESEARCH? OR RETRIEV? OR INQUIR? OR QUERY? OR QUERIES OR REQUEST?) (5N) (WORD?? OR TERM? ? OR RESULT? ? OR KEYWORD? OR KEY()WORD?)

3539 S10(100N) (EMBED? OR FIT OR FITS OR FITTED OR FITTING OR BUILTIN OR (BUILD? OR BUILT) ()IN OR INLAY? OR INLAID? OR INGRAIN? OR IMPLANT? OR INCULCAT?)

1538 Sll(100N) (DELIVER? OR SEND??? OR SENT OR UPLOAD? OR DISTRI-BUT? OR TRANSFER? OR TRANSMIT? OR BEAM???)

87 S4:S6(10N)S8:S9(10N)Sll(10N)S1242 RD (unique items)26 S14 NOT PD>2000

Set Items DescriptionSl 12894467 LOGO?? OR BANNER? ? OR SYMBOL? ? OR GRAPHIC? OR SIGN? ? OR

BRAND? OR ICON OR ICONS OR IMAGE OR TRADEMARK?S2 673134 Sl(5N) (MODIF? OR REVIS??? OR REMODEL? OR ADAPT? OR CHANGE?

? OR CHANGING? OR UPDATING? OR UP()DATE? ? OR CUSTOM?)S3 452506 Sl(5N) (UPDATE? ? OR TRANSFORM? OR ALTER??? OR REFORMAT? OR

REARRANG? OR ADD??? OR DELET??? OR SPECIAL?)S4 5287 Sl(5N) (RE() (CREATE? ? OR CREATING? OR CREATION? OR DECORAT?

OR FASHION? OR ,FURBISH? OR CONSTRUCT? OR CONFIG? OR DO OR DOING OR DESIGN?»

S5 44334 S2:S4(20N) (EVENT? ? OR OCCASION? OR PARTY? OR PARTIES OR F-UNCTION? ? OR ANNlVERSAR? OR HOLIDAY?)

S6 2180 S2:S4(10N) (SEARCH? OR RESEARCH? OR RETRIEV? OR INQUIR? OR -QUERY? OR QUERIES OR REQUEST?) (3N) (WORD?? OR TERM? ? OR RESULT? ? OR KEYWORD? OR KEY()WORD?)

S7 24 S6(10N) (EMBED? OR FIT OR FITS OR FITTED OR FITTING OR BUIL-TIN OR (BUILD? OR BUILT) ()IN OR INLAY? OR INLAID? OR INGRAIN?OR IMPLANT? OR INCULCAT?)


S9 0 S2:S4(10N)S5(10N)S6(10N)S7S10 7 S7 NOT PD>2000S11 5 RD (unique items)S12 3036 S5(10N) (WEBSITE? OR WEB()SITE? OR WEBPAGE? OR WEB()PAGE? OR

WEB()ADDRESS? OR URL?? OR URI?? OR NETWORK? OR WWW)S13 2965 S5(10N) (HOMEPAGE? OR HOME() PAGE? OR FRONTPAGE? OR FRONT()P-

AGE? OR SITE? OR HTML() FILE? OR INTERNET? OR WORLDWIDEWEB)S14 26 S12:S13(10N)S6S15 13 RD (unique items)S16 6 S15 NOT PD>2000S17 515 S12:S13(10N)S8S18 0 S17(10N)S6S19 87 S6(10N)S8S20 87 S19 AND S6(5N)S8821 41 RD (unique items)S22 22 S21 NOT PD>2000S23 515 S17 NOT S20S24 44 S23 AND (COMPAN? OR STANDARD) (5N) (IMAGE? ? OR ICON? ? OR L-

OGO? ? OR BRAND??? OR TRADEMARK?)S25 16 S24 NOT PD>2000S26 8 RD (unique items)S27 3616 S5(5N) (COMPAN? OR STANDARD) (3N) (IMAGE? ? OR ICON? ? OR LOG-

O? ? OR BRAND??? OR TRADEMARK?)S28 6 S27(5N)S6S29 375 S27(5N)S12:S13S30 214 RD (unique items)S31 80 S30 NOT PD>2000File 9:Business & Industry(R) Jul/1994-2006/Apr 26

(c) 2006 The Gale GroupFile 13:BAMP 2006/Apr W3

(c) 2006 The Gale GroupFile 15:ABI/lnform(R) 1971-2006/Apr 27

(c) 2006 ProQuest Info&LearningFile 16:Gale Group PROMT(R) 1990-2006/Apr 27

(c) 2006 The Gale GroupFile 47:Gale Group Magazine DB(TM) 1959-2006/Apr 26

(c) 2006 The Gale groupFile 75:TGG Management Contents(R) 86-2006/Apr W3

(c) 2006 The Gale GroupFile 88:Gale Group Business A.R.T.S. 1976-2006/Apr 20


~File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

File

98:General Sci Abs 1984-2004/Dec(c) 2005 The HW Wilson Co.

141:Readers Guide 1983-2005/May(c) 2006 The HW Wilson Co

148:Gale Group Trade & Industry DB 1976-2006/Apr 27(c)2006 The Gale Group

160:Gale Group PROMT(R) 1972-1989(c) 1999 The Gale Group

239:Mathsci 1940-2006/Jun(c) 2006 American Mathematical Society

275:Gale Group Computer DB(TM) 1983-2006/Apr 26(c) 2006 The Gale Group

369:New Scientist 1994-2006/Sep WI(c) 2006 Reed Business Information Ltd.

370:Science 1996-1999/Jul W3(c) 1999 AAAS

484:Periodical Abs Plustext 1986-2006/Apr W2(c) 2006 ProQuest

553:Wilson Bus. Abs. 1982-2006/Apr(c) 2006 The HW Wilson Co

610:Business Wire 1999-2006/Apr 27(c) 2006 Business Wire.

613:PR Newswire 1999-2006/Apr 27(c) 2006 PR Newswire Association Inc

621:Gale Group New Prod.Annou. (R) 1985-2006/Apr 27(c) 2006 The Gale Group

624:McGraw-Hill Publications 1985-2006/Apr 27(c) 2006 McGraw-Hill Co. Inc

634:San Jose Mercury Jun 1985-2006/Apr 26(c) 2006 San Jose Mercury News

635:Business Dateline(R) 1985-2006/Apr 27(c) 2006 ProQuest lnfo&Learning

636:Gale Group Newsletter DB(TM) 1987-2006/Apr 26(c) 2006 The Gale Group

647:CMP Computer Fulltext 1988-2006/May W2(c) 2006 CMP Media, LLC

674:Computer News Fulltext 1989-2006/Apr W3(c) 2006 lDG Communications

696:DlALOG Telecom. Newsletters 1995-2006/Apr 27(c) 2006 Dialog

810:Business Wire 1986-1999/Feb 28(c) 1999 Business Wire

813:PR Newswire 1987-1999/Apr 30(c) 1999 PR Newswire Association Inc

REQUEST Application Number 09/843,923

FOR Filing Date Apri130, 2001CONTINUED EXAMINATION

TRANSMITTAL First Named Inventor Sergey Brin

Art Unit 2142Address to:

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Examiner Name B. AilesCustomer Service Window, Mail Stop RCE

Randolph Building Attorney Docket Number 0026-0002

401 Dulany StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

This is a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114 ofthe above-identified application.Request for Continued Examination (RCE) practice under 37 CFR 1.114 does not apply to any utility or plant application filed prior to June8, 1995, or to any design application. See Instruction Sheet for RCEs (not to be submitted to the USPTO) on page 2.

l. Submission required under 37 CFR 1.114 (Note: If the RCE is proper, any previously filed unenteredamendments and amendments enclosed with the RCE will be entered in the order in which they were filed unlessapplicant instructs otherwise. If applicant does not wish to have any previously filed unentered amendment(s)entered, applicant must request non-entry of such amendment(s).

a. ~ Previously submitted. If a final Office action is outstanding, any amendments filed after the finalOffice action may be considered as a submission even if this box is not checked.

l. 0 Consider the arguments in the Appeal Brief or Reply Brief previously filed on11. 0 Other

b. 0 Enclosed

0 Amendment/Reply... 0 Information Disclosure Statement (mS)l. 111.

11. 0 Affidavit(s)/Declaration(s) IV. 0 Other

2. Miscellaneousa. 0 Suspension of action on the above-identified application is requested under 37 CFR l.l03(c) for a

period of months (Period of suspension shall not exceed 3 months; Fee under 37 CFR 1.17(i) required)b. 0 Other

3. Fees The RCE fee under 37 CFR 1.1 7(e) is required by 37 CFR 1.114 when the RCE is filed.

a. ~ The Director is hereby authorized to charge any other appropriate fees that may be requiredby this paper that are not accounted for below, and to credit any overpayment, to DepositAccount No. 50-1070.

l. ~ RCE fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(e)11. 0 Extension of time fee (37 CFR 1.136 and 1.17)111. 0 Other

b. 0 Check in the amount of $ 790.00 enclosedc. ~ Payment by credit card (Form PTO-2038 enclosed)

WARNING: Information on this form may become public. Credit card information shouldnot be included on this form. Provide credit card information and authorization on PTO-2038.

CUSTOMER NUMBER: 44989SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT, ATTORNEY, OR AGENT REQUIRED

Name (Print / Type) Paul A. Harrity Registration No. (Attorney/Agent) 39,574Signature /Paul A. Harrity/ Date May 17,2006

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING OR TRANSMISSIONI hereby certify that this correspondence is being deposited with the United States Postal Service with sufficient postage as firstclass mail in an envelope addressed to: Commissioner for Patents, Box RCE, Washington, DC 20231, or facsimile transmittedto the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on the date shown below.

Name (Print / Type)

Signature Date





First Named Inventor: Sergey Brin




Utility Filing Fees


USD($)

Basic Filing:

Pages:

Claims:


Petition:

Patent-Appeals-and-Interference:


Extension-of-Time:


USD($)

Miscellaneous:

Request for continued examination 1801 1 790 790



EFSID: 1049503









Receipt Date: 17-MAY-2006









Deposit Account

File Listing:

DocumentNumber Document Description File Name File Size(Bytes) Multi

Part

1Request for Continued Examination 05-17-06-RCE-Transmittal.p

111091 no 1(RCE) df

Warnings:

Information:

2 Fee Worksheet (PTO-875) fee-info.pdf 8159 no 2

Warnings:

Information:




National Stage of an International Application under 35 U.S.C. 371If a timely submission to enter the national stage of an international application is compliant with the conditionsof 35 U.S.C. 371 and other applicable requirements a Form PCT/OO/EO/903 indicating acceptance of theapplication as a national stage submission under 35 U.S.C. 371 will be issued in addition to the Filing Receipt,in due course.



Examiner: B. Ailes


SergeyBrin

'Application No.: 09/843,923


or. SYSTEMS AND METHODS FORENTICING USERS TO ACCESS AWEBSITE

U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Service Window, Mail Stop AFRandolph Building401 Dulany Street},Jexandria, VA 22314

))) Group Art Unit: 2142)

. ))

. )))))

AFTER FINAL AMENDMENT

In response to the final Office Action. dated February 22, 2006, and pursuant to 37 C.F.R

§ 1.116, Applicant proposes to amend the above-identified application as follows:

Amendments to the Oaims begin on page ~ of this paper.

'Remarks begin on page 9 ofthis paper.


P.o. Box 1450Alexnndri•• Virgini. 22313·1450www.uspto.gov

APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

FILING DATE

04/30/2001


Sergey Brio

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

0026-0002

CONFIRMATION NO.

9916

44989 7590 05/11/2006 EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN AHARRITY SNYDER, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030

ART UNIT

2142


PAPER NUMBER


PTO-90C (Rev. 10/03)

~.

..

Advisory ActionBefore the Filing of an Appeal Brief

Application No.

09/843,923

Examiner

Benjamin A. Ailes

Applicant(s)

BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit

2142

••The MAILING DATE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address ••

THE REPLY FILED 24 April 2006 FAILS TO PLACE THIS APPLICATION IN CONDITION FOR ALLOWANCE.

1. [8l The reply was filed after a final rejection, but prior to or on the same day as filing a Notice of Appeal. To avoid abandonment of.this application, applicant must timely file one of the following replies: (1) an amendment, affidavit, or other evidence, whichplaces the application in condition for allowance; (2) a Notice of Appeal (with appeal fee) in compliance with 37 CFR 41.31; or(3) a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) in compliance with 37 CFR 1.114. The reply must be filed within one of thefollowing time periods:

a) 0 The period for reply expires months from the mailing date of the final rejection.b) ~ The period for reply expires on: (1) the mailing date of this Advisory Action, or (2) the date set forth in the final rejection, whichever is later. In no

event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the final rejection.Examiner Note: If box 1 is checked, check either box (a) or (b). ONLY CHECK BOX (b) WHEN THE FIRST REPLY WAS FILED WITHIN TWOMONTHS OF THE FINAL REJECTION. See MPEP 706.07(f).

Extensions of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). The date on which the petition under 37 CFR 1.136(a) and the appropriate extension fee havebeen filed is the date for purposes of determining the period of extension and the corresponding amount of the fee. The appropriate extension fee under 37CFR 1..17(a) is calculated froni: (1) the expiration date of the shortened statutory period for reply originally set in the final Office action; or (2) as set forth in (b)above, if checked. Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of the final rejection, even if timely filed, may reduce anyearned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).NOTICE OF APPEAL

2. DThe Notice of Appeal was filed on __. A brief in compliance with 37 CFR 41.37 must be filed within two months of the dateof filing the Notice of Appeal (37 CFR 41.37(a)), or any extension thereof (37 CFR 41.37(e)), to avoid dismissal of the appeal.Since a Notice of Appeal has been filed, any reply must be filed within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 41.37(a).

AMENDMENTS

3. ~ The proposed amendment(s) filed after a final rejection, but prior to the date of filing a brief, will not be entered because(a)~ They raise new issues that would require further consideration and/or search (see NOTE below);(b)D They raise the issue of new matter (see NOTE below); .(c)O They are not deemed to place the application in better form for appeal by materially reducing or simplifying the issues for

• appeal; and/or .(d)D They present additiona~claims without canceling a corresponding number of finally rejected claims.

NOTE: See Continuation Sheet. (See 37 CFR 1.116 and 41.33(a)).

4.0 The amendments are not in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121. See attached Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment (PTOL-324).

5.0 Applicant's reply has overcome the following rejection(s): __.

6. 0 Newly proposed or amended claim(s) __ would be allowable if submitted in a separate, timely filed amendment cancelingthe non-allowable c1aim(s).

7.~ For purposes of appeal, the proposed amendment(s): a) [8l will not be entered, or b) 0 will be entered and an explanation ofhow the new or amended claims would be rejected is provided below or appended.The status of the c1aim(s) is (or will be) as follows:Claim(s) allowed: __.Claim(s) objected to: __.Claim(s) rejected: 18-39.Claim(s) withdrawn from consideration: __.

AFFIDAVIT OR OTHER EVIDENCE

8. 0 The affidavit or other evidence filed after a final action, but before or on the date of filing a Notice of Appeal will not be 'enteredbecause applicant failed to provide a showing of good and sufficient reasons why the affidavit or other evidence is necessaryand was not earl ier presented. See 37 CFR 1.116(e).

9. 0 The affidavit or other evidence filed after the date of filing a Notice of Appeal, but prior to the date of filing a brief, will not beentered because the affidavit or other evidence failed to overcome~ rejections under appeal and/or appellant fails to provide ashowing a good and sufficient reasons why it is necessary and was not earlier presented. See 37 CFR 41.33(d)(1).

10. 0 The affidavit or other evidence is entered. An explanation of the status of the claims after entry is below or attached.REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION/OTHER

11. [8l The r~quest for reconsideration has been considered but does NOT place the application in condition for allowance because:See Continuation Sheet.

12.0 Note the attached Information Disclosure Statement(s). (PTO/SB/OB or PTO-1449) Paper No(s). __13. 0 Other: __.

U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficePTOL-303 (Rev. 7-05) Advisory Action Before the Filing of an Appeal Brief Part of Paper No. 20060508

(• ,_.:3 •

.Continuation Sheet (PTOL.303) Application No.

. Continuation of 3. NOTE: The change in scope due to the amendments to claims 18, 22, 26 and 28 requires further search· and/orconsideration.

Continuation of 11. does NOT place the application in condition for allowance because: The Examiner maintains the rejectionsset forth inthe previous office action.

~,.~ ~BEATRlZ PRIETO

PAIMA~ ~yM,1.!t\IF':'"

2




SergeyBrin

'Application No.: 09/843,923


or: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FORENTICING USERS TO ACCESS AWEB SITE

u.s. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Service Window, Mail Stop AFRandolph Building401 Dulany StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

))) Group Art Unit: 2142)) Examiner: B. Ailes)

. )))))


In response to the fmal Office Action, dated February 22,2006, and pursuant to 37 C.F.R.



'Remarks begin on page 9 of tins paper.

0026-0002Sergey Brin09/843,923

UNITEDSTA~ DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeAddrcu: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS

P.o. Box 1450A!<XImdria, Vuginia 22313-1450www.tIIplO.gov

___AP_PL_IC_ATI_O_N_NUMB__ER FIL_IN_G_O_R_37_1<;.;.c}_DA_T_E FIRS_T_NAM_E_D_AP_PL_IC_ANT__I--ATIY-.-OOC-KE-T-N-O.r-rl-TL-E-

04/30/2001

44989HARRITY SNYDER, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030


Immlll~~mmlmmn~n~nmmlml~~mnII19~m~~I~1*OC000000018720192*

Date Mailed: 05/09/2006

NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF POWER OF ATTORNEY

This is in response to the Power of Attorney filed 04/24/2006.

The Power of Attorney in this application is accepted. Correspondence in this application will be mailed to theabove address as provided by 37 CFR 1.33.

• LA!43921 (571) 272-3586

OFFICE COpy




SergeyBrin




U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Service Window, Mail Stop AFRandolph Building401 Dulany StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

))) Group Art Unit 2142)) Examiner: B. Ailes))))))


In response to the final Office Action, dated February 22,2006, and pursuant to 37 C.F.R.


Amendments to the Claims begin on page 2 ofthis paper.





This listing of claims will replace all prior versions, and listings, ofclaims in the application:

Listing of Claims:

1-17. (canceled)

18. (currently amended) A method for enticing users to access a web page,

comprising:









logo includes:

creating the special event logo by modifying the standard company logo with one or more

animated images.

20. (previously presented) The method of claim 18, wherein the modifying a standard

company logo includes:

2






22. (currently amended) The method of claim [[18]] 37, '""herein the associating one

or more search tenns includes further comprising:

identifying associating one or more search temlS relating to the special event; and




includes:


24. (previously presented) The method of claim 18, wherein the invoking a search

includes:




3



25. (original) The method of claim 18, wherein the modifYing a standard company

logo includes:



modifYing the standard company logo with special event infonnation to create the special

event logo.

26. (currently amended) A computer-readable medium that stores instructions


comprising:


special event;


logo, the link or search results relating to the special event;



instructions for providing the link or search results associated with the special event logo.





4







event.


identifying a standard company logo associated with a web site~




logo;


invoking a search relating to the special event based on the one or more search tenus in







5

PATENTU.S. Patent Application No. 09/843l923



data.




holiday.

32. (previously presented) The server of claim 27l wherein the processor is further

configured to~


logo.

33. (previously presented) The server of claim 32l wherein the processor is further

configured to~


generate a search query based on the one or more search termsl

perform a search based on the search queryl and


34. (previously presented) The method of claim 18, wherein uploading the special


6





instructions for uploading the special event logo include:


web page.

36. (previously presented) The method ofclaim 28, further comprising:


37. (previously presented) A method, comprising:




invoking a search relating to the special event in response to the received selection; and


38. (previously presented) The method of claim 37, wherein one or more search

terms are associated with the special event logo; and



7


Docket No. 0026~0002

39. (previously presented) The method of claim 37, wherein the presenting a special



8



REMARKS

Initially, in accordance with Applicant's duty to provide information regarding the

substance of an interview, a personal interview was held on April 12, 2006, between Applicant's

representative, Primary Patent Examiner Prieto, and Examiner Ailes. Applicant would first like

to thank Examiners Prieto and Ailes for the courtesies extended during the personal interview.

During that interview, the rejection based on Wolff (U.S. Patent No. 6,247,047) in view ofUnold

et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0055880) was discussed. The Examiners

agreed to reconsider the rejections upon the filing of this After Final Amendment.

In the final Office Action, the Examiner rejected claims 18-39 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)

as unpatentable over Wolff (U.S. Patent No. 6,247,047) in view ofUnold et al. (U.S. Patent

Application Publication No. 2002/0055880).

By this Amendment, Applicant proposes amending claims 18, 22, 26, and 28 to improve

form solely to expedite prosecution and without acquiescing in the Examiner's rejection.

Applicant respectfully traverses the Examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Claims 18-39

remain pending.

In paragraphs 4-21 of the final Office Action, the Examiner rejected claims 18-39 as

allegedly unpatentable over Wolff in view of Unold et al. Applicant respectfully traverses the

rejection.

Amended independent claim 18, for example, is directed to a method for enticing users to

access a web page. The method comprises modifying a standard company logo for a special

event to create a special event logo; associating one or more search terms with the special event

logo, the one or more search terms relating to the special event; uploading the special event logo

9

PATENTU.S. Patent Application No. 09/843~923


to the web page; receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and invoking a search

relating to the special event based on the one or more search tenus in response to the user

selection.

Neither Wolff nor Unold et al., whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination~

discloses or suggests the combination of features recited in claim 18. For example, neither Wolff

nor Unold et at discloses or suggests modifying a standard company logo for a special event to

create a special event logo.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses the use of a standard company logo and cited

column 8, lines 35-40, of Wolff for support (final Office Action, paragraph 5). Applicant

respectfully disagrees.

At column 8, lines 35-42~ Wolff discloses:

At step 200, a WWW page 100 is displayed on display 18 ofa user node 14. Page 100 is retrievedfrom sponsor server 50 (FIG. 1) when server 50 is accessed by specifying its URL during abrowsing session by the user. Page 100 is specified by HTML file 52 which, as described above,caused an icon or advertising banner 102 to be displayed. Banner 102, displayed on a geographicarea 104 of page ]00, includes graphics relating to a particular product or service being advertised.

In this section, Wolff discloses displaying an advertising banner relating to a particular product

or service being advertised on a web page. It appears that the Examiner is alleging that an

advertising banner is equivalent to a company logo. Applicant submits that such an allegation is

unreasonable because an advertising banner is quite different from a company logo. They are

designed for different purposes and they implement different functionality. An advertising

banner typically includes advertising material that offers a product or service for sale. It may be

possible for an advertising banner to include a company logo with the advertising material (see,

e.g., paragraphs 0125 and 0126 of Unold et at), but an advertising banner is definitely not

equivalent to a company logo. Wolff does not even mention a company logo. Therefore, Wolff

10



cannot disclose the ability to modify a standard company logo, as alleged by the Examiner.

In response to a similar argument previously presented by Applicant, the Examiner

alleged:

Through broadest reasonable interpretation of the term "company logo" it is interpreted by theExaminer to mean anything or any type of representation of a company including any type ofadvertisement for the company which is used to ltrepresentlt the company. It is well known thatone company can be represented by a plurality of different logos in a plurality of ways of media(animation, video, pictures, etc.). It is therefore maintained by the Examiner that a company logowhen altered is quite often done to "attract" a consumer, making the company seem more differentand unique when compared with other companies. The same reasoning is used for advertising.Advertising is used to "attract" customers to a product sold by the company by attempting to beunique and different Therefore, it is concluded by the Examiner that a company logo is in factequivalent in functionality to an advertisement logo.

(final Office Action, paragraph 23). Applicant respectfully submits that the Examiner's

allegations are premised on an incorrect presumption by the Examiner. The Examiner alleged

that companies are represented by a plurality ofdifferent logos and that companies often alter

their company logos to attract customers. Applicant disagrees. Companies do not typically alter

their company logos to attract customers. In fact, the opposite it true. A company's logo is quite

often their trademark and they keep it the same so that customers know that they are dealing with

the company and not some other company. Therefore, the Examiner1s allegation that Iia company

logo when altered is quite often done to 'attrad a consumer, making the company seem more

different and unique when compared with other companies" finds no basis in fact.

The Examiner admitted that Wolff does not disclose modifYing a standard company logo

to become a special event logo (final Office Action, paragraph 5). The Examiner alleged that

Unold et al. discloses the ability to alter a standard company logo to become a special event logo

in accordance with a special event and cited paragraph 0007 of Unold et al. for support (final

Office Action, paragraph 5). Applicant respectfully disagrees.

11



At paragraph 0007, Unold et aL discloses:

Therefore, there exists in the industry, a need for a system and method for enabling the rapidcreation of electronic advertisements, for rapidly changing or replacing advertisements in responseto market and sales trends, changes in customer preferences, or the occurrence of a holiday orspecial event, for controlling access to digital signs, and for addressing these and other related, andunrelated, problems.

In this section, Unold et al. discloses the need for a system and method to rapidly create, change,

and replace advertisements. It appears again that the Examiner is alleging that an advertisement

is equivalent to a company logo. As explained above, such an allegation is unreasonable because

advertisements are quite different from company logos. Therefore, the need for rapidly creating,

changing, and replacing advertisements, as identified by Unold et aI., falls short of curing the

deficiencies in the disclosure of Wolff.

Therefore, even if Wolff and Unold et aL were combinable (a point that Applicant does

not concede), the combined system would not disclose or suggest modifYing a standard company

logo for a special event to create a special event logo, as required by claim 18.

Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that an advertisement can be equated to a

company logo, Wolff and Unold et al. do not disclose or suggest associating one or more search

terms with a special event logo, where the one or more search terms relate to the special event.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses associating one or more search terms with a company

logo (final Office Action, paragraph 5) and that it would have been obvious to associate a search

term with the special event because Wolff discloses associating a search term with a company

logo, therefore, "the search term would have to be related to the special event logo in some sort

of way" (final Office Action, paragraph 8). Applicant respectfully submits that the Examiner's

obviousness statement falls short of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.

Wolff discloses that a URL and unique indicia identifying the product or service being

12



advertised is embedded within an advertising banner (coL 8, lines 43-48). Wolff discloses that if

a user clicks on the advertising banner, the host server (associated with the advertiser) uses the

unique indicia to search a product/service database for a record containing information specific to

the advertised product or service (coL 9, lines 3-7). Nowhere does Wolff disclose or remotely

suggest that this unique indicia is related to a special event, as required by claim 18. The

Examiner's allegation that the unique indicia "would have to be related" to a special event is

unsupported by any facts.

Because neither Wolff nor Unold et aI. discloses or suggests associating one or more

search terms with the special event logo, where the one or more search terms relate to the special

event, Wolff and Unold et aI., whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, cannot

disclose or suggest invoking a search relating to the special event based on the one or more

search terms in response to the user selection, as further required by claim 18.


Unold et aI., whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination. Claims 19-21,23-25, and 34

depend from claim 18 and are, therefore, patentable over Wolffand Unold et aI. for at least the

reasons given with regard to claim 18. Claims 19-21, 23-25, and 34 are also patentable over

Wolff and Unold et al. for reasons of their own.


company logo with one or more animated images. Neither Wolff nor Unold et al. discloses or


The Examiner alleged that Unold et al. discloses the ability to modify a logo with

animated images, video, and audio data and cited paragraph 0047, lines 9-13, ofUnold et al. for

13



support (final Office Action, paragraph 6). Applicant respectfully disagrees.

At paragraph 0047, lines 9-13, Unold et al. discloses:

Each digital sign 108, preferably, comprises: a display subsystem capable of displaying video orstill images received in the form of digital signals; an audio subsystem capable of producing anddelivering audible sound from received digital signals therefor.

In this section, Unold et aL discloses that a digital sign is capable of displaying video or still

images and producing audible sound. The Examiner appears to allege that a digital sign is

equivalent to a company logo. Unold et aL describes a digital sign as a device that includes a

display via which an advertiser can advertise its products or services in locations, such as

airports, shopping malls, exhibit halls, taxi cabs, etc. (paragraphs 0047 and 0048). Applicant

submits that it is unreasonable to equate a digital sign device to a company logo since they are

two very different things.

In response to a similar argument previously presented by Applicant, the Examiner

alleged that it is "deemed obvious in the art that a digital display can display animated images '1

(final Office Action, paragraph 26). Applicants respectfully submit that the Examiner's

allegation falls short of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness. The mere fact that a

digital display can display animated images falls way short of rendering obvious creating a

special event logo by modifYing a standard company logo with one or more animated images, as



Wolff and Unold et al.


with at least one of video or audio data. Neither Wolff nor Unoid et al. discloses or suggests this

14

PATENTu.s. Patent Application No. 09/843,923


combination of features.


animated images, video, and audio data and cited paragraph 0047, lines 9-13, ofUnold et al. for

support (final Office Action, paragraph 6). Applicant respectfully disagrees.

Paragraph 0047, lines 9-13, of Unold et al. has been reproduced above. In this section,

Unold et al. discloses that a digital sign is capable of displaying video or still images and

producing audible sound. As explained above with regard to claim 19, Applicant submits that it

is unreasonable to equate a digital sign device to a company logo since they are two very

different things. Applicant further submits that the mere fact that a digital display device can

display video and produce audible sound falls way short of rendering obvious creating the special

event logo by modifYing the standard company logo with at least one of video or audio data, as




Claim 25 recites determining a home page for the web page on a network, identifying the

standard company logo on the home page, and modifying the standard company logo with special

event information to create the special event logo. Neither Wolff nor Unold et al. discloses or


For example, neither Wolff nor Unold et al. discloses or suggests determining a home

page for a web page on a network. The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses this feature and

cited column 8, lines 35-40, of Wolff for support (final Office Action, paragraph 11). Applicant


15



Column 8, lines 35-42, of Wolff has been reproduced above. In this section, Wolff

discloses retrieving a page 100 during a browsing session by a user. Nowhere in this section, or

elsewhere, does Wolff disclose or remotely suggest determining a home page for a web page on a

network, as required by claim 25.

If the Examiner persists with this rejection, Applicant respectfully requests that the

Examiner provide a reasonable explanation ofhow the above-cited portion of Wolff discloses or

suggests determining a home page for a web page on a network, as required by claim 25. lfthe

Examiner cannot provide a reasonable explanation, then the Examiner must withdraw the

rejection.

Wolff and Unold et al. also do not disclose or suggest identifYing a standard company

logo on the home page. The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses this feature and cited column

8, lines 35-40, of Wolff for support (final Office Action, paragraph 11). Applicant respectfully

disagrees.

Column 8, lines 35-40, of Wolff has been reproduced above. In this section, Wolff

discloses that an advertising banner is displayed on a web page. As explained above with regard

to claim 18, an advertising banner is not equivalent to a company logo. Therefore, contrary to

the Examiner's allegation, Wolff does not disclose or remotely suggest identifYing a standard

company logo on a home page, as required by claim 25.



Amended independent claim 26 recites features similar to, but possibly different in scope

from, features recited in claim 18. Claim 26 is, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Unold et aI.,

16



whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, for at least reasons similar to reasons

given with regard to claim 18. Claims 29-31 and 35 depend from claim 26 and are, therefore,

patentable over Wolff and Unold et aL for at least the reasons given with regard to claim 26.

Claims 29-31 and 35 also recite features similar to, but possibly different in scope from, features

recited in claims 19-21,23-25, and 34. Claims 29-31 and 35 are, therefore, also patentable over

Wolff and Unold et al. for reasons similar to reasons given with regard to claims 19-21,23-25,

and 34.



instructions to determine a home page for a web page on the network, identifY a standard

company logo on the horne page, modifY the standard company logo with special event

infonnation corresponding to a special event to create a special event logo, and replace the


Neither Wolff nor Unold et aI., whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination,


nor Unold et al. discloses or suggests a processor configured to determine a home page for a web

page on a network or identify a standard company logo on the home page, for at least reasons

similar to reasons given with regard to claim 25.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses retrieving data from a sponsor server that the

Examiner alleged is the same as a horne page (final Office Action, page 29). Applicant

respectfully disagrees. A server and a home page are two totally different things and any

argument that they are equivalents finds no basis in fact.

17

PATENTU.S. Patent Application No. 09/843~923


Wolff and Unold et al. also do not disclose or suggest a processor configured to modify a

standard company logo with special event information corresponding to a special event to create

a special event logo, as further recited in claim 27, for at least reasons similar to reasons given


Wolff and Unold et aI. also do not disclose or suggest a processor configured to replace

the standard company logo with the special event logo during the special event, as further recited

in claim 27. The Examiner did not address this feature and, therefore, did not establish a prima

facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 27.


Unold et aI., whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination. Claims 32 and 33 depend

from claim 27 and are~ therefore, patentable over Wolff and Unold et aI. for at least the reasons



features recited in claims l8~20. Claim 28 is~ therefore~ patentable over Wolff and Unold et aL~


given with regard to claims 18-20. Claim 36 depends from claim 28. Claim 36 is, therefore,

patentable over Wolff and Unold et at for at least the reasons given with regard to claim 28.


features recited in claim 18. Claim 37 is, therefore~ patentable over Wolff and Unold et aI.,


given with regard to claim 18. Claims 22, 38, and 39 depend from claim 37 and are~ therefore,

patentable over Wolff and Unold et ai. for at least the reasons given with regard to claim 37.

18




Examiner1s reconsideration of the application and the timely allowance of pending claims 18-39.

Applicant respectfully requests that this Amendment under 37 c.P.R. § 1.116 be entered

by the Exanliner, placing claims 18-39 in condition for immediate allowance. Applicant submits

that the proposed amendments do not raise new issues or necessitate the undertaking of any

additional search of the art by the Examiner, since all of the elements and their relationships

claimed were either earlier claimed or implied in the claims as examined. Therefore, this

Amendment should allow for immediate action by the Examiner. Further, Applicant submits that

the entry of this Amendment would place the application in better fonn for appeal, should the

Examiner dispute the patentability of the pending claims.

lfthe Examiner does not believe that all pending claims are now in condition for


application.

19



To the extent necessary, a petition for an extension of time under 37 C.P.R. § 1.136 is






By: IPau! A. Harrity!Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574

Date: April 24, 2006


20

STATEMENT UNDER 37 CFR 3.73(b)

Applicant/Patent Owner: Sergey Brin

Application No./Patent No.: 09/843,923 Filed/Issue Date: April 30, 2001

Entitled: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEB SITE

Google Inc., a corporation(Name of Assignee)

states that it is:

(Type of Assignee, e.g., corporation, partnership, etc.)

1. ~

2.0the assignee of the entire right, title, and interest; or

an assignee of less than the entire right, title and interest.The extent (by, percentage) of its ownership interest is _%

in the patent application/patent identified above by virtue of either:

A. ~ An assignment from the inventor(s) of the patent application/patent identified above.The assignment was recorded in the United States Patent and Trademark Office at Reel011757, Frame 0476, or for which a copy thereof is attached.

OR

B. 0 A chain of title from the inventor(s), of the patent application/patent identified above, tothe current assignee as shown below:

1. From: To:The document was recorded in the United States Patent and Trademark Office atReel _' Frame _' or for which a copy thereof is attached.



o Additional documents in the chain of title are listed on a supplemental sheet.

o Copies of assignments or other documents in the chain of title are attached.[NOTE: A separate copy (i.e., the original assignment document or a true copy of theoriginal document) must be submitted to Assignment Division in accordance with 37 CFRPart 3, if the assignment is to be recorded in the records of the USPTO. See MPEP 302.08]

The undersigned (whose title is supplied below) is authorized to act on behalf of the assignee.

April 24, 2006Date

Paul A. HarrityTyped or printed name

/Paul A. Harrity/Signature

Attorney for AssigneeTitle

PTO/SB/81 (04-05)Approved for use through 11/30/2005. OMB 0651-0035

U.S. Patenl and Trademark Office; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEI" IkRU dn er the Paperwor eduction Act of 1995 no persons are reqUired to respond to a col ecllon of Information un ess il disolavs a valid OMB control number.

/ Application Number ATIACHMENT: EXHIBIT A & EXHIBIT B ""'\

POWER OF ATTORNEY Filing Date

andFirst Named Inventor

CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESSTitle

Art UnitINDICATION FORM Examiner Name

\. Attorney Docket Number ~

I hereby revoke all previous powers of attorney given in the above~identified application.I hereby appoint:

[i] Practitioners associated with the Customer Number:

I44989

IOR

D Practitioner(s) named below:

Name Registration Number

as my/our attorney(s) or agent(s) to prosecute the application identified above, and to transact all business in the United States Patent andTrademark Office connected therewith.

Please recognize or change the correspondence address for the above-identified application to:

[Z] The address associated with the above-mentioned Customer Number;OR

I I

D The address associated with Customer Number:OR

D Firm orIndividual Name

Address

City I State I I Zip ICountry

Telephone I Email I! am the:

0 Applicant/Inventor.

[Z] Assignee of record of the entire interest. See 37 CFR 3.71.Statement under 37 CFR 3.73(b) is enclosed. (Form PTO/SBI96)

SIGNATURE of Applicant or Assignee of Record

Signature () /l r} #' I Date I /1/.z..llzez:qy:;-Name David C. Drummond £/. ...4%'# /f I Telephone ITitle and Company Vice President Corporate Development, General Counsel of Google Inc.

NOTE: Signatures of aillhe inventors or assignees of record of the entire interest or their represenlative(s) are required. Submit multiple forms if more than onesignature is required, see below'.

[Z] 'Totalo1.1 forms are submitted.ThiS colleclion of information IS reqUIred by 37 CFR 1.31, 1.32 and 1.33. The Information IS reqUIred to obtain or retain a benefit by the publlc which IS to file (and bythe USPTO to process) an application. Confidentiality is governed by 35 U.S.C. 122 and 37 CFR 1.11 and 1.14. This collection is estimated to lake 3 minutesto complete, including gathering, preparing, and submitting the completed application form to lhe USPTO. Time will vary depending upon the individual case. Anycomments on lhe amount of time you require to complete this form and/or suggestions for reducing this burden, should be sent to the Chief Information Officer,U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, U.S. Department of Commerce, P.O, Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450, DO NOT SEND FEES OR COMPLETEDFORMS TOTHlS ADDRESS. SEND TO: Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313·1450.

If you need assistance in completing the form, caI/1-800-PTO-9199 and select option 2.

EXHIBIT A TO POWER OF ATTORNEY

U.S. PATENT APPLICATIONSSerial No. Filed Date09/729,240 12/5/200009/843,923 4130/200109/895,174 712/2001111000,375 12/1/200409/734,887 12/13/2000091734,886 12/13/200009/734,883 12/13/200009/777,863 2/7/2001091734,901 12/13/200010/965,714 10118/200411/008,262 12/101200409/636,052 8110/200009/638,080 8114/200009/638,082 8114/200010/029,883 12/31/2001

10/386,110 3112/200309/939,661 8128/200110/385}52 3112/200309/850,403 518/2001091956,875 9121/200110/408,784 4/8/200310/734,111 12/15/200310/747,043 12/30/200310/608,140 8/30/200310/377,117 313/2003101425,819 4/30/2003

10/462,690 6117/200310/608,550 6/30/200310/462,818 6/17/2003

PCT/US04/19241 6/17/2004

10/608,139 6/30/200310/608,039 6130/2003


U.S. PATENT APPLICATIONSSerial No. Filed Date10/608,037 6130/200310/608,135 6/30/200310/608,136 6130/200310/457A88 6110/2003

PCT/US04/18241 6/8/2004

10/665,359 9/22/200310/658,452 9/10/200310/662,931 9/16/2003

PCT/US04/30028 9/1412004

10/673,681 9/30/200310/653,899 9/4/2003101813,356 3131/2004

peTIU804/28927 9/312004

101658,390 9/10/2003101743,547 12/23/200310/672,248 9129/200310/748,666 12/31/2003

PCT/US04/42165 12/17/2004,

10/671,516 9129/200310/668,142 9124/200310/726A83 12/4/2003101748,655 12/31/200310/664,902 9122/200310/664,929 9122/2003

PCT/US04/30983 9/20/2004

10/813,607 3131/200410/732,366 12/11/2003

2


U.S. PATENT APPLICATIONSSerial No. Filed Date

PCT/US04/37383 11110/2004

10/726,484 12/4/2003101748,654 12/31/200310/697,333 10/31/200310/706,991 11/13/2003101748,664 12/31/2003

peTIUS04/30000 9/1512004

10/712,263 11/14/200310/930,848 911/2004101734,584 12/15/200310/748,663 12/31/2003

PCTIUS04/42162 12/17/2004

10/748,661 12/31/2003101748,662 12/31/200311/023,962 12/29/200410/813,586 3/31/2004

10/748,656 12/31/2003PCT/US04/30982 9/20/2004

10/879,520 6130/200410/813,359 3131/2004

PCT/US05/10701 3/29/2005

10/810,723 3/29/200410/808,326 3125/200410/813,229 3131/200410/813,573 3131/200410/810,725 3129/200410/813,618 3131/200410/879,503 6130/2004

3


U.S. PATENT APPLICATIONSSerial No. Filed Date

PCTIUS04/29982 9/1512004

10/953,114 9130/200410/813,572 3131/2004

peTIUS05/1 0344 3/2812005

10/879,521 6130/200410/813,592 3131/200410/813,590 3131/200410/800,006 3/15/200410/878,653 6129/2004

10/804,180 3119/200429/201,661 3119/200429/201,660 3/19/200410/880,164 6/30/2004

10/869,057 6/171200410/887,443 6130/2004

PCTIUS05/22726 6/29/2005~

10/952,449 9129/200410/871,030 6121/2004101842,697 5/11/200410/923,034 8/23/200410/952,445 9129/200410/938,502 t1f13/2004101938,505 9/13/200410/938,727 9113/2004

10/949,706 9127/200410/949,708 9127/200410/953,491 9130/2004

10/952,482 9129/200410/954,009 9130/200410/952,501 9129/2004

4


U.S. PATENT APPLICATIONSSerial No. Filed Date10/950,696 9128/200410/953,497 9130/2004

N/A 7/13/200510/952,444 9129/200410/953,496 9130/200410/953,112 9130/200410/611,267 6/30/200310/611,269 6/30/200329/214,259 9/30/200410/953,117 9130/200410/954,007 9130/200410/954,008 9130/200411/139,999 5131/200510/954,021 9130/200410/952,443 9129/200410/996,602 11/26/2004

PCT/US04/39656 11126/2004

11/024,968 12/30/200411/024,966 12/30/200411/024,784 12/30/200411/024,976 12/30/200411/094,793 3/31/200511/169,279 6129/200511/024,851 12/30/2004

11/024,765 12/30/200411/024,967 12/30/200411/024,785 12/30/200411/024,975 12/30/200411/024,790 12/30/200411/024,977 12/30/2004

11/010,316 12/14/200411/090,302 3/28/2005

5


U.S. PATENT APPLICATIONSSerial No. Filed Date11/094,790 3131/200511/094,794 3131/200511/169,151 6/29/200511/132,362 5119/200511/170,134 6/30/200511/094,791 3131/200511/167,581 6128/200510/674,802 9130/200310/119,375 419/200209/939,522 8124/200110/629,479 7/28/2003

PCT/US04/24306 7/27/2004

10/608,270 6127/2003PCT/US04/16258 5/20/2004

10/668,721 9122/2003peTIUS04/28651 9/1/2004

101750,917 112/2004101607,927 6127/2003

peTIUS04/19219 6/1612004

11/168,561 6/29/2005111170,786 6130/200511/169,285 6129/200511/138,670 5127/200511/139,032 5127/200511/155,882 6120/200511/160,872 7113/2005

PCT/US05/10866 3/30/2005

6

EXHIBIT B TO POWER OF ATTORNEYU.S. PATENTS

Serial No. Filed Date U.S. Patent No. Issued Date~904z827 1/9/1998 _~~285~929 9/4/200109/899,068 7/6/2001 US 6.799,176 Bl 9/28/2004 --1--------

'1730/2001 6.526,440 Bl---.._-----,--

_9J./771.~77 2/25/200310/351.316 1/27/2003 6.725,259 BI 4/2012004-----.-.-.----1---'--------- US 6,839.702 Bl-- ---174720"05---_.Q~{134.88;L J)/13/200009/521,996 3/9/2000 6,67§E81 Bl 1 1137iOo'~f-

r9/S44,733 4/6/2000 US 6.754,873 Bl 6/22/2004'.to/664,9.92 --9 /22!.~QQ~~

----_.._-_._---_.__._.._-- ---------_.-~..Qf3 6.934,61~J~.!_,--J>j~~i200~J


EFSID: 1029015









Receipt Date: 24-APR-2006






Submitted with Payment I noL----- _

File Listing:

Document Document Description File Name File Size(Bytes) Multi PagesNumber Part

10026-0002-After-Final-Amen

885063 20dment.pdf

yes

Multipart Description

Doc Desc Start End

Amendment After Final 1 1

Amendment Copy Claims/Response to Suggested Claims 2 8

Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment 9 20

Warnings:

Information:

2Assignee showing of ownership per

0026-0002-Statement.pdf 44579 no 137 CFR 3.73(b).

Warnings:

Information:

3Power of Attorney (may include 0026-0002-Power-of-Attorne

408075 8Associate POA) y.pdf

no

Warnings:

Information:





------------' ...-;;:::;;:;::::--,'I'D Ionor DocMt Number

cnMER1HANOR IUALLENmY

RATE FEE

OR 710.G0

OR .,.

ORXBo.

OR ..

oR..lOTAL .-._...• ". cmtER'IIIAN

Oft.· SMALLENnIYADDJ.

.~~

OR .*..OAXBo.

OR 4270. .

OR Man: fCCIl-._-I. .

AA1E FEE

SSUO

XI.x.o=..tas-

.

ADDJ.Am: 1IOHM.

Pm;.XI"x.,.

• 13&- . ..ft"~

o

'=' RATE

CLAIMS AS FILED· PART I IllALLENmY:mae c::::'I

".-:

~~...

PAJENT APPUCATION FEED~N RECORD•.~ .' ... Effective October 1. 2000 ..

•Ii

ITClIIII ." ••

lad ..........

,.......~...U&DUUIIIIIrI'.,...c.lIl _

Appli~tion No.

..::- .

\ .

Interview Summary09/843,923

Examiner

Benjamin A. Ailes

Applicant(5)

BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit

2142

All participants (applicant, applicant's representative, PTO personnel):

(1) Benjamin A. Ailes.

(2) Paul Harrity (39,574).

(3)Beatriz Prieto.

(4)__.

Date of Interview: 12 April 2006.

Type: a)O Telephonic b)O Video Conferencec)~ Personal [copy given to: 1)0 applicant 2)0 applicant's representative]

Exhibit shown or demonstration conducted: d)~ Yes e)O' No.If Yes, brief description: Examples of standard company logos and an altered logo.

Claim(s) discussed: 18.22.26.27 and 37.

Identification of prior art discussed: Wolff ((US 6,247,047) Unold (uS 200210055880).

Agreement with respect to the claims f)0 was reached. g)~ was not reached. h)O N/A.

Substance of Interview including description of the general nature of what was agreed to if an agreement wasreached, or any other comments: See Continuation Sheet,

(A fuller description, if necessary, and a copy of the amendments which the examiner agreed would render the claimsallowable, if available, must be attached, Also, where no copy of the amendments that would render the claimsallowable is available, a summary thereof must be attached.)

THE FORMAL WRITTEN REPLY TO THE LAST OFFICE ACTION MUST INCLUDE THE SUBSTANCE OF THEINTERVIEW. (See MPEP Section 713.04). If a reply to the last Office action has already been filed, APPLICANT ISGIVEN A NON-EXTENDABLE PERIOD OF THE LONGER OF ONE MONTH OR THIRTY DAYS FROM THISINTERVIEW DATE, OR THE MAILING DATE OF THIS INTERVIEWSUMMARYFORM,WHICHEVER IS LATER,TOFILE A STATEMENT OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE INTERVIEW. See Summary of Record of Interviewrequirements on reverse side or on attached sheet.

Examiner Note: You must sign this form unless it is anAttachment to a signed Office action.

U.S. Patent and Trademark OffIce

PTOL-413 (Rev. 04-03) Interview Summary

Examiner's signature, if required

Paper No. 20060412

Summary of Record of Interview Requirements

Manual of Patent examining Procedure (MPEP), Section 713.04, Substance of Interview Must be Made of RecordA ~mplete written statement as to the substance of any face-to-face: video conference, or telephone interview with regard to an application must be made of record in theapplication whether or not an agreement with the examiner was reached at the interview.

Title 37 Code of Federal RegUlations (CFR) § 1.133 InterviewsParagraph (b)

In every instance where reconsideration is requested in view of an interview with an examiner, a complete written statement of the reasons presented at the interview aswarranting favorable action must be filed by the applicant. An interview does not remove the necessity for reply to Office action as specified in §§ 1.111, 1.135. (35 U.S.C. 132)

37 CFR §1.2 Business to be transacted in writing.All business with the Patent or Trademark Office should be transacted in writing. The personal attendance of applicants or their attorneys or agents at the Patent andTrademark Office is unnecessary. The action ofthe Patent and Trademark Office will be based exclusively on the written record in the Office. No attention will be paid toany alleged oral promise, stipulation, or understanding in relation to which there is disagreement or doubt. .

The action of the Patent and Trademark Office cannot be based exclusively on the written record in the Office if that record is itselfincomplete through the failure to record the substance of interviews. .

It is the responsibility of the applicant or the attorney or agent to make the substance of an interview of record in the application file, unless'the examiner indicates he or she will do so. It is the examiner's responsibility to see that such a record is made~and to correct material inaccuracieswhich bear directly on the question of patentability. .

Examiners must complete an Interview Summary Form for each interview held where a matter of substal)ce has been discussed during theinterview by checking the appropriate boxes and filling in the blanks. Discussions regarding only procedural matters, directed solely to restrictionrequirements for which interview recordation is otherwise prOVided for in Section 812.01 of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, or pointingout typographical errors or unreadable script in Office actions or the like, are excluded from the interview recordation procedures below. Where t/'lesubstance of an interview is completely recorded in an Examiners Amendment, no separate Interview Summary Record is required.

The Interview Summary Form shall be given an appropriate Paper No., placed in the right hand portion of the file, and listed on the"Contents" section of the file wrapper. In a personal interview, a duplicate of the Form is given to the applicant (or attorney or agent) at theconclusion of the interview. In the case of a telephone or video-conference interview, the copy is mailed to the applicant's correspondence addresseither with or prior to the next official communication. If additional correspondence from the examiner is not likely before an allowance or if othercircumstances dictate, the Form should be mailed promptly after the interview rather than with the next official communication.

The Form provides for recordation of the following information:Application Number (Series Code and Serial Number)Name of applicantName of examinerDate of interviewType of interview (telephonic, video-conference, or personal)Name of participant(s) (applicant, attorney or agent, examiner, other PTO personnel, etc.)An indication whether or not an exhibit was shown or a demonstration conductedAn identification of the specific prior art discussedAn indication whether an agreement was reached and if so, a description of the general nature of the agreement (may be byattachment of a copy of amendments or claims agreed as being allowable). Note: Agreement as to allowability is tentative and doesnot restrict further action by the examiner to the contrary.The signature of the examiner who conducted the interview (if Form is not an attachment to a signed Office action)

It is desirable that the examiner orally remind the applicant of his or her obligation to record the substance of the interview of each case. Itshould be noted, however, that the IntervieW Summary Form will not normally be considered a complete and proper recordation of the interviewunless it includes, or is supplemented by the applicant or the examiner to include, all of the applicable items required below concerning thesubstance of the interview.

A complete and proper recordation of the substance of any interview should include at least the following applicable items:1) A brief description of the nature of any exhibit shown or any demonstration conducted,2) an identification of the claims discussed,3) an identification of the specific prior art discussed,4) an identification of the principal proposed 'amendments of a substantive nature discussed, unless these are already described on the

Interview Summary Form completed by the Examiner,5) a brief identification of the general thrust of the principal arguments presented to the examiner,

(The identification of arguments need not be lengthy or elaborate. A verbatim or highly detailed description of the arguments is notrequired. The identification of the arguments is sufficient if the general nature or thrust of the principal arguments made to theexaminer can be understood in the context of the application file. Of cours'e, the applicant may desire to emphasize and fullydescribe those arguments which he or she feels were or might be persuasive to the examiner.)

6) a general indication of any other pertinent matters discussed, and7) if appropriate, the general results or outcome of the interview unless already described in the Interview Summary Form completed by

the examiner.

Examiners are expected to carefully review the applicant's record of the substance of an interview. If the record is hot complete andaccurate, the examiner will give the applicant an extendable one month time period to correct the record.

Examiner to Check for Accuracy

If the claims are allowable for other reasons of record, the examiner should send a letter setting forth the examiner's version of thestatement attributed to him or her. If the record is complete and accurate, the examiner should place the indication, "Interview Record OK" on thepaper recording the substance of the interview along with the date and the examiner's initials.

2

.. .- . ,

Continuation Sheet (PTOL-413). Application No. 09/843,923

,./

Continuation of Substance of Interview including'description of the general nature of what was agreed to if anagreement was reached, or any other comments: Mr. Harrity initiated the interview by outlining the applicant'sinvention and provided examples of the intended interpretation of a standard company logo vs. a modified company'logo based on a special event and also discussed the search functionality of the claims. Examiner Ailes, ExaminerPrieto and Mr. Harrity discussed the claim terminology and it was determined that the "standard company logo" needsto be more properly defined within the claims to exclude it from reading on the modifiable web page banners of theWolff reference. Examiner Ailes and Examiner Prieto provided Mr. Harrity with a few possible options for distinguishingthe claims, (1) narrow the interpretation of claimed term "standard company logo" with extrinsic evidence such as adictionary definition, or (2) Amend the claims to include search terms relating to a special event. Beyond this, noagreement was reached in terms of allowance. Mr. Harrity agreed to file a response to the final rejection.

, .64.~';~~TRlZ PRIETO

PRtMARY EXAMtNER

3


APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

44989 7590

FILING DATE

04/3012001

02/22/2006


Sergey Brin

ATIORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.

0026-0002 9916

EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN AHARRITY SNYDER, LLP11350 Random Hills RoadSUITE 600FAIRFAX, VA 22030

ART UNIT

2142


PAPER NUMBER


PTO·90C (Rev. 10/03)


Application No.

09/843,923

Examiner

Applicant(s)

BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit


-- 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 ~ MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS,WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.- Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, maya reply be timely filed

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 anyearned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).

Status

1)[2] Responsive to communication(s) filed on 22 November 2005.

2a)[2] This action is FINAL. 2b)0 This action is non-final.




4)[2] Claim(s) 18-39 is/are pending in the application.



6)[2] Claim(s) 18-39 is/are rejected.



Application Papers




Replacement drawing sheet(s) inclUding the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).








application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).


Attachment(s)

1) 0 Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)2) 0 Notice of Draftsperson's Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948)

3) 0 Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449 or PTO/S8/08)Paper No(s)/Mail Date __.


5) 0 Notice of Informal Patent Application (PTO-152)6) 0 Other: __'

U.s. Palent and Trademark Office



Art Unit: 2142

DETAILED ACTION

1. This action is in response to correspondence filed 22 November 2005.



Page 2





Wolff (U.S. 6,247,047) in view of Unold et al. (U.S. 2002/0055880 A1), hereinafter

referred to as Unold.

5. Regarding claims 18, 26, 28, and 37-38, Wolff discloses the use of a standard

company logo (col. 8, lines 35-40), associating one or more search terms with the

company logo (col. 8, lines 43-48), uploading the company logo to a web page (col. 8,

lines 38-40), receiving a user selection of the company logo (col. 8, lines 58-62), and

invoking a search based on the one or more search terms in response to the user

selection (col. 9, lines 1-7). Wolff discloses the main idea of using a company logo,

being able to modify the company logo, and associating a search term along with it, but

does not explicitly disclose in the modifying step of modifying the standard company

logo to become a special event logo. However, Unold discloses the ability and method

of altering a standard company logo to become a special event logo in accordance with

a special event (Page 1, column 2, paragraph [0007]). One of ordinary skill in the art


Art Unit: 2142

Page 3

would have found it useful to combine the method of modifying a standard company

logo to become a special event logo as disclosed by Unold because Unold provides a

method wherein company logos and advertisements can be changed qUickly and

efficiently to correspond with market and sales trends (Page 1, column 2, paragraph

[0007]). It is for this reason that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the

applicant's invention would have been motivated to implement the methods of modifying

a company logo as disclosed by Unold and combine them with the standard company

logo displaying method disclosed by Wolff.

6. Regarding claims 19 and 20, Unold discloses the ability to modify the logo with

animated images, video, and audio data (page 3, column 2, paragraph [0047], lines 9-

13). The motivation used to combine Wolff and Unold in the rejection of claim 18

applies equally as well to claims 19 and 20.

7. Regarding claim 21, Unold discloses the special event including a holiday (page

1, column 1, paragraph [0007]). The motivation used to combine Wolff and Unold in the

rejection of claim 18 applies equally as well to claim 21.

8. Regarding claim.22, Wolff discloses the use of a search term but Wolff does not

explicitly disclose the search term being related to the special event because Wolff does

not explicitly disclose the step of modifying a company logo to become a special event

logo as explained in the rejection of claim 18. It would have been obvious to one of

ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's invention to associate the search

term with the special event in the combination of Wolff and Unold because Wolff alone

associates the search term with the company logo, so in combination of Wolff and


Art Unit: 2142

Page 4

Unold, the search term 'would have to be related to the special event logo in some sort

of way. It is for this reason that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been

motivated to associate the search term with the special event.

9. Regarding claim 23, Unold discloses the ability to schedule when a special event

logo is to be displayed (page 2, column 2, paragraph [0018]). The motivation used to

combine Wolff and Unold in the rejection of claim 18 applies equally as well to claim 23.

10. Regarding claim 24, Wolff discloses the method of generating a search query

using the one or more search terms (col. 9, lines 1-8), using the search query to search

at least one of a network, an index, or a directory (col. 9, lines 1-8), and obtaining

search results based on the search (col. 9, lines 9-15).

11. Regarding claim 25, Wolff discloses determining a home page for the web page

on a network (col. 8, lines 35-40) and identifying the standard company logo on the

home page (col. 8, lines 35-40), but does not explicitly disclose in the modifying step of

modifying the standard company logo to become a special event logo. However, Unold

discloses the ability and method of altering a standard company logo to become a

special event logo in accordance with a special event (Page 1, column 2, paragraph

[0007]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it useful to combine the

method of modifying a standard company logo to become a special event logo as

disclosed by Unold because Unold provides a method wherein company logos and

advertisements can be changed quickly and efficiently to correspond with market and

sales trends (Page 1, column 2, paragraph [0007]). It is for this reason that one of

ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's invention would have been


Art Unit: 2142

Page 5

motivated to implement the methods of modifying a company logo as disclosed by

Unold and combine them with the standard company logo displaying method disclosed

by Wolff.

12. Claim 27 contains similar subject matter and is rejected under the same rationale

as claims 18 and 25.


as claim 19.


as claim 20.


as claim 21.


as claim 22.


as claim 24.

18. Regarding claim 34, Wolff discloses the method wherein uploading the special

event logo includes replacing the standard company logo with the special event logo on

the web page (col. 8, lines 38-40, deemed inherent in the art that when uploading

something new the old is replaced.)


as claim 34.


Art Unit: 2142

Page 6


as claim 34.


as claim 23.


22. Applicant's arguments filed 22 November 2005 have been fUlly considered but

they are not persuasive.

23. (A) Applicant argues on page 8 of the response that neither Wolff nor Unold et al.

discloses or suggests modifying a standard company logo for a special event to create

a special event logo. The Examiner does not agree. Through broadest reasonable

interpretation of the term "company logo" it is interpreted by the Examiner to mean

anything or any type of representation of a company including any type of

advertisement for the company which is used to "represent" the company. It is well

known that one company can be represented by a plurality of different logos in a

plurality of ways of media(animation, video, pictures, etc.). It is therefore maintained by

the Examiner that a company logo when altered is quite often done to "attract" a

consumer, making the company seem more different and unique when compared with

other companies. The same reasoning is used for advertising. Advertising is used to

"attract" customers to a product sold by the company by attempting to be unique and

different. Therefore, it is concluded by the Examiner that a company logo is in fact

equivalent in functionality to an advertisement logo. In view of this point, the Examiner

has maintained the rejection set forth above.


Art Unit: 2142

Page 7

24. (B) Applicant argues on pages 9-10 of the response that Wolff and Unold cannot

disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms with the special event logo.

In view of argument (A), the Examiner disagrees and maintains the rejection. Wolff

explicitly discloses the use of search term in column 8, lines 43-48.

25. (C) Applicant argues on page 11 of the response that Wolff and Unold cannot

disclose or suggest providing search results relating to a special event in response to

user selection of the special event logo. In response to applicant's argument that the

references fail to show certain features of applicant's invention, it is noted that the

features upon which applicant relies (i.e., "providing search results relating to the

special event") are not recited in the rejected c1aim(s). Although the claims are

interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into

the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181,26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).

26. (0) Applicant argues on pages 12-13 that neither Wolff nor Unold et al. disclose

or suggest creating the special event logo by modifying the standard company logo with

one or more animated images. The Examiner does not agree. Through the combination

of Wolff and Unold, the Examiner has concluded the combination teaches the ability to

alter a company logo based on a special event as outlined in the rejection of

independent claim 18. In view of the combination Unold clearly discloses the ability to

alter and display animation on page 3, column 2, paragraph [0047], lines 9-13. It is

deemed obvious in the art that a digital display can display animated images. The

digital display is utilized to display the logo.


Art Unit: 2142

Page 8

27. (E) Applicant argues on pages 13-14 that neither Wolff nor Unold et al. disclose

or suggest modifying the standard company logo with at least one of video or audio

data. The Examiner does not agree. Through the combination of Wolff and Unold, the

Examiner has concluded the combination teaches the ability to alter a company logo

based on a special event as outlined in the rejection of independent claim 18. In view of

the combination Unold clearly discloses the ability to alter and display video or audio on

page 3, column 2, paragraph [0047], lines 9-13. It is deemed obvious in the art that a

digital display can display video. The digital display is utilized to display the logo.

28. (F) Applicant argues on page 14 in regards to claim 22 that neither Wolff nor

Unold et al. disclose identifying one or more search terms relating to the special event.

The Examiner does not agree. In reference to Wolff (col. 8, line 65 - col. 9, line 15) a

key word is assigned (i.e. 12345). Therefore this keyword must be related in some sort

of way. This evidence is enough to fall under the Applicant's claimed subject matter.

29. (G) Applicant argues on page 15 in regards to claim 25 and page 16 in regards to

claim 27 that neither Wolff nor Unold et al. disclose or suggest identifying a standard

company logo on a home page. The Examiner does not agree. Wolff discloses in

column 8, lines 35-40 the method of retrieving data from a "sponsor server" which is

deemed the same as applicant's claimed "home page."

Conclusion

30. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time

policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).


Art Unit: 2142

Page 9

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.


examiner should be directed to Benjamin A. Ailes whose telephone number is (571 )272-











Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).

baa


IIII "II II III II09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit


..J Rejected - (Through numeral) Non-Elected AppealCancelled N A


Claim Date Claim Date Claim Date; ...

(ij(ij '" (ij

(ij(ij

(ijc § c c

c 'm c 'm c 'mi.i: (5 i;j i.i: (5 i.i: (5

1 - 51 1012 52 1023 53 1034 54 1045 55 1056 56 1067 57 1078 58 1089 59 10910 60 11011 61 11112 62 11213 63 11314 64 11415 65 11516 66 11617 ,'"' 67 117

Ifl81 ..; 68 118"I!l 69 11920 70 12021 71 12122 72 12223 73 12324 74 12425- 75 125

('26 76 126Tel) 77 127(W 78 12829 79 12930 80 13031 81 13132 82 13233 83 13334 ;.;. 84 13435 : 85 1353.6 86 13637) 87 13738 88 13839 89 13940 90 14041 91 14142 92 14243 93 14344 94 14445 95 14546 96 14647 97 14748 98 14849 99 14950 100 : 150

U,S. Patent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No, 20060218


Reexamination

IIII III IIII II 09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit





709 204,216 2120/2006 BAAEAST - updated class/subclass search 2120/2006 BAA

705 26 2120/2006 BAA

345 473, 730 2120/2006 BAA

345 738 2120/2006 BAA



u.S. Patent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No. 20060218

Ref#

Hits Search Query

EAST Search History

DBs Default Plurals Time StampOperator

S35

.. :,·:,·······:1 in:: I.,: ••·.':!: i1 •••••:••..•..•••..•.•••.•.••••••• :.:.:.:' ... ,... ,.,

1533 705/26.ccls. and(@ad<120000S01" or@rlad<120000S01")

ON 2006/02/18 12:03

L1

L3

97 705/26.ccls. and(@ad<120000501" or@rlad<120000S01") and@pd>120050719"

3200 345/473.ccls. 709/204.ccls.709/216.ccls. 345/738.ccls.

ON 2006/02/2009:17

249 14

2/20/069:35:38 AMC: \Documents and Settings\bailes\My Documents\EAST\Workspaces\09843923.wsp

ON 2006/02/2009:17

Page 1


Sergey Brin







AMENDMENT

In response to the non-final Office Action, dated July 21,2005, the period for response

being extended through December 21, 2005 by the filing of a petition for a two month extension

oftime and the requisite fee concurrently herewith, please amend the application as follows:







Listing of Claims:

1-17. (canceled)

18. (currently amended) A method for enticing users to access a web page,

comprising:


associating one or more search terms with the special event logo;



fJfeyicling seareh fesults felatiRg te the sfJeeia:l eveRt invoking a search based on the one

or more search terms in response to the user selection.


logo includes:


animated images.




2



ofvideo or audio data.


22. (original) The method of claim 18, wherein the associating one or more search

terms includes:

identifying one or more search terms relating to the special event.


includes:


24. (currently amended) The method of claim 18, wherein the flreyiaiag seat'eh

resllits invoking a search includes:





logo includes:



3



modifying the standard company logo with special event infonnation to create the special

event logo.

26. (previously presented) A computer-readable medium that stores instructions

executable by one or more processors to perfonn a method for attracting users to a web page,

comprising:

instructions for creating a special event logo by modifying a standard company logo;


logo;







detennine a home page for a web page on the network,


modify the standard company logo with special event infonnation corresponding



event.

4









flfoviEliHg seareh feSl:l1ts felatiflg to the s:fleeial e'leHt invoking a search based on the one

or more search terms in response to the detected selection.







data.




5



holiday.


configured to:


logo.


configured to:





34. (new) The method of claim 18, wherein uploading the special event logo

includes:


35. (new) The computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the instructions for

uploading the special event logo include:


web page.

6



36. (new) The method of claim 28, further comprising:


37. (new) A method, comprising:




invoking a search relating to the special event in response to the received selection; and


38. (new) The method of claim 37, wherein one or more search terms are associated

with the special event logo; and



39. (new) The method of claim 37, wherein the presenting a special event logo

includes:


7



REMARKS

In the non-fmal Office Action, the Examiner rejected claims 18-33 under 35 U.S.C. §

I03(a) as unpatentable over Wolff (U.S. Patent No. 6,247,047) in view of Unold et ai. (U.S.

Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0055880).

By this Amendment, Applicant amends claims 18, 24, and 28 to improve foim, and adds

new claims 34-39. Applicant respectfully traverses the Examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. §

103. Claims 18-39 are pending.

In paragraphs 4-17 of the Office Action, the Examiner rejected claims 18-33 as allegedly

unpatentable over Wolff in view of Unold et ai. Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection.

Independent claim 18, for example, is directed to a method for enticing users to access a

web page. The method comprises modifying a standard company logo for a special event to

create a special event logo; associating one or more search terms with the special event logo;

uploading the special event logo to the web page; receiving a user selection of the special event

logo; and providing search results relating to the special event in response to the user selection.



nor Unold et ai. discloses or suggests modifying a standard company logo for a special event to

create a special event logo.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses "the main idea of using a company logo, being

able to modify the company logo, and associating a search term with it" and cited column 8, line

35 - column 9, line 7 of Wolff for support (Office Action, paragraph 5). Applicant respectfully

disagrees.

8




At step 200, a WWW page 100 is displayed on display 18 of a user node 14. Page 100 is retrievedfrom sponsor server 50 (FIG. I) when server 50 is accessed by specifying its URL during abrowsing session by the user. Page 100 is specified by HTML file 52 which, as described above,caused an icon or advertising banner 102 to be displayed. Banner 102, displayed on a geographicarea 104 of page 100, includes graphics relating to a particular product or service being advertised.Embedded within banner 102 is the URL of host server 12 (e.g., "www.bannerbuy.com") and aunique indicia (e.g., "12345") identifying the product or service being advertised. The indicia isappended to the end of the URL (e.g., I www.bannerbuy.com/I2345"). and the URL is linked tobanner 102. The URL and indicia are shown in a dashed box 106 to indicate they are transparent tothe user. In other embodiments, the URL and indicia can be displayed to the user, or banner 102can be replaced by another icon having embedded therein the same URL and indicia. For example,banner 102 can be replaced by a hyperlink including the URL of host server 12 and the indicia ofthe advertised product or service.

At step 202, a user uninterested in the advertised product or service may continue browsingwithout selecting banner 102. However, if the user wants to make a transaction or wants moreinformation about the advertised product or service, the user selects banner 102 using an inputdevice such as mouse 22 by clicking in geographic area 104. In response, at step 204, user node 14makes an TCP/IP request using the URL ("www.bannerbuy.com") embedded within banner 102 tocontact host server 12 over Internet 16.

At step 206, host server 12 generates a unique transaction identification number ("transaction ill"),and creates a new record in the transaction record database which can be indexed by thetransaction ill. This record will be used to store any input data entered by the user for thistransaction. At step 208, host server 12 receives the unique indicia (e.g., "12345") embeddedwithin banner 102 and uses the indicia to search the on-line product/service database for a recordcontaining information specific to the advertised product or service.

In this section, Wolff discloses displaying an advertising banner on a web page and embedding

within the advertising banner a URL of the host server and a unique indicia that identifies the

product or service being advertised. It appears that the Examiner is alleging that an advertising

banner is equivalent to a company logo. Applicant submits that such an allegation is

unreasonable because an advertising banner is quite different from a compa.TJ.y logo. They are

designed for different purposes and they implement different functionality. An advertising

banner typically includes advertising material that offers a product or service for sale. It may be

possible for an advertising banner to include a company logo with the advertising material (see,

e.g., paragraphs 0125 and 0126 of Unold et al.), but an advertising banner is definitely not

9



equivalent to a company logo. Wolff does not even mention a company logo. Therefore, Wolff

cannot disclose the ability to modify a company logo, as alleged by the Examiner.

The Examiner admitted that Wolff does not disclose modifying a standard company logo

to become a special event logo (Office Action, paragraph 5). The Examiner alleged that Unold et

ai. discloses the ability to alter a standard company logo to become a special event logo in

accordance with a special event and cited paragraph 0007 of Unold et ai. for support (Office

Action, paragraph 5). Applicant respectfully disagrees.

At paragraph 0007, Unold et ai. discloses:

Therefore, there exists in the industry, a need for a system and method for enabling the rapidcreation of electronic advertisements, for rapidly changing or replacing advertisements in responseto market and sales trends, changes in customer preferences, or the occurrence of a holiday orspecial event, for controlling access to digital signs, and for addressing these and other related, andunrelated, problems.

In this section, Unold et ai. discloses the need for a system and method to rapidly create, change,

and replace advertisements. It appears again that the Examiner is alleging that an advertisement

is equivalent to a company logo. As explained above, such an allegation is unreasonable because

advertisements are quite different from company logos. Therefore, the need for rapid creating,

changing, and replacing of advertisements, as identified by Unold et aI., falls short of curing the

deficiencies in the disclosure of Wolff.

Therefore, even if Wolff and Unold et ai. were combinable (a point that Applicant does

not concede), the combined system would not disclose or suggest modifying a standard company

logo for a special event to create a special event logo, as required by claim 18.

Because neither Wolff nor Unold et ai. discloses or suggests modifying a standard

company logo for a special event to create a special event logo, Wolff and Unold et aI., whether

taken alone or in any reasonable combination, cannot disclose or suggest associating one or more

10



search tenns with the special event logo, as further required by claim 18.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses associating one or more search tenns with a

company logo and cited column 8, lines 43-48, of Wolff for support (Office Action, paragraph

5). Applicant respectfully disagrees.


Embedded within banner 102 is the URL ofhost server 12 (e.g., ..www.bannerbuy.com..) and aunique indicia (e.g., "12345") identifying the product or service being advertised. The indicia isappended to the end of the URL (e.g., ..www.bannerbuy.com/12345 ..). and the URL is linked tobanner 102.

In this section, Wolff discloses that a URL and unique indicia identifying the product or service

being advertised is embedded within an advertising banner. Wolff discloses that if a user clicks

on the advertising banner, the host server (associated with the advertiser) uses the unique indicia

to search a product/service database for a record containing infonnation specific to the advertised

product or service (col. 9, lines 3-7). Even if, for the sake of argument, the unique indicia could

be equated to a search tenn (a point that Applicant does not concede), Wolff does not disclose or

suggest associating the unique indicia with a special event logo, as required by claim 18. The

disclosure of Unold et al. does not cure this deficiency in the disclosure of Wolff.

Because neither Wolff nor Unold et al. discloses or suggests associating one or more

search tenns with the special event logo, Wolff and Unold et aI., whether taken alone or in any

reasonable combination, cannot disclose or suggest providing search results relating to a special

event in response to user selection of the special event logo, as further required by claim 18.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses providing search results relating to the logo in

response to user selection and cited column 9, lines 1-7, of Wolff for support (Office Action,

paragraph 5). Applicant submits that the Examiner has misconstrued the language of claim 18.

11



Claim 18 does not recite providing search results relating to a logo, but instead recites providing

search results relating to a special event. Wolff does not disclose or suggest this feature.


This record will be used to store any input data entered by the user for this transaction. At step208, host server 12 receives the unique indicia (e.g., "12345") embedded within banner 102 anduses the indicia to search the on-line product/service database for a record containing informationspecific to the advertised product or service.

In this section, Wolff discloses that the unique indicia is used to search a product/service

database for a record containing information specific to the advertised product or service. This

section of Wolff is deficient for at least a couple of reasons. First, Wolff discloses that the host

server performs a search in response to user selection of the advertising banner, not in response

to user selection of a special event logo, as required by claim 18. Second, the information

obtained as a result of the search (i.e., information specific to the advertised product or service)

cannot reasonably be equated to search results relating to a special event, as required by claim 18.

The disclosure of Unold et ai. does not cure these deficiencies in the disclosure of Wolff.


Unold et aI., whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination. Claims 19-25 depend from

claim 18 and are, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Unold et ai. for at least the reasons given

with regard to claim 18. Claims 19-25 are also patentable for reasons of their own.


company logo with one or more animated images. Neither Wolff nor Unold et ai. discloses or


The Examiner alleged that Unold et ai. discloses the ability to modify a logo with

animated images, video, and audio data and cited paragraph 0047, lines 9-13, of Unold et ai. for

12



support (Office Action, paragraph 6). Applicant respectfully disagrees.

At paragraph 0047, lines 9-13, Unold et al. discloses:

Each digital sign 108, preferably, comprises: a display subsystem capable ofdisplaying video orstill images received in the form of digital signals; an audio subsystem capable of producing anddelivering audible sound from received digital signals therefor.

In this section, Unold et al. discloses that a digital sign is capable of displaying video or still

images and producing audible sound. The Examiner appears to allege that a digital sign is

equivalent to a company logo. Unold et al. describes a digital sign as a device that includes a

display via which an advertiser can advertise its products or services in locations, such as

airports, shopping malls, exhibit halls, taxi cabs, etc. (paragraphs 0047 and 0048). Applicant

submits that it is unreasonable to equate a digital sign device to a company logo since they are

two very different things.




with at least one of video or audio data. Neither Wolff nor Unold et al. discloses or suggests this

combination of features.


animated images, video, and audio data and cited paragraph 0047, lines 9-13, of Unold et al. for

support (Office Action, paragraph 6). Applicant respectfully disagrees.

Paragraph 0047, lines 9-13, ofUnold et al. has been reproduced above. In this section,

Unold et al. discloses that a digital sign is capable of displaying video or still images and

producing audible sound. As explained above with regard to claim 19, Applicant submits that it

13



is unreasonable to equate a digital sign device to a company logo since they are two very

different things.



Claim 22 recites identifying one or more search terms relating to the special event.

Neither Wolff nor Unold et al. discloses or suggests this combination of features.

The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses the use of a search term but admitted that

Wolff does not disclose the search term being related to a special event (Office Action, paragraph

8). The Examiner alleged that it would have been obvious to associate the search term with the

special event in the combination of Wolff and Unold et al. "because Wolff alone associates the

search term with the company logo, so in combination of Wolff and Unold, the search term

would be related to the special event logo in some sort of way" (Office Action, paragraph 8).

Applicant respectfully disagrees.

The Examiner's allegation rests on the assumption that Wolff discloses associating a

search term with a company logo. As explained above with regard to claim 18, contrary to the

Examiner's allegation, Wolff does not disclose associating a search term with a company logo.

Because the basis of the Examiner's allegation lacks merit, the rest of the Examiner's allegation

also lacks merit. Contrary to the Examiner's allegation, even if Wolff could be combined with

Unold et al. (a point that Applicant does not concede), the combined system would not have

identified one or more search terms relating to a special event, or associated the one or more

search terms with the special event logo, as required by claim 22.


14

, I



Wolff and Unold et aI.

Claim 25 recites determining a home page for the web page on a network, identifying the

standard company logo on the home page, and modifying the standard company logo with special

event information to create the special event logo. Neither Wolff nor Unold et aI. discloses or


For example, neither Wolff nor Unold et al. discloses or suggests identifying a standard

company logo on a home page. The Examiner alleged that Wolff discloses this feature and cited

column 8, lines 35-40, of Wolff for support (Office Action, paragraph 11). Applicant



At step 200, a WWWpage 100 is displayed on display 18 ofa user node 14. Page 100 is retrievedfrom sponsor server 50 (FIG. 1) when server 50 is accessed by specifying its URL during abrowsing session by the user. Page 100 is specified by HTML file 52 which, as described above,caused an icon or advertising banner 102 to be displayed.

In this section, Wolff discloses that an advertising banner is displayed on a web page. As

explained above with regard to claim 18, an advertising banner is not equivalent to a company

logo. Therefore, contrary to the Examiner's allegation, Wolff does not disclose or remotely

suggest identifying a standard company logo on a home page, as required by claim 25.


Wolff and Unold et aI.

Independent claim 26 recites features similar to features recited in claim 18. Claim 26 is,

therefore, patentable over Wolff and Unold et aI., whether taken alone or in any reasonable

combination, for at least reasons similar to reasons given with regard to claim 18. Claims 29-31

depend from claim 26 and are, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Unold et aI. for at least the

15

•• I. , (



reasons given with regard to claim 26. Claims 29-31 also recite features similar to features

recited in claims 19-25. Claims 29-31 are, therefore, also patentable over Wolff and Unold et ai.

for reasons similar to reasons given with regard to claims 19-25.









nor Unold et ai. discloses or suggests a processor configured to identify a standard company logo

on a home page, for at least reasons similar to reasons given with regard to claim 25.

Wolff and Unold et ai. also do not disclose or suggest a processor configured to modify a

standard company logo with special event information corresponding to a special event to create

a special event logo, as further recited in claim 27, for at least reasons similar to reasons given


Wolff and Unold et ai. also do not disclose or suggest a processor configured to replace

the standard company logo with the special event logo during the special event, as further recited

in claim 27. The Examiner did not address this feature and, therefore, did not establish a prima

facie case of obviousness with regard to claim 27.


16

, , I I



Unold et al., whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination. Claims 32 and 33 depend

from claim 27 and are, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Unold et al. for at least the reasons


Independent claim 28 recites features similar to features recited in claims 18-20. Claim

28 is, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Unold et al., whether taken alone or in any reasonable

combination, for at least reasons similar to reasons given with regard to claims 18-20.

New claims 34, 35, and 36 depend from claims 18,26, and 28, respectively. Claims 34-

36 are, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Unold et al. for at least the reasons given with regard

to claims 18, 26, and 28.

New independent claim 37 recites features similar to, but different in scope from, features

recited in other independent claims. Claim 37 is, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Unold et

al. for at least reasons similar to reasons given with regard to the other independent claims.

Claims 38 and 39 depend from claim 37 and are, therefore, patentable over Wolff and Unold et

al. for at least the reasons given with regard to claim 37.


Examiner's reconsideration ofthe application and the timely allowance of pending claims 18-36.

If the Examiner does not believe that all pending claims are now in condition for


application.

To the extent necessary, a petition for an extension oftime under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136 is

hereby made. Please charge any shortage in fees due in connection with the filing ofthis paper,

17

., '/ l ..,






HARRITY & SNYDER, L.L.P.

Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574

Date: November 22, 2005

11240 Waples Mill RoadSuite 300Fairfax, Virginia 22030(571) 432-0800

18



Application No.: 09/843,923 Examiner: B. Ailes



,~E 'AlAo ~

1.\\\\~ ~\\()~ '). '}. g,~ ~'~&TR~dft


Sergey Brin

For: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FORENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEBSITE

PETITION FOR TWO MONTH EXTENSION OF TIME


Sir:

The following extension of time is requested to respond to the Office Action dated July 21,2005:

Two months to December 21,2005; the extension fee is:

D $ 225.00 IZJ $ 450.00

D The shortened statutory period has been reset by an Advisory Action dated __.

IZJ An extension fee in the amount of $ $450.00 is enclosed.

D Charge $ _ to Deposit Account No. 50-1070.

The Comm issioner is hereby authorized to charge any other appropriate fees that may be required by this

paper that are not accounted for above, and to credit any overpayment, to Deposit Account No. 50-1070.



~~~5~89843923

450.08 OPBy: --'---"'-"""""'=--_-==----+__~_ _____'~-


CUSTOMER NUMBER: 44989Date: November 22, 2005

Ir().{~paZAttorney's Docket No. 0020:0002

l



Sergey Brin



For.: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FORENTICING USERS TO ACCESSA WEB SITE


AMENDMENT/REPLY TRANSMITTAL LETTER

U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Service Window, Mail Stop AmendmentRandolph Building401 Dulany Street'Alexandria, VA 22314

Sir:

Enclosed is a reply for the above-identified patent application.

~ A Petition for Extension of Time is also enclosed.

D A Terminal Disclaimer and a check for D $65.00 D $130.00 to cover therequisite Government fee are also enclosed.

D A Request for Continued Examination under 37 C.F.R. § 1.114 is enclosed.

D A request for Entry and Consideration of Submission under 37 C.F.R. § 1. 129(a)is also enclosed.'

Amendment/Reply Transmittal LetterApplication Serial No. 09/843,923Attorney's Docket No. 0026-0002

Page 2

[:g] No additional claim fee is required.

D An additional claim fee is required, and is calculated as shown below:

AMENDED CLAIMS

No. of Highest No. Extra Rate AdditionalClaims Of Claims Claims Fee

PreviouslyPaid For

Total Minus x $50.00 =

Claims

Ind. Minus x $200.00 =

Claims

If Amendment adds multiple dependent claims, add $360.00

Total Amendment Fee

If Small entity status is claimed, subtract 50% of Total Amendment Fee

TOTAL ADDITIONAL FEE DUE FOR THIS AMENDMENT

o A claim fee in the amount of $ is enclosed.

D Charge $ _ to Deposit Account no. 50-1070.






Page 3






By~Qep\=3)Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574


Customer Number: 44989Date: November 22, 2005

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEUNITED STATES DEPARTMElIo'T OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark om..,Address: COMMlSSIOll.'ER FOR PATENTS

P.O.1lox 1450Akxandria, ViIginia 2231 3-14S0www.lISplO.gov

APPLICAnON NO.

09/843,923

44989 7590

FILING DATE

04130/2001

0712112005


Sergey Brin

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMAnON NO.

0026-0002 9916

EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN AHARRITY & SNYDER, LLP11240 WAPLES MILL ROADSUITE 300FAIRFAX, VA 22030

ART UNIT

2142


PAPER NUMBER


PTO-90C (Rev. 10/03)

T

IOffice Action Summary

Application No.

09/843,923

Examiner

Applicant(s)

BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit

Benjamin A Ailes 2142

-- 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;J MONTH(S) FROMTHE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.- Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a}. In no event, however, maya reply be timely filed

after SIX (6) MONTHS from the maUing date of this communication.- If the period for reply specified above is less than thirty (3D) days, a reply within the staMory minimum of thirty (3D) days will be considered timely.- If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum staMory 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).


Status

1)~ Responsive to communication(s) filed on 02 Mav 2005.

2a)0 This action is FINAL. 2b)~ This action is non-final.


closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.


4)~ Claim(s) 18-33 is/are pending in the application.



6)~ Claim(s) 18-33 is/are rejected.



Application Papers



. Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).




12)0 Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)' or (t).

a)O All b)D Some * c)O None of:






Attachment(s)

1)~ Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)


3) 0 Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449 or PTO/SB/08)Paper No(s)/Mail Date __.


5) 0 Notice of Informal Patent Application (PTO-152)

6) 0 Other: __.

U.S. Patent and Trademar1< Office


.(.0 ()


Art Unit: 2142

DETAILED ACTION

1. This action is in response to the Amendment and Response to Restriction

Requirement filed 02 May 2005.


Page 2






Wolff (U.S. 6,247,047) in view of Unold et al. (U.S. 2002/0055880 A1), hereinafter

referred to as Unold.

5. Regarding claims 18,26, and 28, Wolff discloses the use of a standard company

logo (col. 8, lines 35-40), associating one or more search terms with the company logo

(col. 8, lines 43-48), uploading the company logo to a web page (col. 8, lines 38-40),

receiving a user selection of the company logo (col. 8, lines 58-62), and providing

search results relating to the logo in response to the user selection (col. 9, lines 1-7).

Wolff discloses the main idea of using a company logo, being able to modify the

company logo, and associating a search term along with it, but does not explicitly

disclose in the modifying step of modifying the standard company logo to become a

special event logo. However, Unold discloses the ability and method of altering a

standard company logo to become a special event logo in accordance with a special


Art Unit: 2142

Page 3

event (Page 1, column 2, paragraph [0007]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have

found it useful to combine the method of modifying a standard company logo to become

a special event logo as disclosed by Unold because Unold provides a method wherein

company logos and advertisements can be changed quickly and efficiently to

correspond with market and sales trends (Page 1, column 2, paragraph [0007]). It is for

this reason that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's invention

would have been motivated to implement the methods of modifying a company logo as

disclosed by Unold and combine them with the standard company logo displaying

method disclosed by Wolff.

6. Regarding claims 19 and 20, Unold discloses the ability to modify the logo with

animated images, video, and audio data (page 3, column 2, paragraph [0047], lines 9-

13). The motivation used to combine Wolff and Unold in the rejection of claim 18

applies equally as well to claims 19 and 20.

7. Regarding claim 21, Unold discloses'the special event including a holiday (page

1, column 1, paragraph [0007]). The motivation used to combine Wolff and Unold in the

rejection of claim 18 applies equally as well to claim 21.

8. Regarding claim 22, Wolff discloses the use of a search term but Wolff does not

explicitly disclose the search term being related to the special event because Wolff does

not explicitly disclose the step of modifying a company logo to become a special event

logo as explained in the rejection of claim 18. It would have been obvious to one of

ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's invention to associate the search

term with the special event in the combination of Wolff and Unold because Wolff alone


Art Unit: 2142

Page 4

associates the search term with the company logo, so in combination of Wolff and

Unold, the search term would have to be related to the special event logo in some sort

of way. It is. for this reason that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been

motivated to associate the search term with the special event.

9. Regarding claim 23, Unold discloses the ability to schedule when a special event

logo is to be displayed (page 2, column 2, paragraph [0018]). The motivation used to

combine Wolff and Unold in the rejection of claim 18 applies equally as well to claim 23.

10. Regarding claim 24, Wolff discloses the method of generating a search query

using the one or more search terms (col. 9, lines 1-8), using the search query to search

at least one of a network, ali index, or a directory (col. 9, lines 1-8), and obtaining

search results based on the search (col. 9, lines 9-15).

11. Regarding claim 25, Wolff discloses determining a home page for the web page

on a network (col. 8, lines 35-40) and identifying the standard company logo on the

home page (col. 8, lines 35-40), but does not explicitly disclose in the modifying step of

modifying the standard company logo to become a special event logo. However, Unold

discloses the ability and method of altering a standard company logo to become a

special event logo in accordance with a special event (Page 1, column 2, paragraph

[0007]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it useful to combine the

method of modifying a standard company logo to become a special event logo as

disclosed by Unold because Unold provides a method wherein company logos and

advertisements can be changed quickly and efficiently to correspond with market and

sales trends (Page 1, column 2, paragraph [0007]). It is for this reason that one of


Art Unit: 2142

ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's invention would have been

Page 5

motivated to implement the methods of modifying a company logo as disclosed by

Unold and combine them with the standard company logo displaying method disclosed

by Wolff.


as claims 18 and 25.


as claim 19.

14. ·Claim 30 contains similar subject matter and is rejected under the same rationale

as claim 20.


as claim 21.


as claim 22.


as claim 24.


18. Applicant's arguments filed 02 May 2005 have been considered but are moot in

view of the new ground(s) of rejection.


Art Unit: 2142

Conclusion



Page 6

Baum (U.S. 2002/0065741 A1) discloses a method of distributing images to

multiple recipients.

Bollay (U.S. 6,457,009 B1) discloses a method of searching multiple Internet

resident databases using search fields in a generic form.

Tognazzini et al. (U.S. 6,519,584) disclose advertising displays such as found in

mass transit vehicles or stations or in electronic newspapers are provided with user

directed search capabilities.



3899. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30-5, First Friday Off.





Art Unit: 2142

Page 7






you have questions on. access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic


baaL~~

WTRIZ PRtETOPA1MARY EXAtJnNER


09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYNotice of References Cited

Examiner Art Unit

Benjamin A Ailes 2142Page 1 of 1



Country Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YVYY Name Classification

A U5-6,247,047 B1 06-2001 Wolff, Eric L. 709/219

B U5-2002l0055880 A 1 05-2002 Unold et aI. 705/26

C US-2002l0065741 A1 05-2002 Baum, Daniel R. 705/26

D U5-6,457,009 B1 09-2002 Bollay, Denison W. 707/10

E U5-e,519,584 B1 02-2003 Tognazzini et al. 707/3

.F US-

G US-

H US-

I US-

J US-

K US-

L US-

M US-



Country Name ClassificationCountry Code-Number-Kind Code MM-VYVY

N

0

P

Q

R

S

T


A copy of this reference IS not bemg furnished with this Office action. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).)Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.


U

V

W

X

.u.s. Patent ard Trademark Office



II II IIII III III ~ II09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit


" Rejected - (Through numeral) Non-Elected AppealCancelled N A



1ii II>: .

1ii 1ii1ii c:

~1ii c: 1ii c:

c: '01 c: '01 c: '01u:: (5 ;::: u:: (5 u:: (5:.:.

1 . 51 1012 52 I'" 1023 1'. 53 I:':' 1034 I:·: 54 I·:· 1045 H 55 1056 - :::. 56 1067 - 57 1078 - :::. 58 1089 - 59 10910 - 60 11011 - .. : 61 11112 62 11213 . 63 11314 64 11415 65 11516 - ::: 66 11617 - ::. 67 11718 ..J 68 118l"§ -J 69 11920 -J 70 12021 -J 71 12122 ..J 72 12223 -J 73 12324 ..J 74 12425 -J 75 125f~ ..J 76 126

71 -J 77 1278) ..J 78 128

29 -J 79 12930 -J 80 13031 -J 81 13132 ..J 82 13233 -J 83 13334 84 13435 85 13536 86 13637 87 13738 88 13839 89 13940 90 14041 91 14142 92 14243 93 14344 94 14445 95 14546 96 14647 97 14748 98 14849 99 14950 .: 100 150

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No. 20050719


Reexamination

IIII IIII I I I I09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit


SEARCHED SEARCH NOTES(INCLUDING SEARCH STRATEGY)


705 26 7/19/2005 BAAEAST - General Text Search,

7/19/2005 BAAClass/subclass seach

Search Tips· Primary Examiner •7/19/2005 BAALarry Donaghue - see attached (LD)



u.s. Patent and Trademark Office Part of Paper No. 20050719

~. I

2005/07/1910:38

2005/07/19 11:13

2005/07/19.. 14:29

2005/07/1914:29

2005/07/l9.1~f:23.

2005/07/1911:14

:::::::::::':.::;'::: ... :';"::"::::.:::::':':"

ON

Plurals Time Stamp

ON

ON

ON 2005/07/1914:23

DBs

:tiS':PGPUB·

USPAT

:l.IS-PGPUS·;.·.USPAT;;.;<: :.EPQ~)p'(~i;."I:···'·'····'···'

.DERWENTL

. JB,~~TOB..:

US-PGPUB; ORUSPAT;USOCR

"i0020055880i,

("6457009" "6247047").pn.

•·('16457009"1~6247047'.'.).piL. .- .-- ' , - .

Hits Search Query

L11

L15

L14

L8

Ref#

:uS··

L17

t16 .

19 ("5572643" I "5675507" I"5715453" I "5724424" I"5778368" I "5796952" I"5948061" I "5960411").PN. OR("6247047").URPN.

·:~8vt~s~~~~tf-~:~~MNe~~~~i~r:b~! ::e~~~~~:;;:!.•• ~piid:ay.)::::·:~.~ .. ~~·~~!J!IIH;iJj; •. ::·<: i:~~~W$.~)

.. .•••: '••• :.::••• :•••:.. :.: ::.:.'.' .••• :•.• ·lBl'vtTDB:::.:··V·:.::.:.: I:' :1

36 11 and ((logo or banner or ad or US-PGPUB; ORadvertisement or sale or USPAT;clearance) same (season$3 or EPO; JPO;holiday» DERWENT;

IBM_TDB

...........-.. , il'~~d:«(i8gd.8t:'b~·~h~~)$~h1e.. .. ;·l)S~PGPLJBfl·;b·IRi:·l ..:: l:C)N::"/il':'id()5/oij1.9!i·l:i~· ••(seasbri$36r,holid~y»· :: ..... : ;·ljSPAT;:··.·.·.··"<.:.,•..:.;.::. :l:PO;)PO;I.:::> ::1> :.1 .:::: ••

............ ,..· :.1.·:>.:;·.'.::.::': ···oERWENt··II: :::11:1:;:1·:::.:: ·:···:·:.. :... :: .••.. :... :.: ••• :.. ::.:.:.:.: •.•.. :.:.:.:.:.:.:.: •.. :.: •• •••.•••.•. :••1\ •• !:j~MI"'t.>$.;·.:

1435 705/26.ccls. and US-PGPUB; OR(@ad<"20000501" or USPAT;@rlad<"20000501") EPO; JPO;

DERWENT;IBM_TDB

'.':;:1.'.:.:·:·:;':':,:235:1· ..... . ····,·······,·······,·,·······'IQ~lllllrTINill· .(lqg8With2qmp~ny>:$~·m~ ....:::lJ.$~P:G.PUB.; .ip()SjR7h.Q:i.i!i~

....................';?:i1JIa,v,:$n::srpe.seieCt$3;..:... iIj j::~:~~~;~~~:::! iii::;!i:::::!! : .· 1:······:::·······:· ••••• ·.···1 •. · ··:.:.: : ' ·..:..!!i •••fB~~ltB~T;!·il!IY·.T.TI: :: ••• >1 ill.· •.,:}:'·· .

9 (logo with company) same US-PGPUB; ORdisplay$3 same (season$2 or USPAT;holida$2) EPO; JPO;

DERWENT;IBM_TDB

... ,-.:-:."' ..,. ...,••(I()gc>.With2qrnp~hY)~~m~:: •••..:••.••• ·ij~~PGP:W:B;::·IPR' :: lQN;::qlsplaY$:3:· . . . . . . USpAt ........... .. .. .. Ji\i jEPp;ii~6;kIk::::·jI[iII ili}..:•••:!ll::::"":::,:: H ::. ..:: >T...·••.•.. ·DERWENT;:::

Search History 7/19/05 4:00:48 PM Page 1C:\Documents and Settings\bailes\My Documents\EAST\Workspaces\09843923.wsp

. '

L6

L4

: : I·

I'

4447 logo with company

'1265: . (logo orcompany):s~n1e"':::(season$3:orhbliday)C

. - "'-.- - : _. - .... ' ,'::".. ,:.

.

69 2 not 3

US-PGPUB; ORUSPAT;EPa; JPO;DERWENT;IBM_TDB

........... - .

USjP,GP.iJ~;;-:

·U$pAT;'..;:: .'.• :EPQn"Q;/:,· .

·DERWENt),"·, ::::IBM:TDB::>...:. ~.. ::,,',.,.,,::: ...

US-PGPUB; ORUSPAT;EPa; JPO;DERWENT;IBM_TDB

ON

." !".

!"".

!" ..1·:".

ON

2005/07/19 10:36

:: ....

2005/07/1910:36

ON 2005/07/1910:35

" I::, '::L,. >:' ,,::

.':' : .. :

,...,.:::: '.'.:.

:.:.

L2 90

." .,,,.

........................... "".""."." . """""""""""''''''''1:::.::.:'.:;.::::::::::::::::~:·~~n"~(Vi@:9.r·in~~rr.~t§r.$ite) .• ·· :: ::QS~P(jP.LJB;::;F·(OR:R:>'·;'::rCiN·: ::I::2005!Q7/19'iO:35::

.;.:......•.••••••••••••;••• :.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.;;;;;;;;:;:.:.;;:;;.:•.. ;.;;;;;;.;;;.; •• :;i!~I;;;I!:!:!I!! I!!! I::I!!III'I: !':!·I :.:::;, ,,;.,: ,':: •......1 and (web or internet or site) US-PGPUB; OR

USPAT;EPa; JPO;DERWENT;IBM_TDB

::iJ~:'P'·":'.G.,.·..p.·,.:..·u":",,,,·B··;:I:;'nll: 1:IJDNi I::2d65/o7/i91o!3s::... :.:,' ',: ... : ",: ... :,:' :,:.:.:.: :.:.:

:USP,AT;:: ,., :.:::::,:::'::~PPU&9.;:': ....:PI;RWI;NT:> .:. ..... .... ..:JaH:tos: .,. .:. I <: ::: .: : :•. :. Y: II

Search History 7/19/05 4:00:48 PM Page 2C:\Documents and Settings\bailes\My Documents\EAST\Workspaces\09843923.wsp

Ref Hits Search Query DBs Default Plurals Time Stamp# Operator

Ll 252 (logo or banner)same (season$3 or US-PGPUB; ADJ OFF 2005/07/12 10:29holiday) USPAT;

EPO

L2 55 11 and (web or internet or site) US-PGPUB; ADJ OFF 2005/07/12 10:22USPAT;EPO

L3 11 11 same (web or internet or site) US-PGPUB; ADJ OFF 2005/07/12 10:17USPAT;EPO

L4 44 12 not 13 US-PGPUB; ADJ OFF 2005/07/12 10:22USPAT;EPO

L5 764 (logo or company)same (season$3 US-PGPUB; ADJ OFF 2005/07/12 10:28or holiday) USPAT;

EPO

L6 3067 (logo with company) US-PGPUB; ADJ OFF 2005/07/12 10:28USPAT;EPO

L7 751 (logo with company) same US-PGPUB; ADJ OFF 2005/07/12 10:29displaY$3 USPAT;

EPO

L8 1 (logo with company) same US-PGPUB; ADJ OFF 2005/07/12 10:30displaY$3 same (season$2 or USPAT;holida$2) EPO

L9 181 (logo with company) same US-PGPUB; ADJ OFF 2005/07/12 10:30displaY$3 same select$3 USPAT;

EPO

Search History 7/12/2005 10:39:16 AM Page 1C:\Documents and Settings\ldonaghue\My Documents\EAST\\default.wsp




Sergey Brin




))) Group Art Unit: ~142

)) Examiner: B. Ailes))))))

AMENDMENTIREPLY TRANSMITTAL LETTER

U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficeCustomer Service Window, Mail Stop AmendmentRandolph Building40 I Dulany StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

Sir:


D A Petition for Extension of Time is also enclosed.



D A request for Entry and Consideration of Submission under 37 C.F.R. § 1.129(a)is also enclosed.


Page 2

I:8J No additional claim fee is required.

o An additional claim fee is required, and is calculated as shown below:

AMENDED CLAIMS


PreviouslyPaid For

Total Minus x $50.00 = 0

Claims

Ind. Minus x $200.00 = 0

Claims


Total Amendment Fee 0


TOTAL ADDITIONAL FEE DUE FOR THIS AMENDMENT 0








Page 3






Reg. No. 39,574

By:~O<t=\ ;-Paul A. Harrity


Customer Number: 44989Date: May 2, 2005


Examiner: B. Ailes

'M"Y 0 2 - ~-<> ~~~ 'J:-~

:t!4 TRAOtY-"In re Patent Application of

Sergey Brin





))) Group Art Unit: 2142))))))))


AMENDMENT AND RESPONSE TO RESTRICTION REQUIREMENT

In response to the Restriction Requirement, dated April 21, 2005, please amend this

application as follows:







Listing of Claims:

1-17. (canceled)

18. (original) A method for enticing users to access a web page, comprising:





providing search results relating to the special event in response to the user selection.


logo includes:


animated images.





2




22. (original) The method of claim 18, wherein the associating one or more search

terms includes:



includes:


24. (previously presented) The method of claim 18, wherein the providing search

results includes:





logo includes:




event logo.

3



26. (previously presented) A computer-readable medium that stores instructions


comprising:



logo;












event.

4



28. (new) A method, comprising:






providing search results relating to the special event in response to the detected selection.


creating a special event logo include:





data.




holiday.

5

logo.



32. (new) The server of claim 27, wherein the processor is further configured to:


33. (new) The server of claim 32, wherein the processor is further configured to:





6



REMARKS

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("Patent Office") issued a restriction requirement

under 35 U.S.C. § 121.

By this Amendment and Response to the Restriction Requirement, Applicant cancels

claims 1-17 without prejudice or disclaimer and reserves the right to pursue these claims in a

divisional application. Applicant also adds new claims 28-33. Claims 18-33 are pending.

With regard to the restriction requirement, the Patent Office required restriction to one of

the following inventions: Group I corresponding to claims 1-17 allegedly drawn to uploading a

story line to a web site, which is classified in class 709, subclass 218; and Group II

corresponding to claims 18-27 allegedly drawn to providing search results associated with a

special event logo that the user selected, which is classified in class 709, subclass 228. The

Patent Office alleged that the inventions of Groups I and II are related as subcombinations

disclosed as usable together in a single combination.

Applicant selects Group II without traverse. Applicant submits that new claims 28-33

recite some features similar to features recited in the claims of Group II. Therefore, claims 28-33

should be included in and examined with the claims of Group II.

In view of the foregoing, favorable examination of pending claims 18-33 is respectfully

requested.

7



To the extent necessary, a petition for an extension oftime under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136 is


induding extension of time fees, to Deposit Account No. 50-1070 and please credit any excess




BY:Ts~~Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574

Date: May 2, 2005


8

. ..----------- --------....plication or Docket Number

: .. : ADD1·RATE nOHAL'

OlHERTHANOR SMALLENnrI

RATE FEE

710.00

OR X$1IJ::a.

OR xao

OR +270=

OR..TOTAL ...._ .... '. OTHERTHAN

OR-· SMALL ENTITY

ADOI-.···~TE 1J~

OR ·)$1..

OR X8()a

OR <tl270=.

OR Aoorr. FEE..._ ....

OR XS18=

R X80a

R +270

OR·~.FE:~__..

RATE FEE8ASICFEI 355.00

xs.XAO::o.

+t3Ss

. TOTAL

ADD"RATE TlONALFEE

)(So.

X40a .

+t35-

.JOTALADDIT.FEE

ADOI-RATE lJONI'L

FEE'X$~

X~.:. ., 0

+135- 10TOTAL . .

ADDIT.FEE

o

" '111 _

NUU8EA EXTRANUU8EA FIlED

PA1ENT APPUCAnON FEE DI;TERMINAnON RECORD.r.'- Effective October 1, 2000 .~

CLAIMS AS FILED· PART IColumn 1

TOTAL ClAIMS

FOR

TOTALCHARGEABlE ClAIMS

MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM PRESENT

INDEPENDENTClAIMS minus 3 ...

,•

ADD":flAlE naNAL

OR )($18=.

OR .X80=

ADO"RATE TIONAL

FEE)(S.Da

)(40-,

+135-

TOTALADDIT.FEE

PRESENTEXTRA

RRST PAESENTAnON OF MUlTIPLE DEPENDENT ClAIM

Ind pendIIn1 • MInus - a

Total • Minus.. •

PIt8IlI8IIdT........oaa. u.s.DEJlIlIImIENI'OFCOMIIEACI!'VAL GI"Ck'" 110 'OIlIDUD

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEcrJ

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeAddress: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS

P.O. Box 1450Alexandria, Virginia 22313·1450www.uspto.gov

APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

44989 7590

FILING DATE

04/30/2001

04/2112005


Sergey Brin

ATIORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMAnON NO.

0026-0002 9916

EXAMINER

AILES. BENJAMIN AHARRITY & SNYDER, LLP11240 WAPLES MILL ROADSUITE 300FAIRFAX, VA 22030

ART UNIT

2142


PAPER NUMBER


PTO·90C (Rev. 10/03)


Application No.

09/843,923

Examiner

Applicant(s)

BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit


•• The MAILING DATE 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 1 MONTH(S) FROMTHE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.- Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, maya reply be timely filed

after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication. .• If the period for reply specified above is less than thirty (30) days, a reply within the statutory minimum of thirty (30) days will be considered timely.- 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).


Status

1)1:8:]

2a)0

3)0

Responsive to communication(s) filed on 22 November 2004.

This action is FINAL. 2b)1:8:] This action is non-final.

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 Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.


. 4)1:8:] Claim(s) 1-27 is/are pending in the application.



6)0 Claim(s) __ is/are rejected.


8)12:$;} Claim(s) 1-27 are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.

Application Papers





11)0 The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152.\









Attachment(s)

1) 0 Notice of References Cited (PT0-892)2) 0 Notice of Draftsperson's Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948)

3) 0 Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449 or PTO/SB/Oa)Paper No(s)/Mail Date __.


5) 0 Notice of Informal Patent Application (PTO-152)

6) 0 Other: __.

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

~TOl-326(R".'-04) Office Action Summary Part of Paper No.lMail Date 04132005


Art Unit: 2142

DETAILED ACTION

Election/Restrictions

Page 2

1. Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:

I. Claims 1-17, drawn to uploading a story line to a web site, classified in

class 709, subclass 218.

II. Claims 18-27, drawn to providing search results associated with a special

event logo that the user selected, classified in class 709, subclass 228.

The inventions are distinct, each from the other because of the following reasons:

2. Inventions I and II are related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together

in a single combination. The subcombinations are distinct from each other if they are

shown to be separately usable. In the instant case, invention I has separate utility such

as dynamically uploading different images to a web site, while invention II has separate

utility such as predefined search results for a link. See MPEP § 806.05(d).

3. Because these inventions are distinct for the reasons given above and the

search required for Group I is not required for Group II, restriction for examination

purposes as indicated is proper.

4. Because these inventions are distinct for the reasons given above and the

search required for Group II is not required for Group I, restriction for examination

purposes as indicated is proper.

5. Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must

include an election of the invention to be examined even though the requirement be

traversed (37 CFR 1.143).

~ .•' w


Art Unit: 2142

Page 3



3899. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30-5, First Friday Off.


supervisor, Jack B. Harvey can be reached on (571 )272-3896. The fax phone number









Benjamin AilesPatent ExaminerArt Unit 2142


Reexamination

III I III III II II09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit





Jason Cardone - Primary Examiner -Assisted with Election/Restriction 4/13/2005 BAArequirement.

J




Index of ClaimsApplication No. Applicant(s)

IIII III IIII ~I I09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit


..j Rejected - (Through numeral) Non-Elected AppealCancelled N A



(ij(ij ..,. II)

(ijiQ

(ijiQ

I::~ ~

I:: I::I:: '6> I:: '6> I:: '6>

u::: '1:: u::: (5 u::: (50 co ~

I~) ,; + 51 1012 v + 52 1023 ,; + 53 1034 ,; + 54 1045 ,; + 55 1056 ,; + 56 1067 ,; + 57 1078 v + 58 1089 ,; + 59 10910 ,; + 60 110

[UT) v + 61 111K1~ ,; + 62 112

13 v + 63 113lL4J v + 64 114('15) ,; + 65 11516 ,; + 66 11617 ,; + 67 117

(18) ,; + 68 11819 ,; + 69 11920 ,; + 70 12021 v + 71 12122 v + 72 12223 ,; + 73 12324 v + 74 12425 v + 75 1252& v + 76 126

f'l.7) v + 77 12728 78 12829 79 12930 80 13031 81 13132 82 13233 83 13334 84 13435 85 13536 86 13637 87 13738 88 13839 89 13940 90 14041 91 14142 92 14243 93 14344 94 14445 95 14546 96 14647 97 14748 98 14849 99 14950 100 150


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeAddress: COM\1ISSIONER FOR PATENTS

p.o. Box 1450Alexandria, \rupjnia 22313-1-150www.uspto.gov

APPUCATION NUMBER

09/843,923

PA1ENT NUMBER GROUP ART UNIT

2142

FH-E WRAPPER LOCATION

06BO

Change of Address/Power of Attorney

The following fields have been set to Customer Number 44989 on

• Correspondence Address• Power of Attorney

The address of record for Customer Number 44989 is:HARRITY & SNYDER, LLP11240 WAPLES MILL ROADSUITE 300FAIRFAX, VA 22030

The Practitioners of record for Customer Number 44989 are:

PTO INSTRUCTIONS:

Please take the following action when the correspondence address has been changed to a customernumber:1) Add 'ADDRESS CHANGE TO CUSTOMER NUMBER' on the next available content line ofthe File Jacket.2) Put a line through the old address on the File Jacket and enter the Customer Number as thenew address.3) File this Notice in the File Jacket.

Please take the following action when the correspondence address has NOT been changed:1) File this Notice in the File Jacket




Sergey Brin





AMENDMENT/REPLY TRANSMITTAL LETTER

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office220 20th Street S.Customer Window, Mail Stop AmendmentCrystal Plaza Two, Lobby, Room IB03Arlington, Virginia 22202

Sir:


D A Petition for Extension of Time is also enclosed.



o A request for Entry and Consideration of Submission under 37 C.F.R. § 1.129(a)is also enclosed.

'I

',,' ,\.e... . .P'I/ t

AmendmentJReply Transmittal LetterApplication Serial No. 09/843,923Attorney's Docket No. 0026-0002

Page 2

IZI' No additional claim fee is required.

o An additional claim fee is required, and is calculated as shown below:

AMENDED CLAIMS


PreviouslyPaid For

Total Minus x $18.00 = 0

Claims

Ind. Minus x $ 88.00::;; 0

Claims


Total Amendment Fee 0


TOTAL ADDITIONAL FEE DUE FOR THIS AMENDMENT 0







AmendmentJReply Transmittal LetterApplication Serial No. 09/843,923Attorney's Docket No. 0026-0002

Page 3






Reg. No. 39,574

By:B Qt\%-Paul A. Harrity ~


Customer Number: 44989Date: November 22, 2004


SergeyBrin




U.S. Patent and Trademark Office220 20th Street SouthCustomer Window, Mail Stop AmendmentCrystal Plaza Two, Lobby, Room IB03Arlington, Virginia 22202



AMENDMENT

In response to the non-final Office Action dated August 23,2004, please amend the

above-identified application as follows:







Listing of Claims:

1. (Original) A method for enticing users to access a web page, comprising:

uploading a first image in a story line to the web page; and

periodically uploading successive images, following the first image, to the web page

according to the story line.

2. (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising:

generating a plurality of images that tell a story according to the story line, the images

including the first image and the successive images; and

storing the images on a server associated with the web page.

3. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein the first image and the successive

images include animated images.

4. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein each of the first image and the

successive images includes a series of animated images.

5. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein the uploading includes:

presenting the first image for viewing over a network; and

wherein the periodically uploading includes:

2



presenting the successive images for viewing over the network.

6. (Original) The method of claim 5, wherein the presenting the first image

includes:

displaying the first image on the web page; and

wherein the presenting the successive images includes:

displaying the successive images on the web page.

7. (Currently Amended) The method of claim 6, wherein the first image and the

successive images are displayed near or with at least one of a company's logo [[and]] or an

advertisement.

8. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein the periodically uploading includes:

uploading the successive images after each predetermined period of time.

9. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein the periodically uploading includes:

uploading the successive images after random periods oftime.

10. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein the first image and the successive

images include video images.

11. (Original) A system for attracting users to a web page, comprising:

3



means for uploading a first image in a story line to the web page; and

means for periodically uploading successive images, following the first image, to the web

page according to the story line.

12. (Original) A computer-readable medium that stores instructions executable by

one or more processors to perform a method for attracting users to a web page, comprising:

instructions for uploading an initial object in a story line to the web page; and

instructions for periodically uploading successive objects, following the initial object, to

the web page according to the story line.

13. (Currently Amended) The computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the

initial and successive objects include at least one of animated images, video images, [[and]] or

audio information.

14. (Original) A server, comprising:



upload an initial object in a story line to a site on a network, and

periodically upload successive objects, following the initial object, to the site

according to the story line to entice users to return to the site.

15. (Original) A method for attracting users to a site on a network, comprising:

4



receiving a plurality of images that tell a story according to a story line; and

successively displaying the images on the site according to the story line.

16. (Original) The method of claim 15, wherein the successively displaying includes:

displaying a first one ofthe images on the site for a predetermined amount of

time, and

displaying next ones of the images on the site after each predetermined amount of

time.

17. (Original) The method of claim 15, wherein the successively displaying includes:

displaying a first one of the images on the site for a first amount oftime, and

displaying next ones of the images on the site for random amounts of time after

the first amount of time.

18. (Original) A method for enticing users to access a web page, comprising:






19. (Original) The method of claim 18, wherein the modifying a standard company

5



logo includes:


animated images.

20. (Currently Amended) The method of claim 18, wherein the modifying a standard



of video [[and]] or audio data.

21. (Original) The method of claim 18, wherein the special event includes a holiday.

22. (Original) The method of claim 18, wherein the associating one or more search

terms includes:


23. (Original) The method of claim 18, wherein the uploading the special event logo

includes:


24. (Currently Amended) The method of claim 18, wherein the providing search

results includes:


6



using the search query to search at least one of a network, an index, [[and]] or a directory,

and


25. (Original) The method of claim 18, wherein the modifying a standard company

logo includes:




event logo.

26. (Currently Amended) A computer-readable medium that stores instructions


comprising:


instructions for associating at least one of a link [[and]] or search results with the special

event logo;




27. (Original) A server connected to a network, comprising:

7










event.

8



REMARKS

In the non-final Office Action, the Examiner rejected claims 1-8, 10-16, 18-21,23, and

25-27 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by Freiberger et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,034,652);

rejected claim 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Freiberger et al. in view of

Mukherjea et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,317,740); rejected claim 24 under 35 U.S.c. § 103(a) as

unpatentable over Freiberger et al. in view of Coden et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,873,080); and

rejected claims 9 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Freiberger et al. in view

of Glazman et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,264,555).

By this Amendment, Applicant amends claims 7, 13,20,24, and 26 to improve form.

Applicant respectfully traverses the Examiner's rejections under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103.

Claims 1-27 remain pending.

In paragraphs 2-25 of the Office Action, the Examiner rejected claims 1-8, 10-16, 18-21,

23, and 25-27 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as allegedly anticipated by Freiberger et al. Applicant

respectfully traverses the rejection.

A proper rejection under 35 U.S.c. § 102 requires that a single reference teach every

aspect of the claimed invention either expressly or impliedly. Any feature not directly taught

must be inherently present. In other words, the identical invention must be shown in as complete

detail as contained in the claim. See M.P.E.P. § 2131. Freiberger et al. does not disclose or

suggest the combination of features recited in claims 1-8, 10-16, 18-21,23, and 25-27.

Independent claim 1, for example, recites a method for enticing users to access a web

page, comprising uploading a first image in a story line to the web page; and periodically

9

Ii 'Y1 . ,



uploading successive images, following the first image, to the web page according to the story

line.

Freiberger et al. does not disclose or suggest the combination of features recited in claim

1. For example, Freiberger et al. does not disclose or suggest uploading a first image in a story

line to a web page. Instead, Freiberger et al. discloses presenting information to a person in the

vicinity of a display device in a manner that engages the peripheral attention of the person (col. 2,

lines 2-4). Freiberger et al. discloses that the information is embodied as one or more sets of

content data that represent sensory data that is either video or audio data (col. 2, lines 20-22).

Freiberger et al. also discloses that images generated from the content data are displayed

automatically in a predetermined manner without user intervention (col. 2, lines 38-41).

Nowhere does Freiberger et al. disclose or suggest that an image in a story line is uploaded to a

web site, as required by claim 1.

The Examiner alleged that Freiberger et al. discloses uploading an image and cited

column 2, lines 28-34, of Freiberger et al. for support (Office Action, paragraph 4). Applicant

submits that the Examiner has not addressed the features of claim 1. Claim 1 does not merely

recite uploading an image, but instead recites uploading an image in a story line to a web site.

The disclosure of Freiberger et al. is deficient in at least two respects: (1) nowhere does

Freiberger et al. disclose or suggest that the images or content data that are presented to the user

are part of a story line; and (2) nowhere does Freiberger et al. disclose or suggest uploading the

images or content data to a web page, as both required by claim 1.

With regard to (1), Freiberger et al. discloses that video data that might be used as the

content data includes advertisements, moving and still videos (e.g., nature scenes, pictures of

10



family members, MTV music segments, or video from a camera monitoring a specified location),

financial data, or news summaries (col. 7, lines 28-35). Nowhere does Freiberger et al. disclose

or suggest that the content data includes a first image in a story line, as required by claim 1.

With regard to (2), Freiberger et al. discloses that the content data is obtained by a content

display system and stored in a database in memory of the computer used to implement the

content display system (col. 21, lines 20-24). Freiberger et al. discloses that the content display

systems are implemented on user computers to provide the content data to the user (col. 2, lines

28-34; and col. 13, lines 43-48). Nowhere does Freiberger et al. disclose or suggest that the

content data is uploaded to a web page, as required by claim 1.

Freiberger et al. also does not disclose or suggest periodically uploading successive

images, following the first image, to the web page according to the story line, as further required

by claim 1. The Examiner alleged that Freiberger et al. discloses periodically uploading

successive images and cited column 2, lines 28-34, of Freiberger et al. for support (Office

Action, paragraph 4). Applicant again submits that the Examiner has not addressed the features

of claim 1. Claim 1 does not merely recite periodically uploading successive images, but instead

recites periodically uploading successive images, following the first image, to the web page

according to the story line. As explained above, Freiberger et al. does not disclose uploading

images to a web page according to a story line.

For at least these reasons, Applicant submits that claim 1 is not anticipated by Freiberger

et al. Claims 2-8 and 10 depend from claim 1 and are, therefore, not anticipated by Freiberger et

al. for at least the reasons given with regard to claim 1. Claims 2-8 and 10 are also not

anticipated by Freiberger et al. for reasons of their own.

11



Claim 2, for example, recites generating a plurality of images that tell a story according to

the story line, where the images include the first image and the successive images; and storing

the images on a server associated with the web page. Freiberger et al. does not disclose or

suggest this combination of features.

The Examiner alleged that Freiberger et al. discloses generating a plurality of images and

storing the images on a server and cited column 3, lines 63·65, column 2, lines 22-25, and

column 14, lines 12-14, of Freiberger et al. for support (Office Action, paragraph 5). Applicant

submits that the Examiner has not addressed the features of claim 2. Claim 2 does not merely

recite generating a plurality of images and storing the images on a server, but instead recites

generating a plurality of images that tell a stOry according to the stOry line, where the images

include the first image and the successive images; and storing the images on a server associated

with the web page. In addition, the sections of Freiberger et al. identified by the Examiner do not


At column 3, lines 63-65, Freiberger et al. discloses "The content display system uses the

provided set of instructions to selectively display on the display device an image or images

generated from the provided content data." Nowhere in this section, or elsewhere, does

Freiberger et al. disclose or suggest generating a plurality of images that tell a story according to

a story line, as required by claim 2.

At column 2, lines 22-25, Freiberger et al. discloses "Each set of content data is

formulated by a content provider and made available for use by an attention manager according

to the invention." Nowhere in this section, or elsewhere, does Freiberger et al. disclose or

suggest storing the images on a server associated with a web page, as required by claim 2.

12

f "t .



At column 14, lines 12-14, Freiberger et al. discloses "The application manager 201,

content providing systems 202 and content display systems 203 can be implemented using

appropriately programmed digital computers." Nowhere in this section, or elsewhere, does

Freiberger et al. disclose or suggest storing the images on a server associated with a web page, as


For at least these additional reasons, Applicant submits that claim 2 is not anticipated by

Freiberger et al.

Claim 7 recites that the first image and the successive images are displayed near or with

at least one of a company's logo or an advertisement. Freiberger et al. does not disclose or

suggest this combination of features.

The Examiner alleged that Freiberger et al. discloses displaying a first image and

successive images near or with at least one of a company's logo and an advertisement and cited

column 7, lines 26-30, ofFreiberger et al. for support (Office Action, paragraph 10). Applicant

disagrees.

At column 7, lines 26-30, Freiberger et al. discloses "The kinds of content data that can

be used with the attention manager are virtually limitless. For example, video data that might be

used as content data includes data that can be used to generate advertisements of interest to the

user ...." In other words, Freiberger et al. discloses that the content data may be advertisement

data. Contrary to the Examiner's allegation, this does not mean or suggest that the content data is

displayed near or with an advertisement, as would be required by claim 7, but instead that it is an

advertisement itself.

13



The Examiner further alleged that "[a]lthough Freiberger teaches the use of an

advertisement, he does not teach the use of a company logo. However, the use of a company

logo in conjunction with an advertisement is deemed to be inherent" (Office Action, paragraph

10). The Examiner's "inherency" argument falls short of meeting the burden of proof required to

establish a rejection based on inherency.

According to M.P.E.P. § 2112, the fact that a certain result or characteristic may occur or

be present in the prior art is not sufficient to establish the inherency of that result or

characteristic. In relying upon the theory of inherency, the Examiner must provide a basis in fact

and/or technical reasoning to reasonably support the determination that the allegedly inherent

characteristic necessarily flows from the teachings of the applied prior art. Inherency cannot be

established by probabilities or possibilities. The mere fact that a certain thing may result from a

given set of circumstances is not sufficient. In this case, the Examiner's allegation does not meet

the requisite burden of proof to establish inherency.

For at least these additional reasons, Applicant submits that claim 7 is not anticipated by

Freiberger et al.

Independent claims 11, 12, 14, and 15 recite features similar to features recited in claim 1.

Claims 11, 12, 14, and 15 are, therefore, not anticipated by Freiberger et al. for reasons similar to

reasons given with regard to claim 1. Claims 13 and 16 depend from claims 12 and 15,

respectively, and are, therefore, not anticipated by Freiberger et al. for at least the reasons given

with regard to claims 12 and 15.

Independent claim 18 recites a method for enticing users to access a web page,

comprising modifying a standard company logo for a special event to create a special event logo;

14



associating one or more search terms with the special event logo; uploading the special event

logo to the web page; receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and providing search

results relating to the special event in response to the user selection.


18. For example, Freiberger et al. does not disclose or suggest modifying a standard company

logo for a special event to create a special event logo.

The Examiner alleged that Freiberger et al. discloses modifying a standard company logo

for a special event and cited column 7, lines 26-35, of Freiberger et al. for support (Office

Action, paragraph 18). Applicant disagrees.

At column 7, lines 26-35, Freiberger et al. discloses:

The kinds of content data that can be used with the attention manager are virtuallylimitless. For example, video data that might be used as content data includes data that canbe used to generate advertisements of interest to the user, moving and still video imageswhich can be real-time or pre-recorded (e.g., nature scenes, pictures of family members,MTV music segments, or video from a camera monitoring a specified location, such as skislopes or a traffic intersection, for conditions at that location), financial data (e.g., stockticker infonnation) or news summaries.

Nowhere in this section, or elsewhere, does Freiberger et al. disclose or remotely suggest

modifying a standard company logo for a special event to create a special event logo, as required

by claim 18.

The Examiner also alleged that a "company logo modified for a special event is still

considered a type of content data described by the prior art" (Office Action, paragraph 18).

Applicant respectfully submits that the Examiner's allegation is flawed. For example, claim 18

does not merely recite a special event logo, but instead recites modifying a standard company

logo for a special event to create a special event logo. Freiberger et al. does not disclose or

remotely suggest this feature of claim 18. Further, the Examiner's allegation that a special event

15



logo falls under the content data disclosed by Freiberger et al. finds absolutely no support in the

Freiberger et al. disclosure.

Freiberger et al. also does not disclose or suggest associating one or more search terms

with the special event logo, as further recited in claim 18. The Examiner alleged that Freiberger

et al. discloses associating one or more search terms and cited column 27, lines 25-30, of

Freiberger et al. for support (Office Action, paragraph 18). Applicant disagrees.


Links can be established to any of a variety of infonnation sources and types ofinfonnation sources. Typically, the link will be made to an infonnation source thatprovides infonnation that is related to the content data which was being displayed whenthe link was established;

Nowhere in this section, or elsewhere, does Freiberger et al. disclose or suggest associating one

or more search terms with a special event logo, as required by claim 18.

The Examiner also alleged that "[i]n order for information resources to be obtained, some

sort of information must be associated with the special event logo. Therefore, having

information associated with a special event logo is deemed inherent and the association of a

search term with the special event logo is considered an advantageous way of associating

information with a special event logo" (Office Action, paragraph 18). Applicant submits that the

Examiner's allegations find no support in the disclosure of Freiberger et al.

As explained above, Freiberger et al. does not disclose or suggest modifying a standard

company logo for a special event to create a special event logo. Therefore, Freiberger et al.

cannot disclose or suggest associating anything with a special event logo. Further, the

Examiner's allegation that having information associated with a special event logo is deemed

inherent falls short of meeting the burden of proof that is required to establish inherency. The

16



Examiner is invited to read M.P.E.P. § 2112 to discover what is required for an allegation based

on inherency. Also, the Examiner's allegation that associating a search term with a special event

logo is an advantageous way of associating information with a special event logo is a conclusory

statement with no support in fact.

Freiberger et al. also does not disclose or suggest uploading a special event logo to a web

page, as further recited in claim 18. The Examiner alleged that Freiberger et al. discloses

uploading a special event logo and cited column 2, lines 28-34, of Freiberger et al. for support

(Office Action, paragraph 18). Applicant disagrees.


Once one or more sets of content data has been acquired, a content display systemintegrates scheduling information for all sets of content data to produce a scheduleaccording to which an image or images corresponding to the sets of content data aredisplayed on a display device associated with the content display system.

Nowhere in this section, or elsewhere, does Freiberger et al. disclose or suggest uploading

content data, let alone a special event logo, to a web page, as required by claim 18. Instead,

Freiberger et al. discloses that the content data is obtained by a content display system and stored

in a database in memory of the computer used to implement the content display system (col. 21,

lines 20-24).

Freiberger et al. also does not disclose or suggest providing search results relating to the

special event in response to a user selection of the special event logo, as further recited in claim

18. The Examiner alleged that Freiberger et al. discloses providing search results relating to the

special event and cited column 27, lines 25-30, of Freiberger et al. for support (Office Action,

paragraph 18). Applicant disagrees.

17



Column 27, lines 25-30, of Freiberger et al. has been reproduced above. Nowhere in this

section, or elsewhere, does Freiberger et al. disclose or remotely suggest providing search results

relating to the special event in response to a user selection of the special event logo, as required

by claim 18.


et al. Claims 19-21,23, and 25 depend from claim 18 and are, therefore, not anticipated by

Freiberger et al. for at least the reasons given with regard to claim 18.

Independent claim 26 recites features similar to features recited in claim 18. Claim 26 is,

therefore, not anticipated by Freiberger et al. for reasons similar to reasons given with regard t6

claim 18.

Independent claim 27 recites a server connected to a network that comprises a memory

configured to store instructions and a processor configured to execute the instructions to

determine a home page for a web page on the network, identify a standard company logo on the

home page, modify the standard company logo with special event information corresponding to a

special event to create a special event logo, and replace the standard company logo with the

special event logo during the special event.


27. For example, Freiberger et al. does not disclose or suggest a processor configured to

determine a home page for a web page on the network, identify a standard company logo on the

home page, modify the standard company logo with special event information corresponding to a

special event to create a special event logo, or replace the standard company logo with the special

event logo during the special event. The Examiner alleged that Freiberger et al. discloses a

18



processor configured to perform these features and cited column 14, lines 19-20, of Freiberger et

al. for support (Office Action, paragraph 25). Applicant disagrees.

At column 14, lines 19-20, Freiberger et al. discloses "a processing device (such as a

conventional microprocessor) .... " Nowhere in this section, or elsewhere, does Freiberger et al.

disclose or even remotely suggest a processor configured to determine a home page for a web

page on the network, identify a standard company logo on the home page, modify the standard

company logo with special event information corresponding to a special event to create a special

event logo, or replace the standard company logo with the special event logo during the special

event, as required by claim 27.

The Examiner also alleged that "[r]eferring again to the package file presented by

Freiberger (column 21, lines 21-55), he teaches the use ofa package file in order to execute

updates to his system. Included in the package file is a network address (column 21, lines 33-35)

and update instructions for the content data (column 21, lines 50-55)" (Office Action, paragraph

25). Applicant submits that the Examiner's allegations do not address any of the features of

claim 18 and, therefore, are insufficient to establish a proper case of anticipation with regard to

claim 27.


In paragraphs 27 and 28 of the Office Action, the Examiner rejected claim 22 under 35

U.S.C. § 103(a) as allegedly unpatentable over Freiberger et al. in view of Mukherjea et al.

Applicant traverses the rejection.

19



Claim 22 depends from claim 18. Without acquiescing in the Examiner's rejection,

Applicant submits that the disclosure of Mukheriea et al. does not cure the deficiencies in the

disclosure of Freiberger et al. identified above with regard to claim 18. Therefore, claim 22 is

patentable over Freiberger et al. and Mukherjea et al., whether taken alone or in any reasonable

combination, for at least the reasons given with regard to claim 18.

In paragraphs 29 and 30 of the Office Action, the Examiner rejected claim 24 under 35

U.S.C. § 103(a) as allegedly unpatentable over Freiberger et al. in view of Coden et al. Applicant

traverses the rejection.

Claim 24 depends from claim 18. Without acquiescing in the Examiner's rejection,

Applicant submits that the disclosure of Coden et al. does not cure the deficiencies in the

disclosure of Freiberger et al. identified above with regard to claim 18. Therefore, claim 24 is

patentable over Freiberger et al. and Coden et al., whether taken alone or in any reasonable

combination, for at least the reasons given with regard to claim 18.

In paragraphs 31 and 32 of the Office Action, the Examiner rejected claims 9 and 17

under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as allegedly unpatentable over Freiberger et al. in view of Glazman et

al. Applicant traverses the rejection.

Claims 9 and 17 depend from claims 1 and 15, respectively. Without acquiescing in the

Examiner's rejection, Applicant submits that the disclosure of Glazman et al. does not cure the

deficiencies in the disclosure of Freiberger et al. identified above with regard to claims 1 and 15.

Therefore, claims 9 and 17 are patentable over Freiberger et al. and Glazman et al., whether

taken alone or in any reasonable combination, for at least the reasons given with regard to claims

1 and 15.

20




Examiner's reconsideration of the application and the timely allowance of claims 1-27.

To the extent necessary, a petition for an extension oftime under 35 C.F.R. 1.136 is


including extension oftime fees, to Deposit Account No. 50-1070 and please credit any excess




Date: November 22,2004


By: :§H5?f=\£?;Reg. No. 39,574

21

X8O= .

X8D:

OTHER THANSMALL ENTITY

RATE FEE710.00

OR

OR~--+----I

OR1----1----1

OR +270=

OR·~T. FEE....__4

OR )($18=

OR X$18=

..... ADDI-RATE nONAL

FEE

OR X$18=

OR X8D:

OR +270=

OR:.TOTAL a..-_--1. OTHERTHAN

OR,· SMALL ENTITY

ADDI- .··'RATE nONAL

~i=EE

OR +270=·

OR' TOTAlADOIT. FEEa..-_.....

.plication or Docket Number

RATE FEEBASIC FEE 355.00

X$9=

X40=,

+135=

TOrAl

SMALL EtrnTYyYPE c:::::J

ADDI-RATE TlONAL

FEEX$9a

X40a '

+135-

JOTAl.ADDIT. FEE

ADD1-RATE TIONAL

FEE

')($9-

X40-.;. .'

+135-

TOTAl., .

ADDIT.FEE

o

PRESENT.•EXTRA

•

NUMBER EXTRA

..

-------------------------.

NUMSERRLED

Minus•Ind pendent Minus... =

PATENT APPLICAnON FEE DETERMINAnON RECORD• Effective October 1, 2000

ARST PRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE DEPENDENTCLAIM

Total

TOTAL CLAIMS

TOTAL CHARGEABLE CLAIMS

FOR

MULTIPLE DEPENDENT ClAIM PRESENT

INDEPENDENT CLAIMS minus 3 =

t

~

..-~

~

,,

I

ADDI- :~TE TlONAL

FEE

OR X80=1--~I__-__rI

OR X$18=.

ADDI-RATE TIONAL

FEE

)($.9=

X40e,

+1~

TOTALACDIT.FEE

PRESENTEXTRA

=••Minus

Ind pendent • Minus'" =

ARST PRESENTATION OF MUlTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM

Total

OR +270=• If It! entry In column 1 Is lesslhan the entry In coJumn 2. wrtte V In column 3. "''''!!T~O!'!!!TAl.!'!'"Io--''''.. If the '\oOghest Number Pre'Jlously Pai:J Fo'" IN THIS SPACE Is Jess than 20. ntar "20.. OR ADOJT: FEE....--04"'If \he "HlghesI Number PrevIously Paid Fot' IN THIS SPACE Is Jess Ihan 3, enter~.

The ~gheSt Number Previously Paid~ (ToIaI or Indep ndent) Is the highest nwnb r found In Ihe appropriate box In column , •

L

o FORM PTOo87S(Rev. lIIOD)

PallInlI1Jld TI1IdemaIll 0IIiclI. u.s. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE'U.S.GPO:~CD

This Page is Inserted by IFW Indexing and ScanningOperations and is not part of the Official Record

BEST AVAILABLE IMAGE;S

Defective images within this document are accurate representatIons ofthe originaldocuments submitted by the applicant.

Defects in the images include but are not limited to the items checked:

o BLACK BORDERS

o IMAGE CUT OFF AT TOP, BOTTOM OR SIDES

o FADED TEXT OR DRAWING

o BLURRED OR ILLEGmLE TEXT OR DRAWING

o SKEWED/SLANTED IMAGES

o COLOR OR BLACK AND WIDTE PHOTOGRAPHS

o GRAY SCALE DOCUMENTS

o LINES OR MARKS ON ORIGINAL DOCUMENT

o REFERENCE(S) OR EXHmIT(S) SUBMITTED ARE POOR QUALITY

o OTHER:-~~------------------

IMAGES ARE BEST AVAILABLE COPY.As rescanning these documents will not correct the imageproblems checked, please do not report these problems tothe IFW Image Problem Mailbox..

/

_U_N_IT_E_D_ST_A_T_E_S_P_A_T_E_N_T_A_N_D_T_R_A_D_E_M_A_R_K_O_F_FI_C_E =====-:-::-===~==~~.UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeAddress: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS I

P.O. Box 1450Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450www.uspto.gov

APPLICATION NO.

09/843,923

FILING DATE

04/3012001


Sergey Brin

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

0026-0002

CONFIRMATION NO.

9916

44989 7590 0812312004 EXAMINER

AILES, BENJAMIN AHARRITY & SNYDER, LLP11240 WAPLES MILL ROADSUITE 300FAIRFAX, VA 22030

ART UNIT

2142


PAPER NUMBER


PTO-90C (Rev. 10/03)


Application No.

09/843,923

Examiner

Applicant(s)

BRIN, SERGEY

Art Unit


-- The MAILING DATE 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 J. MONTH(S) FROMTHE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.- Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, maya reply be timely filed

after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.- If the period for reply specified above is less than thirty (30) days, a reply within the statutory minimum of. thirty (30) days will be considered timely.- 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 anyearned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).

Status

1)[8] Responsive to communication(s) filed on 30 Apri/ 2001.

2a)0 This action is FINAL. 2b)[8] This action is non-final.




4)[8] Claim(s) 1-27 is/are pending in the application.



6)[8] Claim(s) 1-27 is/are rejected.



Application Papers


10)[2J The drawing(s) filed on 30 Apri/2001 is/are: a)[2J accepted or b)O 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):




12)0 Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).

a)O All b)D Some * c)O None of:




application from the International Bureau (peT Rule 17.2(a».


Attachment(s)

1) [8J Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)


3) J&:! Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449 or PTO/SB/08)Paper No(s)/Mail Date __.

4) 0 Interview Summary (PTO-413)Paper No(s)/Mail Date. __ .

5) 0 Notice of Informal Patent Application (PTO-152)6) 0 Other: __.

u.s. Patent and Trademark Office



Art Unit: 2142

DETAILED ACTION

1. Claims 1-27 have been examined.


2. 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 -

(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section122(b). by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or(2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States beforethe invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed underthe treaty defined in section 351 (a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of anapplication filed in the United States only if the international application designated the UnitedStates and was published under Article 21 (2) of such treaty in the English language.

3. Claims 1-8,10-16,18-21,23 and 25-27 are rejected under 35

U.S;C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Freiberger (U.S. 6,034,652).

4. As per claims 1 and 11, Freiberger teaches a method/system for enticing

users to access a web page, comprising:

-uploading a first image... (column 2, lines 28-34).

-periodically uploading successive images... (column 2, lines 28-34).

5. As per claim 2 in accordance with claim 1, Freiberger teaches further,

-the generation of a plurality of images... (column 3, lines 63-65).

-the storing of images on a server. .. (column 2, lines 22-25, and column

14, lines 12-14).

The content provider mentioned in the prior art ads as the server for the

attention manager, or the client. It is deemed inherent for the content provider

Page 2


Art Unit: 2142

server to include space to store the content being this is where the content data

is provided.

6. As per claim 3 in accordance with claim 1, Freiberger teaches the first

image and the successive images include animated images (column 6, lines 56-

64)


image and the successive images include a series of animated images (column

, 6, lines 56-64).

8. As per claim 5 in accordance with claim 1, Freiberger teaches the

uploading process including:

-presenting the first image... (column 14, lines 36-42).

-presenting the successive images... (column 14, lines 36-42).

Page 3

Content providing systems communicate with the content display systems,

meaning the content providers (the servers) send the content display system (the

client) the images for viewing.


presenting of the first image including:

-displaying the first image... (column 2, lines 28-34).

-displaying the successive images... (column 2, lines 28-34).

10. As per claim 7 in accordance with claim 6, Freiberger teaches a method

wherein the first image and the successive images are displayed near or with at

least one of a company's logo and an advertisement (column 7, lines 26-30).


Art Unit: 2142

Although Freiberger teaches the use of an advertisement, he does not

teach the use of a company logo. However, the use of a company logo in

conjunction with an advertisement is deemed to be inherent.


periodically uploading including:

-uploading the successive images after each predetermined ... (column 2,

lines 38-42).


image and the successive images including video images (column 6, lines 57-

64).

13. As per claim 12, Freiberger discloses a computer-readable medium that

stores instructions to perform a method, comprising:

-instructions for uploading an initial object. .. (column 3, lines 63-65).

-instructions for periodically uploading successive objects... (column 3,

lines 63-65).

14. As per claim 13 in accordance with claim 12, Freiberger teaches the use

of a computer-readable medium where the initial and successive objects include

Page 4

at least one of animated images, video images, and audio information (Column 6,

lines 56-64).

15. As per claim 14, Freiberger teaches a server comprising:

-a memory... (column 14, lines 20-21).

-a processor (column 14, lines 19-20) configured to:

-upload an initial object... (column 14, lines 36-44).


Art Unit: 2142

-periodically upload successive objects... (column 14, lines 36-44)..

16. As per claim 15, Freiberger teaches a method for attracting users to a site

on a network, comprising:

-receiving a plurality of images... (column 4, lines 32-34).

-successively displaying the images... (column 4, 47-55).

17. As per claim 16 in accordance with claim 15, Freiberger teaches a

successively displaying including:

-displaying a first one of the images... (column 2, lines 39-41 ).

-displaying next ones of the images... (column 2, lines 39-41).

18. As per claim 18, Freiberger teaches:

-modifying a standard company logo for a special event... (column 7, lines

26-35).

A company logo modified for a special event is still considered a type of

content data described by the prior art.

-associating one or more search terms... (column 27, lines 25-30).

In order for information resources to be obtained, some sort of information

must be associated with the special event logo. Therefore, having information

associated with a special event logo is deemed to be inherent and the

association of a search term with the special event logo is considered to be an

advantageous way of associating information with a special event logo.

-uploading the special event logo... (column 2, lines 28-34).

-receiving a user selection ... (column 27, lines 30-32).

Page 5


Art Unit: 2142

-providing search results relating to the special event... (column 27, lines

25-30).

19. As per claim 19 in accordance with claim 18, Freiberger teaches:

-creating the special event logo by modifying the standard company logo

with one ore more animated images (column 6, lines 56-64).

20. As per claim 20 in accordance with claim 18, Freiberger teaches:

-creating the special event logo by modifying the standard company logo

with at least one of video and audio data (column 6, lines 56-64).

21. As per claim 21 in accordance with claim 18, Freiberger teaches wherein

the special event includes a holiday.

Although holiday is not explicitly stated, the scope of the prior art

language, "the kinds of content data that can be used... are virtually limitless,"

would inherently include a holiday as a category for content data.


uploading of the special event logo including:

-displaying the special event logo on the web page... (column 4, lines 47-

55).


modifying of a standard logo including:

-determining a home page... (column 21, lines 33-35).

-identifying the standard company logo... (column 21, lines 50-55).

-modifying the standard company logo... (column 21 lines 50-55).

Page 6


Art Unit: 2142

Freiberger teaches the use of what he calls a package file in order to

make updates to certain data content. One key characteristic of the package file

is the association with a network address, which can include a home page.

Computer graphics are known to evolve over the years to become more pleasing

Page 7

to the human eye. A package file used by Freiberger in order to make updates to

image files would be a valuable tool.

24. As per claim 26, Freiberger teaches the use of a computer-readable

medium that stores instructions (column 21, lines 20-25) executable by one or

more processors (column 14, lines 19-20) to perform methods, comprising:

-instructions for creating a special event logo... (column 21, lines 25-28).

-instructions for associating at least one of... (column 27, lines 18 and 25-

30).

-instructions for uploading the special event logo... (column 21, lines 54-

55).

-instructions for receiving a user selection ... (column 27, lines 30-32).

-instructions for providing the link or search results ... (column 27, ines 25-

30).

Freiberger discloses the use of a package file which can be used to

update content data. Included in this package file are instructions on what needs

to be updated where and how this data is to be updated. A package file is an

easy way to execute an update to the content data in an organized manner.

25. As per claim 27, Freiberger teaches the use of a server connected to a

network, comprising:


Art Unit: 2142

-a memory... (column 14, lines 20-21).

-a processor (column 14, lines 19-20) configured to execute instructions

to:

-determine a home page...

-identify a standard company logo...

-modify the standard company logo...

-replace the standard company logo...

Referring again to the package file presented by Freiberger (column 21,

lines 21-55), he teaches the use of a package file in order to execute updates to

his system. Included in the package file is a network address (column 21, lines

33-35) and update instructions for the content data (column 21, lines 50-55).


26. 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 describedas set forth in section 102 of this title. if the differences between the subject matter sought tobe patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have beenobvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to whichsaid subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which theinvention was made.

27. Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over

Freiberger (U.S. 6,034,652) in view of Mukherjea et al (6,317,740).

28. Freiberger fails to teach a method wherein the special event logo is

identified by a search term. However, Mukherjea et al discloses the use of a

search term relating to a special event logo (column 4, lines 34-36). It would

Page 8


Art Unit: 2142

have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant's

Page 9

invention to associate a keyword search term with a special event logo in order to

make image searches more useful and effective.

29. Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over

Freiberger (U.S. 6,034,652) in view of Coden et al. (U.S. 5,873,080).

30. Freiberger fails to teach a search engine method when searching using a

key word. However, Coden et al. disclose a search engine that:

-generates a search query... (column 3, lines 33-36).

-uses the search query to search ... (column 3, lines 26-30 and 33-36).

-obtains the search results ... (column 3, lines 33-36).

It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of

applicant's invention to associate a search engine as disclosed by Coden et al. in

order to make searching for media resourceful.

31. Claims 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being

unpatentable over Freiberger (U.S. 6,034,652) in view of Glazman et al. (U.S.

6,264,555).

32. Freiberger fails to teach the periodically uploading of images after random

periods of time. However, Glazman et al. discloses a display apparatus which

displays images, including text, video displays, graphics, animations, live action

video, or any other material capable of display on a video display. Glazman et al.

disclose the displaying of these images done at random times (column 4, lines

17-20 and 22-28). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at

. ,Application/Control Number: 09/843,923

Art Unit: 2142

Page 10

the time of applicant's invention to use random time parameters when displaying

images in order to entice users to view a webpage more frequently.

Conclusion



Gorbet et al. (U.S. 6,072,480) disclose a method and apparatus for

controlling composition and performance of soundtracks to accompany a slide

show.

Qureshi et al. (U.S. 6,396,500) disclose a method and system for

generating and displaying a slide show with animations and transitions in a

browser.

Helfman (U.S. 6,119,135) discloses a method for passively browsing the

Internet using images extracted from web pages.

Vanechanos, Jr. (U.S. 5,884,309) discloses an order entry system for the

Internet.

Dunlap et al. (U.S. 6,560,637) disclose a web-enabled presentation device

. and methods of use thereof.

Reber et al. (U.S. 5,995,105) disclose methods and systems for providing

a resource in an electronic network.

Rakavy et al. (U.S. 5,913,040) disclose a method and apparatus for

transmitting and displaying information between a remote network and a local

computer.


Art Unit: 2142

Page 11

Gill et al.(U.S. 6,081,262) disclose a method and apparatus for generating

multi-media presentations.

Paulson (U.S. 2002/0044103 A1) discloses a pre-lane display software

system for retail stores.

Pirani et al (U .S. 5,105,184) disclose methods for displaying and

integrating commercial advertisements with computer software.

Mano et al (U.S. 5,978,807) disclose an apparatus for and method of

automatically downloading and storing Internet web pages.

Dom et al (U.S. 6,166,735) disclose a video story board user interface for

selective downloading and displaying of desired portions of remote-stored video

data objects.

Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from

the examiner should be directed to Benjamin A. Ailes whose telephone number is

703-305-0447. The examiner can normally be ~eached on Monday-Friday (8:00-

5:00).

If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the

examiner's supervisor, Jack Harvey can be reached at (703) 305-9705. The fax

phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is

assigned is (703)308-5358.

· ' .Application/Control Number: 09/843,923

Art Unit: 2142

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

Page 12

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).

Communications via Internet e-mail regarding this application, other than

those under 35 U.S.C. 132 or which otherwise require a signature, may be used

by the applicant and should be addressed to [[email protected]]."

All Internet e-mail communications will be made of record in the

application file. PTO employees do not engage in Internet communications

where there exists a possibility that sensitive information could be identified or

exchanged unless the record includes a properly signed express waiver of the

confidentiality requirements of 35 U.S.C. 122. This is more clearly set forth in the

Interim Internet Usage Policy published in the Official Gazette of the Patent and

Trademark on February 25, 1997 at 1195 OG 89.

Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application

or proceeding should be directed to Group receptionist whose telephone number

is (703)305-3900.

baa CJJn~;B.HARVEY

SUPERVISORY PATENT EXAMINER

SHEET OF-

IIII~I ~IIII~II~II ~IIII~IIIIIAnORNEY'S OKT No. ApPLICATION No.

J~INFORMATION 0026·0002 UnassiQned p

26615 ApPLICANT(S)a.11~DISCLOSURE Sergey BRIN

-:11~PAlmI IIJoJEl4I.l.KOFl'lCl!FILING DATE GROUP

CITATION April 30. 2001 Unassigned :i~ .{;PTO·1449

.~U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS

EXAMINER'S FILINGINITIALS PATENT NO. DATE NAME CLASS SUBCLASS DATE

FOREIGN· PATENT,DOCUMENTS

EXAMINER'S Translation

INITIALS PATENT NO. DATE COUNTRY CLASS SUBCLASS Yes No

OTHER DOCUMENTS (Includin~ Author. Title. Date. Pertinent Pages. Etc.)

gil!!Google;' Google Holiday Logos; www.google,com/holidaylogos; pages 1-8; 2001 (printdate).

fJ/lA Google; Mentalplex; www.google.com/holidaylogos; pages 1-4; April 1. 2000.

EXAMINER~;;;://

DATE CONSIDERED151/7/0'/ge/i/dr:,,, II, 'I£'5 -

EXAMINER: Initial if reference considered, whether or not citation is in conformance with MPEP 609; draw line through citation if not inconformance and not considered. Include copy of this form with next communication to applicant(s).

Best Available Copy


09/843,923ReexaminationBRIN, SERGEY

Notice of References CitedExaminer Art Unit




Name ClassificationCountry Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY

A US-6,034,652 A 03-2000 Freiberger et al. 345/730

B US-6,317,740 B1 11-2001 Mukherjea et al. 707/4

C US-5,873,080 A 02-1999 Coden et al. 707/3

D US-6,396,500 B1 05-2002 Qureshi et al. 345/473

E US-6,119,135 A 09-2000 Helfman, Jonathan Isaac 715/513

F US-5,884,309 A 03-1999 Vanechanos, Jr., Steven L. 707/10

G US-6,560,637 B1 05-2003 Dunlap et al. 709/204

H US-5,995,1 05 A 11-1999 Reber et al. 345/835

I US-5,913,040 A 06-1999 Rakavy et al. 709/232

J US-6,081,262 A 06-2000 Gill etal. 715/500.1

K US-2002/00441 03 A1 04-2002 PAULSON, ROGER LEE 345/1.1

L US-5,105,184 A 04-1992 Pirani et al. 345/629

M US-5,978,807 A 11-1999 Mano et al. 707/10



Country Name ClassificationCountry Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY

N

0

P

Q

R

S

T

NON-PATENT DOCUMENTS

A copy of this reference IS not bemg furnished with this Office action. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).)Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.


U

V

W

X

*

U.s. Palent and Trademark OfficePTO~892 (Rev. 01-2001) Notice of References Cited Part of Paper No. 1

Best Available Copy--------------~ -~--~~--~---~--_._- ._-------~---


09/843,923Reexamination

Notice of References CitedBRIN, SERGEY

Examiner Art Unit


\



. Country Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY Name Classification

A US-6,166,735 A 12-2000 Dam etal. 345/749

B US-6,264,555 B1 07-2001 Glazman et al. 463/1

C US-6,072,480 A 06-2000 Gorbet et al. 345/730

D US-

E US-

F US-

G US-

H US-

I US-

J US-

K US-

L US-

M US-



CountryCountry Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY Name Classification

N

0

P

Q .R

S

T


A copy of this reference IS not bemg furnished with this Office actIOn. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).)Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.


U

V

W

X

.u.S. Patent and Trademark Office


Best Avai\ab\e COpy


Imlml~lmIIUDM~~Dm~~mODImIBib Data Sheet

fILE COpy

•COMHI yOR PATENTS

UNITED STATES PATENT AND "rnADEMARK OFfiCEWI.$H'''C1OH. D.C. 20231

WWW.USplo.gO\l


FILING DATE ATTORNEYSERIAL NUMBER 04/30/2001 CLASS GROUP ART UNIT DOCKET NO.

09/843,923RULE

709 2152 0026-0002

1.o.~Io'Ln';.ANI~


1>- CONTINUING DATA _••********"-""-,,,,**-...,,THIS APPlN CLAIMS BENEFIT OF 60/200,957 05/01/2000

1*. FOREIGN APPLICATIONS ..................""

IF REQUIRED, FOREIGN FILING LICENSE GRANTED** 06/21/2001

Foreign Priority claimed [J yes lila no

\l5 USC 119 (a-d) conditions [J yes IS] no Cl Met afterSTATE OR SHEETS TOTAL INDEPENDENTCOUNTRY DRAWING CLAIMS CLAIMS

met _AlIOwan/L- CA 10 27 8Verified and Z~'~ --~ ~ 81/1~cknowledged Examiner's Signature InitialsIA

HARRITY & SNYDER, l.l.P.Suite 30011240 Waples Mill RoadFairfax ,VA 22030

ITITLE


I[J All Fees II[J 1.16 Fees (Filing) IFILING FEE FEES: Authority has been given in Paper o 1.17 Fees ( Processing Ext. ofRECEIVED No. to charge/credit DEPOSIT ACCOUNT time)

1236 No. for following:ICl1.18 Fees (Issue) IICl Other IICl Credit I

Best AvaUabie Copy

Index of ClaimsApplication No. Applicant(s)

1111I11111111111111

09/843,923Examiner

Benjamin A Ailes

BRIN, SERGEYArt Unit

2142

..J Rejected (Through numeral)Cancelled N Non-Elected A Appeal

= Allowed Restricted I Interference o Objected

DateClaim

roro cc "m

u::: '1::0

101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150

I

I.

....

DateClaimDateClaim

q2 ,j 6213,j· 63

9 ,j 59

In ,j 51'2" ,j 52

3 ,j 1--__+_='53:-+--+--+--+-+-+-+-+-t--rl t---t-~+-+-+-I--If---I_+-+-+-14 ,j ~

5 ,j 556 ,j 567 ,j 578 ,j 58

1--__+_-:-:44:-+__+_+-+--+--+--+--+--iH ." '1----+--=--94=-+-+--+--+--+---+--+--+--+---1 ,..... r--+:;-;-;:-r---r---+-+_+_+_+_+_+_145 95

r--+--,-:46=-+--+---+--+--+---+--+--+--+---11 1-_t---:::96:-+-__+_-+-+--+--+--+--+--+-++--+--.;-~f---I_+-+-+-+-+__+_-+---lr--t-4-;-;7:-t--+--+-+-+-+-t-t---l1--l·' ·., 97 I--+-;-;-;;+---+--+-+-+--1-+-l-H1--+

4-;-:8:-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-1--11--1 ".'.. 98 ,.. , r--+-~+--+--t--t-+--+--+--+--f-j49 ".' 99

'--------'---5"-'0----'----'----'---'-------'------'----'---~'---'1... L_L1:.::O-,,-0L-L--'---'----'----'----''----'----'----'' "'L----'--'--=-'-'--'-...L.--l-..l.-.L.-.L.-L-L-J

~) ,j 1,_ _+--:6:-:;4-1--1--1--+-+-+-+-+-+-1'r-----h(~fr5))'&t-,j.-+--+--+---+---+---+--+--+--+ J 65

16 ,j f----f--:6:-::6-+--+--+--+--+--+--+-+-+-i

17 ,j 67

\j 8 ,j 1---+--::6-::-8+-+-+-+_+-+-+-+-1--1 ,'I--__+_~+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_1111 ,j 6920 ,j 70

21 ,j r--+--,--71'--+--+--+--+---+---+---+--+--+---1 ,.,,'r--+-~-+--+--+--+-+-+-+-+-+-i22 ,j 1--__+_,:,:72:-+__+___+_-+--+--+--+--I--+--1 '1--__+_=+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_123 ,j 7324 ,j 74

25 ,j 1--__+_,:,:75:-+__+___+_+-+--+--+--1--1--1 ....r--+-~-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-iI\W ,j 76il(27)) ,j 77

28 78r--+-=29=-+--+--+--+--+---+--+--+--+---1

1r--+-='79=-+--+--+--+---+---+---+--+--+---1l---r::';-::-+-+-+-+-+-+-l-l-f---I

r--+--=-30'--+--+--+--+---+---+--+--+--+---1I

' 1---+-::-8°7-+__+_+-+--+-+-+_+-+-i.·••·.J·.-----1r--;-::-7+-+-+-+-f--+-+__+___+_--J31 81 ."'"~ ~

33 83~ [ M35 85~ ~

TI ~

~ ~r--+--=--39=-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+---1.·· 1---+--::8

-::-9

+_+_+_+_+-+-+-+-+-I,.I--t--:-::-=-t-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+----jr--+-=--l--l-f--l---l------1---f---f---f--{ ,' 1---+-77--l--l--l-I--I------1I------1---f---f--i ,.. I--+-:-:-::--I---+--+--+--+-+-+--+--+-----j1---+-4-:-:;°:-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-1--11--11

, ,.I--__+_~90;--+-+-++-+--+--+--+--+-_i ....,1------t~7+--+-+__+___+_++-+--+---lr--+-4-,-:1-+--+--+-+-+-+-+--1------11------11.,... 91 '•.•..,..

42 I'· 92.'f-_+--:-:-::-l-+_+_+-+-+-+-+-+----j1----+--=':43=-+--+---+--+--+---+--+--+--+---1 93 .••••••


Best AvaUable Copy

Search Notes Application No. Applicant(s)

IIII III IIII IIIII I 09/843,923 BRIN, SERGEYExaminer Art Unit

Beniamin A Ailes 2142

SEARCHED SEARCH NOTES(INCLUDING SEARCH STRATEGY)


345 730 8/17/2004 BAAPLUS Search 8/11/2004 BAA

345 473 8/17/2004 BAA

709 204 8/17/2004 BAA

709 216 8/17/2004 BAA EAST 8/17/2004 BAA

345 730 8/17/2004 BAA

345 738 8/17/2004 BAA

IEEE Explore 8/10/2004 BAA

ACM Portal 8/10/2004 BAA



U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Best Avanab~e Copy

Part of Paper No. 1

This Page is Inserted by IFW Indexing and ScanningOperations and is not part of the Official Record

BEST AVAILA8LE IMAGES

Defective images within this document are accurate representations ofthe originaldocuments submitted by the applicant.


o BLACK BORDERS



o BLURRED OR ILLEGffiLE TEXT OR DRAWING


o COLOR OR BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAPHS



o REFERENCE(S) OR EXHffiIT(S) SUBMITTED ARE POOR QUALITY

o OTHER:-----~---------------

IMAGES ARE BEST AVAILABLE COPY.As rescanning these documents will not correct the imageproblems checked, please do not report these problems tothe IFW Image Problem Mailbox.

,,

L Number1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

Hits Search Text634251 image diplay

10685 (image diplay) and (random with time)

6258 ((image diplay) and (random with time))and @ay<2000

682 (((image diplay) and (random with time))and @ay<2000) and internet

105 ((((image diplay) and (random with time))and @ay<2000) and internet) and 709.clas.

751 (image diplay) and (random adj time)

o ((image diplay) and (random adj time)) and((random adj diplay) with time)

9 (image diplay) and ((random adj display)with time)

44994 image adj display

o (image adj display) and (((image diplay)and (random adj time)) and ((random adjdiplay) with time))

4 (image adj display) and ((random adjdisplay) with time)

130 (image adj display) and (random withdisplay with time) and @ay<2000

137205 (image adj display) and 709.clas. internet

609 (image adj display) and 709.clas. and(internet or Internet or web$4)

258 ((image adj display) and 709.clas. and(internet or Internet or web$4)) andrandom

102 (((image adj display) and 709.clas. and(internet or Internet or web$4)) andrandom) and @ay<2000

72 345/730.ccls.

30 345/730.ccls. and random

13 (345/730.ccls. and random) and @ay<2000

o 345/730.ccls. and (random adj diplay)

o 345/730.ccls. and (random with diplay)

71 345/730.ccls. and (random adk display)

o 345/730.ccls. and (random adj display)

7 345/730.ccls. and (random with display)

2019 (internet or Internet) and (object adjdisplay)

2019 ((internet or Internet) and (object adjdisplay)) and @ay<20000501

686 ((internet or Internet) and (object adjdisplay)) and @ad<20000501

350 (((internet or Internet) and (object adjdisplay)) and @ad<20000501) and random

334 ((((internet or Internet) and (object adjdisplay)) and @ad<20000501) and random)and time

25 (((((internet or Internet) and (object adjdisplay)) and @ad<20000501) and random)and time) and (random with time)

1 6034652.pn.

1 5105184.pn.

313259 (web$4 or $nternet) and (stor$ or news)

DBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US~PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUB

Time stamp2004/08/17 09:32

2004/08/17 09:33

2004/08/17 09:33

2004/08/17 09:33

2004/08/17 09:38,--

2004/08/17 09:39

2004/08/17 09:39

2004/08/17 09:40

2004/08/17 09:41

2004/08/17 09:41

2004/08/17 09:50

2004/08/17 09:57

2004/08/17 09:58

2004/08/17 09:58

2004/08/17 09:58

2004/08/17 10:09

2004/08/17 10:09

2004/08/17 10:10

2004/08/17 10:30

2004/08/17 10:31

2004/08/17 10:31

2004/08/17 10:31

2004/08/17 10:31

2004/08/17 10:32

2004/08/17 10:33

2004/08/17 10:33

2004/08/17 10:33

2004/08/17 10:33

2004/08/17 10:37

2004/08/17 13:47

2004/08/17 13:47

2004/08/12 08:44

2004/08/12 08:45

Search H1story 8/17/04 2.42.34 PMC:\APPS\EAST\Workspaces\09843923b.wsp

Page 1

9692

6614

34

71

136672

\4790

221

170

47

8262

2466

1850

1344

909

791

758

112

80

38

2778

2639

1452

570

403

23

1013651

44921

25

((web$4 or $nternet) and (stor$ or news))and reel(((web$4 or $nternet) and (stor$ or news))and reel) and @ad<20000501((((web$4 or $nternet) and (stor$ ornews)) and reel) and @ad<20000501) and(upload or refresh or select) and (imageadj display)((((web$4 or $nternet) and (stor$ ornews)) and reel) and @ad<20000501) andlogoInternet

Internet and logo

Internet and (logo near advertis$)

(Internet and (logo near advertis$)) and(image or imaging)((Internet and (logo near advertis$)) and(image or imaging)) and @ad<20000501search adj engine

(search adj engine) and @ay<2000

((search adj engine) and @ay<2000) andinternet(((search adj engine) and @ay<2000) andinternet) and generate((((search adj engine) and @ay<2000) andinternet) and generate) and query(((( (search adj engine) and @ay<2000) andinternet) and generate) and query) anddisplay((((((search adj engine) and @ay<2000) andinternet) and generate) and query) anddisplay) and resultSlogo and search and (search adj engine)and 709.clas.image adj search adj engine

(image adj search adj engine) and @ay<2000

search adj query

(search adj query) and (network or indexor directory)( (search adj query) and (network or indexor directory)) and (search adj result$l)(((search adj query) and (network or indexor directory)) and (search adj result$I))and @ay<2001((((search adj query) and (network orindex or directory)) and (search adjresult$I)) and @ay<2001) and (search adjengine) )(((( (search adj query) and (network orindex or directory)) and (search adjresult$I)) and @ay<2001) and (search adjengine)) and (image adj search)image display

image adj display

(image adj .display) and (random adjdisplay)


USPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUB·USPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUB


2004/08/12 08:45

2004/08/12 08:46

2004/08/12 08:51

2004/08/12 08:52

2004/08/12 08:52

2004/08/12 08:53

2004/08/12 08:53

2004/08/12 08:54

2004/08/12 08:54

2004/08/16 15:12

2004/08/16 15:13

2004/08/16 15:13

2004/08/16 15:13

2004/08/16 15:13

2004/08/16 15:13

2004/08/16 15:15

2004/08/16 15:50

2004/08/16 15:50

2004/08/16 17:19

2004/08/16 17:19

2004/08/16 17:20

2004/08/16 17:22

2004/08/16 17:22

2004/08/16 17:23

2004/08/16 18:03

2004/08/16 18:03

2004/08/16 18:03

2004/08/16 18:04

Search History 8/17/04 2:42:34 PMC:\APPS\EAST\workspaces\09843923b.wsp

Page 2

L Number Hits Search Text DB Time stamp- 439 internet and 709/216 USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:15

US-PGPUB- 439 internet and 709/216 USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:15

US-PGPUB- 0 storyline and 709.clas USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:15

US-PGPUB- 0 story$ and 709.clas USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:15

US-PGPUB- 559 story$ and 709.clas. USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:15

US-PGPUB

Search History 8/17/04 2:43:30 PMC:\APPS\EAST\workspaces\09843923a.wsp

Page 1

- 0 (("5329447" USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:15"4128536" US-PGPUB"4276260""4300172""4328237""4383434""4426251""4426225""4432957""4443685""4461920""4466407""4479956""4486436""4486363""4495629""4494858""4496046""4506781""4520082""4522607""4554166""4568764""4612332""4755180""4770295""4781924" I

"4782669""4785920""4789793""4791143""4797683""4814181""4819597""4831723""4835234""4835731""4836317""4837027""4846827""4849370""4855478""4857546""4874397""4879810""4880047""4880631""4880904""4888253""4889616") .pn.("4892697""4893799""4903653""4913560""4924763""4926496""4927704""4928128""4928310""4928482""4933391""4933836""4934499""4935648""4936839""4937844""4939437""4940969""4945019""4947241""4946859""4949013"II ,..,,.."' ..... I ..... "

~earch HiE tory 8 ~'~~%%_ib2~~:30 PM Page 2~: \APPS\El ST\Worksp a~~~3e23a.wsp

"4962532"... ~~ ... -~- ..

- 180 internet with story USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:15US-PGPUB

- 302 internet with story USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:15US-PGPUB

- 2151 dynamic and internet and logo USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:15US-PGPUB

- 6 story and (internet and 709/216) USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:15US-PGPUB

- 858 709/216 USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:16US-PGPUB

- 9 storyline and 709.clas. USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:16US-PGPUB

- 431 (story$ and 709.clas.) and webS USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:16US-PGPUB

Search History 8/17/04 2:43:30 PMC:\APPS\EAST\Workspaces\09843923a.wsp

Page 3

- 100 ("5329447" USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:16"4128536" US-PGPUB"4276260""4300172""4328237""4383434""4426251""4426225""4432957""4443685""4461920""4466407""4479956""4486436""4486363""4495629""4494858""4496046""4506781""4520082""4522607""4554166""4568764""4612332""4755180""4770295""4781924""4782669""4785920""4789793""4791143""4797683""4814181""4819597""4831723""4835234""4835731""4836317""4837027""4846827""4849370""4855478""4857546""4874397""4879810""4880047""4880631""4880904""4888253""4889616") .pn.("4892697""4893799""4903653""4913560""4924763""4926496""4927704""4928128""4928310""4928482""4933391""4933836""4934499""4935648""4936839""4937844""4939437""4940969""4945019""4947241""4946859""4949013"" ,"c"" ,..,,,

~earch Hi! tory 8 J,'~'J15~tb:2"\,3 : 30 PM Page 4

Ie: \APPS\El ST\Worksp o~~~)e23a.wsp

"4962532"... _~~-~- ..

,;,

- 1 (("5329447" USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:16"4128536" US-PGPUB"4276260""4300172""4328237""4383434""4426251""4426225""4432957""4443685""4461920""4466407""4479956""4486436""4486363""4495629""4494858""4496046" I

"4506781""4520082""4522607""4554166""4568764""4612332""4755180""4770295""4781924""4782669""4785920""4789793""4791143""4797683""4814181""4819597""4831723""4835234""4835731""4836317""4837027""4846827""4849370""4855478""4857546""4874397""4879810""4880047""4880631""4880904""4888253""4889616") . pn.("4892697""4893799""4903653""4913560""4924763""4926496""4927704""4928128""4928310""4928482""4933391""4933836""4934499""4935648""4936839""4937844""4939437""4940969""4945019""4947241""4946859""4949013"" ,,,,,.-,-, ,-,,,

fSearch HiE tory 8 1"I,fQ~~2D2~,3 : 3 0 PM Page 5

C: \APPS\EJ ST\Worksp a~~)e23a.wsp

"4962532"... ~~~~~_ ..

- 11 ( ("5329447" USPAT; 2004/08/10 08:16"4128536" US-PGPUB"4276260""4300172""4328237""4383434""4426251""4426225""4432957""4443685""4461920""4466407""4479956""4486436""4486363""4495629""4494858""4496046""4506781""4520082""4522607""4554166""4568764 ""4612332""4755180""4770295""4781924""4782669""4785920""4789793""4791143""4797683""4814181""4819597""4831723""4835234""4835731""4836317""4837027 ""4846827" ,

0 "4849370""4855478""4857546""4874397""4879810""4880047""4880631""4880904""4888253""4889616") .pn.("4892697""4893799""4903653""4913560""4924763""4926496""4927704""4928128""4928310""4928482""4933391""4933836""4934499""4935648"';4936839""4937844 ""4939437""4940969""4945019""4947241""4946859""4949013"" nc'1 ......... "

Search HiE tory 8 J,;'l9q;~ ?O=z'\;3 :3 0 PM Page 6

(': \APPS\El ST\Worksp a~~~3e23a.wsp

"4962532"... ----~_ ..

I,

63 internet and entice and 709.clas.

18 internet with entice

87 (internet with story) and @py<2002

17 (dynamic and internet and logo) andcompany and google

147 (dynamic and internet and logo) andcompany and @py<2001

33 internet with company with logo

222 webS with upload with image

447 webS same upload same image

12 (web$ same upload same image) and @py<2001

633655 display or upload

4920 image and story

3902 (display or upload) and (image and story)

44 ((display or upload) and (image andstory)) and entice

1070 ((display or upload) and (image andstory)) and @py<2001

1793 ((display or upload) and (image andstory)) and (web or website or webpage)

400 (((display or upload) and (image andstory)) and (web or website or webpage))

, and @py<2002o ((company adj logo) or advertis$) and (web

or website or webpage) and @pd<051120025115 ((company adj logo) or advertis$) and (web

or website or webpage) and @py<2002736 (( (company adj logo) or advertis$) and

(web or website or webpage) and @py<2002)and 709.clas.

324 (server and client) and (company adj logo)

55 ((server and client) and (companyadjlogo)) and @py<2002

1 6396500.pn.

50846 345.clas.

1026 logo and 345.clas.

559 (logo and 345.clas.) and @ad<20000501

479 ((logo and 345.clas.) and @ad<20000501)and image

468 (((logo and 345.clas.) and @ad<20000501)and image) and display

216 (( ((logo and 345.clas.) and @ad<20000501)and image) and display) and internet

131 (( (((logo and 345.clas.) and @ad<20000501)and image) and display) and internet) and(refresh$ or uploa$ or replac$)

2 6483512.pn. or 6661419.pn.

26 (image adj viewer) with internet

2413 (image and (view$ or see or slideS)) withinternet

676 ((image and (view$ or see or slideS)) withinternet) and @ad<20000501

128 (( (image and (view$ or see or slide$))with internet) and @ad<20000501) and345.clas.

USPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUB


USPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUBUSPAT;US-PGPUB

2004/08/10 08:16

2004/08/10 08:16

2004/08/10 08:16

2004/08/10 08:16

2004/08/10 08:16

2004/08/10 08:16

2004/08/10 08:23

2004/08/10 08:24

2004/08/10 08:29

2004/08/10 08:29

2004/08/10 08:29

2004/08/10 08:30

2004/08/10 08:30

2004/08/10 08:31

2004/08/10 08:32

2004/08/10 08:47

2004/08/10 08:51

2004/08/10 08:52

2004/08/10 08:52

2004/08/10 13:22

2004/08/10 15:24

2004/08/10 15:25

2004/08/11 11:06

2004/08/11 11:07

2004/08/11 11:07

2004/08/11 11:07

2004/08/11 11:07

2004/08/11 11:07

2004/08/11 12:26

2004/08/11 12:34

2004/08/11 12:40

2004/08/11 12:41

2004/08/11 12:41

2004/08/11 12:43

Search Hlstory 8/17/04 2:43:30 PM

C:\APPS\EAST\workspaces\09843923a.wsp

Page 7

168 (slideshow or slide$l) and webpage

40 ((slideshow or slide$l) and webpage) and@ad<20000501

297 345/738.ccls.

3 345/738.ccls. and slideshow

89 345/738.ccls. and @ad<20000501

72 345/730.ccls.

37 345/730.ccls. and internet

61236 345.clas. animation

4453 345.clas. and animation

14843 animation

40704 (web or internet or hypertext or html)near2 (file$l or page$1 or docurnent$l)

1543 animation same ((web or internet orhypertext or html) near2 (file$l or page$lor docurnent$l)}

101494 (next or successive or second) with(screen$l or page$l)

730 (animation same ((web or internet orhypertext or html) near2 (file$l or page$lor docurnent$l})) and ((next or successiveor second) with (screen$l or page$l))

615 (animation same, ((web or internet orhypertext or html) near2 (file$l or page$lor docurnent$l))) and @ad<20000501

272 ((animation same ((web or internet orhypertext or html) near2 (file$l or page$lor docurnent$l))) and ((next or successiveor second) with (screen$l or page$l))) and@ad<20000501

258 slideshow

117 ((web or internet or hypertext or html)near2 (file$1 or page$l or docurnent$l))and slideshow

22 (((web or internet or hypertext or html)near2 (file$l or page$l or docurnent$1})and slideshow} and @ad<20000501

144 webpage and logo and company

14843 animation

329487 web or internet 0E hypertext or html

7155 animation and (web or internet orhypertext or html)

2508 (animation and (web or internet orhypertext or html)} and @ad<20000501

2439 ((animation and (web or internet orhypertext or html)} and @ad<20000501) andtime

1999 (( (animation and (web or internet orhypertext or html)) and @ad<20000501) andtime) and image

1840 ((((animation and (web or internet orhypertext or html)) and @ad<20000501) andtime) and image) and (refresh$ or replac$or uploa$ or downloa$ or loa$ or sav$)

1036 (((((animation and (web or internet orhypertext or html)} and @ad<20000501) andtime) and image) and (refresh$ or replac$or uploa$ or downloa$ or loa$ or sav$))and (345.clas. or 709.clas.)

USPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUB

USPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUB

USPATiUS-PGPUB

USPATiUS-PGPUB

USPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUB

USPATiUS-PGPUB

USPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUBUSPATiUS-PGPUB

USPATiUS-PGPUB

USPATiUS-PGPUB

USPATiUS-PGPUB

2004/08/11 12:43

2004/08/11 12:55

2004/08/11 12:55

2004/08/11 12:56

2004/08/11 12:56

2004/08/11 12:57

2004/0B/l1 13:00

2004/08/11 13:01

2004/08/11 13:01

2004/08/11 13:01

2004/08/11 13:02

2004/08/11 13:03

2004/08/11 13:04

2004/08/11 13:06

2004/08/11 13:06

2004/08/11 13:07

2004/08/11 13:07

2004/08/11 13:08

2004/08/11 13:36

2004/08/11 13:39

2004/08/11 13:39

2004/08/11 13:40

2004/08/11 13:40

2004/08/11 13:42

2004/08/11 13:42

2004/08/11 13:43

2004/08/11 13:45

2004/08/11 13:45

Search Hlstory 8/17/04 2:43:30 PM

C:\APPS\EAST\Workspaces\09B43923a.wsp

Page B

1029 ((((((animation and (web or internet orhypertext or htm1)} and @ad<20000501) andtime} and image} and (refresh$ or rep1ac$or uploa$ or downloa$ or loa$ or sav$))and (345.clas. or 709.clas.)} and computer

1003 (( (((((animation and (web or internet orhypertext or html}) and @ad<20000501) andtime} and image) and (refresh$ or replac$or uploa$ or downloa$ or loa$ or sav$})and (345.clas. or 709.clas.)} andcomputer) and display

673 ((((((((animation and (web or internet orhypertext or html)} and @ad<20000501} andtime) and image) and (refresh$ or replac$or uploa$ or downloa$ or loa$ or sav$)}and (345.clas. or 709.clas.)} andcomputer} and display} and 345.clas.

400 ((((((((animation and (web or internet orhypertext or html}) and @ad<20000501) andtime} and image) and (refresh$ or replac$or uploa$ or downloa$ or loa$ or sav$))and (345.clas. or 709.clas.)} andcomputer) and display) and 709.clas.

107 ((((((( (animation and (web or internet orhypertext or html)) and @ad<20000501) andtime) and image) and (refresh$ or replac$or uploa$ or downloa$ or loa$ or sav$))and (345.clas. or 709.clas.)} andcomputer) and display} and logo

USPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUB

USPAT;US-PGPUB

2004/08/11 13:46

2004/08/11 13:49

2004/08/11 13:50

2004/08/11 13:50

2004/08/11 13:50

Search History 8/17/04 2:43:30 PMC:\APPS\EAST\Workspaces\09843923a.wsp

Page 9

This Page is Inserted by IFW Indexing and ScanningOperations and is not part of the Official R.ecord

BEST AVAILABLE IMAGES

Defective images within this document are accurate represe:ntatious oftheariginaldocuments submitted by the applicant.


o BLACK BORDERS



o BLURRED OR ILLEGffiLE TEXT OR DRAWING


o COLOR OR BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAPHS



o REFERENCE(S) OR EXHmIT(S) SUBMITTED ARE POOR QUALITY

Q OTHER: ~~ _

IMAGES ARE BEST AVAILABLE COPY.As rescanning these documents will not correct the imageproblems checked9 please do not report these problems tothe IFW Image Problem Mailbox.

L Number Hits Search Text DB Time stamp1 13541 animation USPAT; 2004/08/1014:09

US-PGPUB2 40594 (web or internet or hypertext or html) near2 (file$1 or page$1 USPAT; 2004/08/10 14:10

or document$1) US-PGPUB3 1336 animation same «web or internet or hypertext or html) near2 USPAT; 2004/08/10 14:10

(file$1 or page$1 or document$1» US-PGPUB4 98248 (next or successive or second) with (screen$1 or page$1) USPAT; 2004/08/1014:11

US-PGPUB5 641 (animation same «web or internet or hypertext or html) near2 USPAT; 2004/08/10 14: 11

(file$1 or page$1 or document$1))) and «next or successive or US-PGPUBsecond) with (screen$1 or page$1))

6 887 (animation same «web or internet or hypertext or html) near2 USPAT; 2004/08/1014:11(file$1 or page$1 or document$1))) and @ad<20010430 US-PGPUB

7 451 «animation same «web or internet or hypertext or html) near2 USPAT; 2004/08/1014:12(file$1 or page$1 or document$1))) and «next or successive or US-PGPUBsecond) with (screen$1 or page$1))) and @ad<20010430

8 45 (animation same «web or internet or hypertext or html) near2 USPAT; 2004/08/1014:11(file$1 or page$1 or document$1))) same «next or successive US-PGPUBor second) with (screen$1 or page$1))

9 31 «animation same «web or internet or hypertext or html) near2 USPAT; 2004/08/1014:21(file$1 or page$1 or document$1))) same «next or successive US-PGPUBor second) with (screen$1 or page$1))) and @ad<20010430

10 241 slideshow USPAT; 2004/08/1014:21US-PGPUB

11 108 «web or internet or hypertext or html) near2 (file$1 or page$1 USPAT; 2004/08/1014:21or document$1» and slideshow US-PGPUB

12 44 «(web or internet or hypertext or html) near2 (file$1 or page$1 USPAT; 2004/08/1014:21or document$1)) and slideshow) and@ad<20010430 US-PGPUB

Search History 8/101042:52:51 PM Page 1C:\APPS\EAST\Workspaces\Default EAST Workspace (Flat Panel).wsp

------ - ---

Search Results

IEEE HOME I SEARCH IEEE I SHOP I WEB ACCOUNT I CONTACT IEEE

MembershIp PubllcatwnstServices SteHldards Conferences Careers/Jobs

Page 1 of2

+IEEE

Help fAQ Terms IEEE Peer Review 19...i,~~~ill~!;

~,

;,~ ~EEE"~plore<~l<5 ~ , " ;W ,"',," , ",' RELEASE 1.11

WelcQmc to IEEE Xplore'"

WelcomeUnited States Patent and Trademark Office

» Se,

o Homeo What Can

I Aooess1OLog-out

Tables of Contents

o Journals. &M3gazines

o Conferel]OOProceedings

0- Standards

Search

o ByAUfhoro-Ba.o Advanced

Member Services

D-JolnlEEE0- Establish IEEE.

WebAcoount

Q-AcceSStheIEEE MemberDigital Library

o AccessthBIEEE Entmprlsefile Cabmet

Your search matched 4 of 1060766 documents.A maximum of 500 results are displayed, 15 to a page, sorted by RelevanctDescending order.

Refine This Search:You may refine your search by editing the current search expression or enterinew one in the text box.

li':'l.~~.~..~~.~~>",,~~~:~n~~IOg()Ci Check to search within this result set

ResuIts Key:lNL = Journal or Magazine CNF = Conference STD = Standard

1 Content layer progressive coding of digital mapsForchhammer, 5.; Jensen, O.R.;Image Processing, IEEE Transactions on , Volume: 11 , Issue: 12 , Dec. 2002Pages: 1349 - 1356

[Abstract] [PDJ:_fJtll-Text (819 KB)] IEEEJNL

2 Classifying images collected on the World Wide WebOliveira, CJ.S.; De Albuquerque Araujo, A.; Severiano, CA., Jr.; Ribeiro GonD.;Computer Graphics and Image Processing, 2002. Proceedings. XV BrazilianSymposium on , 7-10 Oct. 2002Pages:327 - 334

[At2.stfi:'lc.:H [PDF Full-Text (l858 KB)] IEEE CNF

3 Proposal of a classifier of images collected in the World Wide WebOliveira, Cl.S.; de A Araujo, A.; Severiano, c.A., Jr.; Gomes, D.R.;Computer Graphics and Image Processing, 2001 Proceedings of XIV BrazilianSymposium on , 15-18 Oct. 2001Pages:395

[Abstract] [PDF Full-Text (67 KB)] IEEE CNF

4 Content progressive coding of limited bits/pixel imagesJensen, O.R.; Forchhammer, S.;Multimedia Signal Processing, 1999 IEEE 3rd Workshop on , 13-15 Sept. 199~

Pages:419 - 424

[Abstract] [PDF Full-Text (409 KB)] IEEE CNF

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/search/searchresult.j sp?SortField=Score&SortOrder=desc&ResultC... 8/10104

Search Results Page 2 of2

JjQmg IJ"Q9.:QJJt 1Journals I Conference Proceedings I Standards 1Search by Author 1~asif;J?~llJ.!<.1:! I 8~ty'gng§f;LS.gerytll Join IEEE I Web Account I·New this week I OPAC Linking Information 1Your Feedback 1Technical Support I Email Alerting I No Robots Please 1Release Notes I IEEE Online

Publications I Help 1E6Q.1 Terms I Back to Top

Copyright © 2004 IEEE - All rights reserved

http://ieeexplore. ieee.orgisearch!searchresult.j sp?SortField=Score&SortOrder=desc&ResultC... 8/10104

~ ~- .Results (page 1): image and web and company and logo Page 1 of6

~

; PORTAL.~L

US Patent & Trademark Office

§JIP'§!<Ijp'_~ (Full Service) B~gj§!~r (Limited Service, Free) Login

Search: (i) The ACM Digital Library 0 The Guide

Ii l11C1 9E! .C1 n(j ""'E!b Clndc()l11panyandl()9°

Terms used image and web and company and logo

r E~J~.QR§ck R~P9..rt.9.....R.rQRI~m. §?lL~f?.91iQ!l§l,JrY~y~

Found 15,185 of 140,980

Sort results by I~:I:~~.~~:. lI.Display results l:xpa~gedf?rrn lm

• Save results to a Binder

I1l Search Tips

[J Open results in a newwindow

Try an· !\.c,tv_a.nC:::§J.JS§C3[c:::bTry this search in The ACM Guide

Results 1 - 20 of 200Best 200 shown

Result page: 12 .~. 1: :5. Q ze 9 10 I1§XtRelevance scale 0 \;;j. iii.

1 QQmQ~tlti'lE:LggV:Qn19g~Qnth~VVQrIQVV:iQ~-'l.V~p.:~_W~Qm9~§t~r~.§g1Jjg~ •Merrill E. WarkentinOctober 1995 ACM SIGAPP Applied Computing Review, Volume 3 Issue 2

Full text available: 'Illt<:!f(ZZ9,Q1K6) Additional Information: IlJJLGiteJiQQ. ~bs1mg. jm:l~xJ~Im~

As the importance of the World Wide Web continues to grow, firms are seeking innovativeways to leverage the technology for competitive advantage. Firms are implementing webbased systems for internal and external information dissemination and for digitalinteractivity, including commerce. This paper highlights some of these uses of the web andaddresses managerial and technical considerations when initiating a web site project, bothon the server side and client side of the web. The focus is on ...

Keywords: digital commerce, internet security, intranet, web design, web server

2 User interface requirements for authentication of communication •Audun J0sang, Mary Anne PattonFebruary 2003 Proceedings of the Fourth Australian user interface conference on User

interfaces 2003 - Volume 18Full text available: III pdf(375.46 KB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references, index terms

Authentication is a security service that consists of verifying that someone's identity is asclaimed. There are a number of challenges to presenting information from the authenticationprocess to the user in a way that is meaningful and ensures security. We show exampleswhere authentication requirements are not met, due to user behaviour and properties ofexisting user interfaces, and suggest some solutions to these problems.

Keywords: authentication, non-repudiation, security, usability, user interface

3 Applying Tufte's principles of information design to creating effective Web sitesBeverly B. ZimmermannOctober 1997 Proceedings of the 15th annual international conference on Computer

documentationFull text available: .~Q.9f(9f~9..§~~_Km Additional Information: flJlLgiJ;:lJiQJl, r~I~mng~§, jmt~xJ~.J.m~

http://portal.acm.org/results.cfm?coll==ACM&dl==ACM&CFID==25397107&CFTOKEN=533... 8/10/04

.Results (page 1): image and web and company and logo

Keywords: document design, home pages, informationdesign, web page design

Page 2 of6

4 Developing trust in internet commerce ..I1demaro Araujo, Ivan AraujoOctober 2003 Proceedings of the 2003 conference of the Centre for Advanced Studies

conference on Collaborative researchFull text available: "_QQf(14Q,4~K6} Additional Information: ML<,.itatioD. QQ.$lntGt. f~f?mnyes, !.D..Q.~.~J~[m.~

Since the success of Web-based businesses depends essentially on their customers,consumers' trust is critical for Internet commerce. This article outlines essential issues thatmay affect customers' trust on Web sites or vendors. It also discusses key elements that canbe used to improve the visitors' sense of trustworthiness on Web sites.

5 CEPE 2000: An ethical evaluation of web site linking •Richard A. SpinelloDecember 2000 ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, Volume 30 Issue 4

Full text available: 11 pdf(908.05 KB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract. references

As the World Wide Web has grown in popularity, the propriety of linking to other web siteshas achieved some prominence as an important moral and legal issue. Hyperlinks representthe essence of Web-based activity, since they facilitate navigation in a unique and efficientfashion. But the pervasive activity of linking has generated notable controversies. Whilemost sites welcome and support incoming links, others block them or seek to license themin some way. Particularly problematic are so-ca ...

6 ItlEu)erf~cL~~g[Cb_~_Og_io~j~J1QtJ;lnQJJgh:_Cl__$tl.tqy_QfQrjeot~eILr:lgJ2ehgyiQLjrr<:lj rected ..searchJaime Teevan, Christine Alvarado, Mark S. Ackerman, David R. KargerApril2004 Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Human factors in computing

systemsFull text available: IIp.gK?.~.?J~ ...KI2} Additional Information: f!JJ.LcitQtiQ.IJ.. QP$tf1=lC!. mf?ft::lIJ.C?$, iD..Qt::l.~J?fm$

This paper presents a modified diary study that investigated how people performedpersonally motivated searches in their email, in their files, and on the Web. Although earlierstudies of directed search focused on keyword search, most of the search behavior weobserved did not involve keyword search. Instead of jumping directly to their informationtarget using keywords, our participants navigated to their target with small, local stepsusing their contextual knowledge as a guide, even when the ...

Keywords: context, information seeking, observational study, orienteering, search,teleporting

7 Resources section: web sitesMichele TepperMay 1998 netWorker, Volume 2 Issue 2

Full text available: 11 pdf(35.02 KB) Additional Information: full citation, references, index terms

8 o.e~igOingtWQ.oQnPfQfitYYep~it~Qnle.§$JbCln$:}QQ!,tSp_~Ye.ClLeClCOCarl Stieren, Zbigniew RachniowskiOctober 1996 Proceedings of the 14th annual international conference on Systems

documentation: Marshaling new technological forces: building acorporate, academic, and user-oriented triangle

http://portal.acm.org/results.cfm?coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=253971 07&CFTOKEN=533... 8/10104

Results (page 1): image and web and company and logo

Full text available: "III odf(915.29 KB) Additional Information: full citation, references, index terms

Page 3 of6

. Full text available: .P'9f(9.,~4.ME.U

9 Model-driven development of Web applications: the AutoWeb systemPiero Fraternali, Paolo PaoliniOctober 2000 ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), Volume 18 Issue 4

Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references, citings, indexterms

This paper describes a methodology for the development of WWWapplications and a toolenvironment specifically tailored for the methodology. The methodology and thedevelopment environment are based upon models and techniques already used in thehypermedia, information systems, and software engineering fields, adapted and blended inan original mix. The foundation of the proposal is the conceptual design of WWWapplications, using HOM-lite, a notation for the specification of structure, nav ...

Keywords: HTML, WWW, application, development, intranet, modelingI \

10 Fast multiresolution image querying ..Charles E. Jacobs, Adam Finkelstein, David H. SalesinSeptember 1995 Proceedings of the 22nd annual conference on Computer graphics and

interactive techniquesFull text available: 11 odf(529.14 KB)

~ os(211.52 KB) Additional Information: fl,lILGitgJiQD, r~f~rf::!nG~$., Giting$.,irtQ!'l.xJ!'l.[r:11$.

Keywords: content-based retrieval, image databases, image indexing, image metrics,query by content, query by example, similarity retrieval, sketch retrieval, wavelets

11~~GlJJity-jn.mQQH~_~Qmmw}iG91i9J1_$:9_h9JJ~ng~§.9.r.v;LQQQQtllJJ]ili~§ ..Audun J0sang, Gunnar SanderudJanuary 2003 Proceedings of the Australasian information security workshop

conference on ACSW frontiers 2003 - Volume 21Full text available: .pgf(l1Z,Q4K6) Additionallnformation:fl,lllgJJ§.tiQD, QQ§tmgL r~J~r.!'l.nG!2$., inq~~J~r.m§

The nature of mobile communication, characterised for example by terminals haVing pooruser interface and limited processing capacity, as well as complex combination of networkprotocols, makes the design of security solutions particularly challenging. This paperdiscusses some of the difficulties system architects are faced with as well as someadvantages mobile networks offer when designing security solutions for mobilecommunication.

Keywords: heterogeneous networks, mobile deVices, security, usability

12 !:jG8~t1QY\l;.Q.iGtQIi9L9.lJtbQ[itY$~_9IGh.QyhYQ_~rJjnk§Qnth~\lYEtRRonny Lempel, Aya SofferApril 2001 Proceedings of the tenth international conference on World Wide Web

Full text available: "IIIpqf(93.~.,]Z.Ke.l Additional Information: fI,lILGltg!iQD, [~f~[!:'JJG~§', GiHO.9§, LOQ§xJ1=1[lJ1§

Keywords: hubs and authorities, image hubs, image retrieval, link structure analysis

http://portal.acm.org/results.cfm?coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=25397107&CFTOKEN=533... 8110/04

Results (page I): image and web and company and logo

13 PicASHOW: pictorial authority search by hyperlinks on the web·January 2002 ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), Volume 20 Issue 1

Page 4 of6

FUll text available: 'II pdf(436.32 KB) Additional Information: fJJJLcitgJiQD. 91:>~1m.g, r.~f~Jsm.Qe$..ing!:)Xler.m$..

relLl~w.

We describe PicASHOW, a fully automated WWW image retrieval system that is based onseveral link-structure analyzing algorithms. Our basic premise is that a page p displays (orlinks to) an image when the author of p considers the image to be of value to the viewers ofthe page. We thus extend some well known link-based WWW page retrieval schemes to thecontext of image retrieval.PicASHOW's analysis of the link structure enables it to retrieverelevant images even when those ...

Keywords: Image retrieval, hubs and authorities, image hubs, link structure analysis

14 Blink response, visual attention, and the www: Visual attention to repeated internetimag~$:Je~tinglI1EL$c:;gnQgthJlleQr:y_9---D_ttl~'v"JQrL(twlcl~~el::>Sheree Josephson, Michael E. HolmesMarch 2002 Proceedings of the symposium on Eye tracking research & applications

FUll text available: 'IIpQfLQ2L3.5Kfll Additional Information: ft,JIL~l@JiQIJ, 9R$.1r.9J:;t, r.~f~JenG.e.$..G.iJilJg$.

The somewhat controversial and often-discussed theory of visual perception, that ofscanpaths, was tested using Web pages as visual stimuli. In 1971, Noton and Stark defined"scanpaths" as repetitive sequences of fixations and saccades that occur upon re-exposureto a visual stimulus, facilitating recognition of that stimulus. Since Internet users arerepeatedly exposed to certain visual displays of information, the Web is an ideal stimulus totest this theory. Eye-movement measures were recorde ...

Keywords: Eye movement, Internet imagery, World Wide Web, eye tracking, optimalmatching analysis, scanpath, sequence comparison, string editing

15f;qiling.QoJineclQC:;\Jrnent$;Ihepe.[$!Jg$iyeQQWeLQfQ?tnQ§.Jo.e:C:;.Qmmerc:;eWep...cl.e.$jgn; ..a new area for researchWendy WinnSeptember 2000 Proceedings of IEEE professional communication society international

professional communication conference and Proceedings of the 18thannual ACM international conference on Computer documentation:technology & teamwork

FUll text available:" pdf(298.51 KB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references

In a matter of months, we have witnessed the meteoric rise and fall of e-commerce. Nowthat the dust is settling, it is time toexamine how some companies are succeeding whereothers have failed. In this paper I suggest that good web design is vital to e-business andthat pathos (emotional appeal) plays a key role in a design's persuasive power. Advertisershave long understood this concept. As e-commerce attempts to revolutionize the businessworld, let class rhetoric serve as the theoretical f ...

16 Annotation-based transcoding for nonvisual web access •Chieko Asakawa, Hironobu TakagiNovember 2000 Proceedings of the fourth international ACM conference on Assistive

technologiesFUll text available: 1I.R.Qf(4g.LfJKEll Additional Information: fpILGiJgt!.Qn, r.eJer.enG?$., G.iJi@$., indexJerm$.

http://portal.acm.org/results.cfm?coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=25397107&CFTOKEN=533... 8/10/04

.Results (page 1): image and web and company and logo Page 5 of6

Keywords: blind, commentary annotation, nonvisual web access, structural annotation,transcoding system

17yv~p~it~f.\!}~ly§t§.:.Q~.§igIJjng..9.nlinS:LP~nneL~(jv~rti§~m~nt?..:.?.1Jg.~J~:LY..Y~.5mim~t~?.Michelle E. BaylesApril2002 Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing

systems: Changing our world, changing ourselvesFull text available: 11 pdf(336.77 KB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references, citings, index

. terms

A common medium for advertising on the Internet is the use of banner ads. This studyinvestigates recall and recognition of animated banner advertisements in an attempt toidentify design guidelines. It was hypothesized that animation would increase recall andrecognition of novel ads by increasing user awareness. No significant relationships werefound between the use of animation and ability to recall and recognize banner ads. Resultsindicate that animation does not enhance user memory of onl ...

Keywords: animation, banner ads, online advertisements, recall, recognition

18yv~p~nd.e..::-J~],J§jn~§§~ppHG.~tjQn;JJ.§~L~q~pJiY.~G..Qnt~ntd.§Hv§ry.JJJeG..h~ni§mQnJb.e. ..world wide webTadashi Nakano, Kaname Harumoto, Shinji Shimojo, Shojiro NishioMarch 2002 Proceedings of the 2002 ACM symposium on Applied computing

Full text available: 1I.pdf(1.00 MB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references, index terms

To reduce the user-perceived latency in web content delivery, many techniques have been. proposed. One is a transmission time control mechanism that automatically adjusts the

quality of inline objects, such as images on a web page, according to the client networkbandwidth. Another is a transmission order control mechanism that can transmit inlineobjects in a specified order preferred by users. In this paper, we describe the developmentof a user adaptive content delivery mechanism that integrat ...

Keywords: HTTP extension, WWW, content adaptation, content delivery, quality of service,transmission order control, transmission time control, user profile

19LQG~1j4~tLQn_Qtwej;LGQntentDaniel BrandonDecember 2001 Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, Volume 17 Issue 2

Full text available: 1IPQf(4§§.,.2.:l.KS1 Additional Information: fuILgit<'lJLQD. r~f~r~n!:?~.l?, inQ~~J!2.lm;'?

20 Timing attacks on Web privacyEdward W. Felten, Michael A. SchneiderNovember 2000 Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Computer and

communications securityFull text available: 11 pdf(184.79 KB) Additional Information: full citation, references, index terr;'s

Results 1 - 20 of 200 Result page: 1 Z J ~ ~ §. Z §. 2. 10 next


~ . . .Results (page 1): image and web and company and logo Page 60f6

The ACM Portal is published by the Association for Computing Machinery. Copyright © 2004 ACM, Inc.I~rm§glJ)$.~g"'1 Ertvacy Policy CQge olEthic~ CgntagjJ)§


'Results (page 1): story and web and logo

US Patent & Trademark Office

Page 1 of6

~lLb.~G[LQ~(Full Service) R~9.i§.t.~[ (Limited Service, Free) Login

Search: (€, The ACM Digital Library 0 The Guide

lst()ryarl~ \oVeba rldlo90

Terms used story and web and logo

r f~~dQ".lGK R§QorL~J)roblern $.;'3ti§f~<::Ji911§'l,J.D.I..~y..

Found4,812 of 140,980

Sort results by I~~I~~~~~~ .. ]·Display results expanded form;

• Save results to a Binder

11I Search Tips

D Open results in a newwindow

Try an 8Q.Y:ill1.(;'~J:L.$~~9.r.t;=...b.Try this search in The ACM Guide

Results 1 - 20 of 200Best 200 shown

Result page: 1 .2 } <1: .2 P. Z a ~ lQ n~xt

Relevance scale 0 I;lliiil iii.1 CQnt~xt.=9..\N.~[~j{V~p.JD.fQn:n~tiQn.Sy~t.e.m§ iii

Aleksander Binemann-Zdanowicz, Roland Kaschek, Klaus-Dieter Schewe, Bernhard ThalheimJanuary 2004 Proceedings of the first Asian-Pacific conference on Conceptual

modelling - Volume 31Full text available:" pdf(4.13.81 KB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references

Apart from completeness usability, performance and maintainability are the key qualityaspects for Web information systems. Considering usability as key implies taking usageprocesses into account right from the beginning of systems development. Contextawareness appears as ,a promising idea for increasing usability of Web Information Systems.In the present paper we propose an approach to context-awareness of Web InformationSystems that systematically distinguishes among the various important k ...

Keywords: SiteLang, Web Information Systems, Web services, context-aware informationsystems, media objects

26.IO~Qg~.?..Lm~...w'§ naylg...~lL9.n ....~.$i0.9 ... ?...tQ..ry_§e.gm~ntq1iolJ. iiiAndrew Merlino, Daryl Morey, Mark MayburyNovember 1997 Proceedings of the fifth ACM international conference on Multimedia

Full text available: •.pqf.C1. ..Z2M6J Additional Information: f!.!!L!::lt;;:l,tjoo, L~feI~Oc:;el?, ,c:;W..Ogl?, io..d.e.~...tenI!.~.

3 Designing two nonprofit Web sites on less than $350 US per year eachCarl Stieren, Zbigniew RachniowskiOctober 1996 Proceedings of the 14th annual international conference on Systems

documentation: Marshaling new technological forces: building acorporate, academic, and user-oriented triangle

Full text available: 'lDp9f(~15.Z~!S~} Additional Information: ft.J.Jlgi!il.JigQ, [~.fl:J.re!J ..9._~~, in9l:J.>.<.JE:WI!§

4 Ihe.J~J:::H~ZCt!lkig§prQgr.~...m: ..~LR~ ...dne.r.§.bjpP.e.tw~~r.:LIs..i.q~L~.Q~Jt§ ..~nqJe.cbnQJQgy.Allison DruinSeptember 1997 interactions, Volume 4 Issue 5

Full text available: .pqf(!?•.RJ..MJ2J Additional Information: f!JJLl<it<;l.tloo. Gi..t!O.9~, jO"g...l:J.2Ltern:ll?


'Results (page 1): story and web and logo Page 2 of6

5 Is a picture worth a thousand words?: an evaluation of information awareness displays ..Christopher Plaue, Todd Miller, John StaskoMay 2004 Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Graphics interface

Full text available: 11 pdf(1.54 MBl Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references

What makes a peripheral or ambient display more effective at presenting awarenessinformation than another? Presently, little is known in this regard and techniques forevaluating these types of displays are just beginning to be developed. In this article, wefocus on one aspect of a peripheral display's effectiveness---its ability to communicateinformation at a glance. We conducted an evaluation of the InfoCanvas, a peripheral displaythat conveys awareness information graphically as a form of ...

Keywords: ambient display, awareness information, empirical evaluation, informationvisualization, peripheral display

6 Qi~GQlJr~~GIJ~§jQI.p.rQ~gG~§Ln~w~§.~gm~nj5:.!tiQnMark T. MayburyAugust 1998

Full text available: •.pgf(~7.,lJ?I56.) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, referencesII Publisher Site .

This paper describes the design and application of time-enhanced, finite state models ofdiscourse cues to the automated segmentation of broadcast news, We describe our analysisof a broadcast news corpus, the design of a discourse cue based story segmentor that buildsupon information extraction techniques, and finally its computational implementation andevaluation in the Broadcast News Navigator (BNN) to support video news browsing,retrieval, and summarization.

Additional Information: fYILc;!ti'!Ji9.IJ, r~f~n?r::l\::;~§', gtiD..9§', jlJg~xJ~r::m§., r~vi~w

7 User interface directions for the WebJakob NielsenJanuary 1999 Communications of the ACM,

Full text available: df 421.52 KBhtml(35.34 KB)

Volume 42 Issue 1

8 AnaJy?is.Qt§tlJggnt.v.v~.p'..prQ"",,§ing_bJ:~b.f!vj.QLLmQJi~atiQn~fQu:t~jgnlng~nq._~vg.llJgtjngWeb sitesEva M. ThurySeptember 1998 Proceedings of the 16th annual international conference on Computer

documentationFull text available:" pdf(748.42 KBl Additional Information: full citation, references, citings, index terms

9 I~GbKnQwlegg_~:~ffiGj~ntlY ..~mqGQ§t:.~ffgGtjv~JY_§_lJQQQr:Ung_lJ$~r§Amy Reeter, Todd KrupaNovember 2002 Proceedings of the 30th annual ACM SIGUCCS conference on User

servicesFull text available: 11 pdf(1.06 MB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references, index terms

For more than 20 years, the information technology organization at the University ofMissouri-Columbia (MU) published an on-campus newsletter. Content ranged from cute



tidbits to pages of programming code for hard-core COBOL readers. Information & AccessTechnology Services (IAT Services) identified several requirements for a publication focusingon campus technology developments and increasing awareness of technology opportunitiesand applications. The publication sought to be timely, cost-effec ...

Keywords: advertising, communication, editorial, magazine, marketing, news, promotional,publication

10 At the forge: Bricolage templatesReuven M. LernerMarch 2004 Linux Journal, Volume 2004 Issue 119

Full text available:~ htm1(19.43 KB) Additional Information: full citation)

11 Technical Session: Saving users from themselves: creating an effective student- ..Qri~nt~q?nt.I::v.inJ§tnt~IY~nJ!QnKevin DavisOctober 2001 Proceedings of the 29th annual ACM SIGUCCS conference on User

servicesFull text available: 11 pdf(270.47 KB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, index terms

The proliferation of computer viruses, Trojans, and other malicious code in recent years haspresented a serious challenge to higher education computer services support programs.Outside of higher education, most IT departments mandate anti-virus policies throughcentral management of end-user systems and software. In an academic environment wherestudent systems are owned by the users and not institutions, however, such an approach isnot always tenable, and the weaker forces of user education, ...

Keywords: McAfee VirusScan, anti-virus, computer security, intervention, residentialcomputing support, user services

12 8pplyingTuft~'§PJ:Incipl~~LQLLofQImC3JiQn d~$!9JltQ~r~C3ting_~ff~ctiY~YV~b_~it~§Beverly B. ZimmermannOctober 1997 Proceedings of the 15th annual international conference on Computer

documentationFull text available: 1Ip9fm?9,6.9J\J2) Additional Information: f\JJLG.i!9.tiQr::t, [~f§[~nG.~"'§, Lng~xJ~Im§

Keywords: document design, home pages, informationdesign, web page design

13E3liO~fesPQn_~Et_yi§1,lc:lI.J!tt~ntjQn,-am:l.Jb_~_wy.y.\~L:_Vi§1J9.LC3it~ot!QnJQ_r~p~9.t~q.j.nt~In~t ..images: testing the scanpath theory on the world wide webSheree Josephson, Michael E. HolmesMarch 2002 Proceedings of the symposium on Eye tracking research &. applications

Full text available:" pdf(621.35 KB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references, citings

The somewhat controversial and often-discussed theory of visual perception, that ofscanpaths, was tested using Web pages as visual stimuli. In 1971, Noton and Stark defined"scanpaths" as repetitive sequences offixations and saccades that occur upon re-exposureto a visual stimulus, facilitating recognition of that stimulus. Since Internet users arerepeatedly exposed to certain visual displays of information, the Web is an ideal stimulus to

http://portal.acm.org/results.cfm?coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=25397107&CFTOKEN=533... 8/1 0/04

Results (page I): story and web and logo

test this theory. Eye-movement measures were recorde ...

Keywords: Eye movement, Internet imagery, World Wide Web, eye tracking, optimalmatching analysis, scanpath, sequence comparison, string editing

Page 4 of6

14I?LJplj$htlJilQLR[Qgmmmingi:_~.fmm~wQ[!slQLth~_g?Y~lQPm~nt~Oc::LpI~$.~nt~liQ_I}J2f

work by children on the World Wide WebJudy KeinerAugust 1997 ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, Volume 31 Issue 3

Full text available: 11 pdf(227.50 KB) Additional Information: full citation, index terms

15CQPy[igbtJ9.v.v.mg~t$th~VVQ[Ic::LVVig~jtY~RMatt RosenbergNovember 1995 Crossroads, Volume 2 Issue 2

Full text available: lilhJmJ(4~L~9KI?J Additional Information: flJJlgitatiQ!l,ir:ldex t.Em:D§

16 VV~p~it~i\n~IY$i$:Q~$ignin.9.Qnlln~.J2~Dn~r..~.c::tY~J:ti$.~m?nt$.:_.$hQLJJg..v.v.~.. ~nim~t.??Michelle E. BaylesApril2002 Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing

systems: Changing our world, changing ourselves

Full text available: 11 pdf(336.77 KB) Additional Information: f!J.ILGiti'!tiQIl, i'!P§.tfi'!Gt. fE:.lfE:.lfE:.lIJG.E:.l§', Gitinfl§, iIlq~~te.r.m§.

A common medium for advertising on the Internet is the use of banner ads. This studyinvestigates recall and recognition or'animated banner advertisements in an attempt toidentify design gUidelines. It was hypothesized that animation would increase recall andrecognition of novel ads by increasing user awareness. No significant relationships werefound between the use of animation and ability to recall and recognize banner ads. Resultsindicate that animation does not enhance user memory of onl ...

Keywords: animation, banner ads, online advertisements, recall, recognition

17 p'p';.I$$LJ?$Qt.Q.Qnt?nL~Dc:t§JILJG1LJr?fQL~.m.LJJtiIin9-Ll91v.v.~b site ..Shihong Huang, Scott TilleyOctober 2001 Proceedings of the 19th annual international conference on Computer

documentationFull text available: 11 pdf(391.88 KB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references, index terms

Most content on the Web today is in English, but the majority of the Earth's peoples speaklanguages other than English. To reach a wider audience, future Web sites will have to bemultilingual, changing a Web site from one that is American-centric and single-language toone that is globally-oriented and multilingual. While the challenges in creating andmaintaining a high-quality Web site in a single language are considerable, working withmultiple languages simultaneously creates special chall ...

Keywords: content management, multilingua, software engineering, structure, web site

18 Di..JXJDJ:)[c:lctiCg. l; Mc:lkJng.c:loJMp.-CicLI?-.ge$Jgning_9.J)usin~_$.$J)choQLyv?p.$It.?.c:I rQ!.Jng ..Rerformance metrics

http://portal.acm.orglresults.cfm?coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=25397107&CFTOKEN=533... 8/10/04


Tom Brinck, Seunghee S. Ha, Nick Pritula, Kara Lock, Alfred Speredelozzi, Mike MonanJune 2003 Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Designing for user experiences

Full text available: 11 pdf(446.93 KB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references

The University of Michigan Business School went through a substantial redesign in 2002-2003 of their site of over 3,000 pages, with a focus on increased ease of use, clean,professional design, improved branding, reduction of Web sprawl, and integration of theirpublic site with their intranet, called 1 iMpact.! The site serves a range of users with varyingneeds, including faculty, students, staff, alumni, prospective students, media, andrecruiters.Our redesign process was ground ...

Keywords: brand building, experience strategy, graphic design, information architecture,interaction design, intranet design, multidisciplinary design/interdisciplinary design,performance metrics, user experience, user interface design, user research, user-centereddesign/human-centered design, visual design, web site design.

19EQQ!,I$ingOOJI$~I:JO:PfQ9~tQtI~J~liQn$hip$:Gl[I$~.$$R~~_~.g~rneq~$ign~r$;_~.'.51[~m~ iiiIIbaseline researchCarrie Heeter, Brian Winn, Rhonda Egidio, Punya Mishra, Norm LowndsJune 2003 Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Designing for user experiences

Full text available:" pdf(131.12 KB) Additional Information: full citation, abstract, references

This NSF-funded two-year research project explores gender and age differences in attitudestoward technology, space exploration, game design, and learning from games. In addition torigorously testing the proposition that all-girl design teams will envision substantivelydifferent education game experiences than all-boy design teams, this project will prOVideextremely elaborate baseline research to inform future design of highly entertaining learninggames.By June 2003, we will have spent five ...

Keywords: age differences, cognitive psychology, ethnography/ethnographic studies,experience design, experience interaction design, game design, gender differences, learning,participatory design, user experience, user interface design, user research, user-centereddesign/human-centered design

20InfQ[m~liQnB~triev~J:.lmQroYLng_Q$§lJqQ:LeleY~nQ~fe§gbaQl<jn_""eQ.infQXIDC3JioD

retrieval using web page segmentationShipeng Yu, Deng Cai, Ji-Rong Wen, Wei-Ying MaMay 2003 Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on World Wide Web

Full text available: 1Ipgf(2Z!?,$iLKl?i Additional Information: :ation, abstract, references, citings, index

In contrast to traditional document retrieval, a web page as a whole is not a goodinformation unit to search because it often contains multiple topics and a lot of irrelevantinformation from navigation, decoration, and interaction part of the page. In this paper, wepropose a VIsion-based Page Segmentation (VIPS) algorithm to detect the semantic contentstructure in a web page. Compared with simple DOM based segmentation method, our pagesegmentation scheme utilizes useful visual cues to obtai ...

Keywords: page segmentation, query expansion, relevance feedback, web informationretrieval

Results 1 - 20 of 200 Result page: 12 ~. 4. ~ (i Z Ii ~ ..LQ ne.~1

http://portal.acm.org/results.cfm?coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=25397107&CFTOKEN=533... 8110/04

· . ' 'Results (page 1): story and web and logo Page 60f6

The ACM Portal is published by the Association for Computing Machinery. Copyright © 2004 ACM, Inc.Terms of Usage Privacy Policy Code of Ethics Contact Us

Useful downloads: 'II Adobe Acrobat Cl QuickTime ..Windows Media Player 1& Real Player

http://portal.acm.org/results.cfm?coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=253971 07&CFTOKEN=533 ... 8/1 0/04

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OffiCE

ImUlllm Iml ~IIIIIIUO ~llm~ 1I11~~ ~I~ DOImlBib Data Sheet

fILE COpy

•COMMI ~OR PATENTS

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEw.5HINClON. D.C. 20231

WWW.USplO.gCN


FILING DATE ATTORNEYSERIAL NUMBER 04/30/2001 CLASS GROUP ART UNIT DOCKET NO.

09/843,923 709 2152 0026-0002RULE

14 PPUC.4NTS


1** CONTINUING DATA *************************

THIS APPLN CLAIMS BENEFIT OF 60/200,957 05/01/2000

1** FOREIGN APPLICATIONS ********************

IF REQUIRED, FOREIGN FILING LICENSE GRANTED** 06/21/2001

Foreign Priority claimed I:J yes I:J noSTATE OR SHEETS TOTAL INDEPENDENT

35 USC 119 (a-d) conditions I:J yes I:J no I:J Met after COUNTRY DRAWING CLAIMS CLAIMSmet Allowance CA 10 27 8Verified andAcknowledged Examiner's Signature Initials


Suite 30011240 Waples Mill RoadFairfax ,VA 22030

TITLE


II:J All Fees III:J 1.16 Fees (Filing) I

FILING FEE FEES: Authority has been given in Paper I:J 1.17 Fees ( Processing Ext. ofRECEIVED No. to charge/credit DEPOSIT ACCOUNT time)

1236 No. for following: 10 1.18 Fees (Issue) III:J Other I

II:J Credit I



OFFICE OF INITIAL PATENT EXAMINATION


SergeyBRIN



For: SYSTEMS AND METHODSFOR ENTICING USERS TOACCESS A WEB SITE

)))))))))))

Group Art Unit: Unknown

Examiner: Unknown

RECEIVEDAUG 3 0 2001

TechnOlogy Center 2100

REOUEST FOR OFFICIAL FILING RECEIPT

Commissioner for Patents and TrademarksWashington, D.C. 20231

Sir:

In reviewing our files, we find that we have not received an Official Filing Receipt for the above-identified

application. A copy of the official receipt card stamped by the Patent Office is attached.

It is respectfully requested that the Commissioner furnish an Official Filing Receipt for this application.


11111111111111111111111111111111111

26615

11240 Waples Mill RoadSuite 300Fallfax, Vrrginia22030(571) 432-0800

Date: August 21, 2001


By't~Q~~Paul A. HarrilyReg. No. 39,574

Inveritor(s): Sergey BRIN'

Docket No.: 0026-0002 Working Any: PAH

RECEIVEDAUG 3 0 2001

Technology Center 2100

Appln. No.: Unassigned

Date: April 30, 200 I

Title:· SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEB SITE

The following was/were received in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on the date stamped hereon:

I8l Utility Patent Application

o Design Patent

o Continuing Prosecution App. Reg.

o Provisional Application Cover Sheet

o Provisional Application

o ContinuationlDivisional App. (Rule)

1.53(b» with copy of application

APPLICATION INCLUDING:

I8l specification (23 pages)

I8l claims (27 claims)

I8l drawings (Fig(s). 1-10, 10 sheet(s»

I8l Executed DeclarationIPower of Attorney

o Unexecuted Declarati'onIPower of Attorney

I8l Request for Non-Publication of Application

I8l Assignment/Assignment Recordation (PTO-1595)

o Claim for Convention Priority w/# cefl. copYOes)

o Preliminary Amendment

o lnforma'tion Disclosure Statement Transmittal

I8l Information Disclosure Statement w/2 reference(s)

I8l Information Disclosure Citation (PTO-1449)

o Petition for # Month Extension of Time

o Constructive Petition for Extension ofTime

I8l Check for $ 1.236,00 is enclosed

I8l Check for $ 40.00 is enclosed

11111111111111111111111111111111111-

26615l'I'..U!lll I JJo.IJ!l4I-.J.KCJ1IllIC I!

.'

'"".



UTILITY PATENTAPPLICATION TRANSMITTAL LETTER

Box PATENT APPLICATIONCommissioner for Patents and TrademarksWashington, D.C. 20231

Sir:

Enclosed for filing is the utility patent application of Sergey BRIN for SYSTEMS ANDMETHODS FOR ENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEB SITE.

Also enclosed are:

[g] 10 sheet(s) of [g] formal 0 informal drawing(s);

o claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. §§ 119 and/or 365 is 0 hereby made to_ filed in _ on_;

o in the declaration;

o a certified copy of the priority document;

o a General Authorization for Petitions for Extensions of Time and Payment of Fees;

o applicant(s) is/are entitled to Small Entity Status;

~an Assignment document and Assignment Recordation Cover Sheet;

1ZI an Information Disclosure Statement and PTO-1449; and 2 references.

l:8J Other: Request for Non-Publication;

1ZI An 1ZI executed 0 unexecuted declaration of the inventor(s)

1ZI also is enclosed 0 will follow.

o Please amend the specification by inserting before the first line the sentence -- Thisapplication claims priority under 35 U.S.C. §§ 119 and/or 365 to _filed in _on _; the entirecontent of which is hereby incorporated by reference.--

o A bibliographic data entry sheet is enclosed.

Utility Patent Application Transmittal LetterAttorney's Docket No. 0026-0002

Page 2

lZI The filing fee has been calculated as follows 0 and in accordance with the enclosedpreliminary amendment:

CLAIMS

No. of Extra Rate FeeClaims Claims

Basic Application Fee $710.00

t;} Total Claims 27 Minus 20 = 7 x $18.00 = $126.00

;~3 Ind. Claims 8 Minus 3 = 5 x $ 80.00 = $400.00,~

:~~Ifmultiple dependent claims are presented, add $270.00

Total Application Fee $1,236.00

If Small entity status is claimed, subtract 50% of Total Application Fee,

Add Assignment Recording Fee if Assignment document is enclosed $40.00

TOTAL APPLICATION FEE DUE $1,276.00

o This application is being filed without a filing fee. Issuance of a Notice to File Missing Partsof Application is respectfully requested.

[gj A check in the amount of $1,236.00 (application filing fee and claims fees) is enclosed forthe fee due.

lZI A check in the amount of $ 40.00 (Assignment Recordation fee) is enclosed for thefee due.

o Charge $_ to Deposit Account No. 50-1070 for the fee due.


Page 3

~ The Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge any appropriate fees under 37 C.F.R. §§1.16, 1.17, and 1.21 that may be required by this paper, and to credit any overpayment, toDeposit Account No. 50-1070. This paper is submitted in duplicate.

1111111111111111111111111111111111\

26615





BY:BO~~Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574




SergeyBRIN

Application No.: Unassigned



))) Group Art Unit: Unassigned)) Examiner: Unassigned))))))

REQUEST FOR NON-PUBLICATION OF APPLICATION ANDCERTIFICATION UNDER 35 U.S.C. &122 (b)(2)(B)(i)

Commissioner of Patent and TrademarksWashington, D.C. 20231

Sir:

As an authorized agent of the above-identified applicant(s), the undersigned attorney

hereby certifies that the invention disclosed in the attached application has not and will not be the

subject of an application filed in another country, or under a multilateral agreement, that requires

publication at eighteen months after filing. I hereby request that the attached application not be

published under 35 U.S.c. §122(b).

I further understand that this non-publication request may be rescinded at any time and if

so, the application will be scheduled for publication at eighteen months from the earliest claimed

filing date for which a benefit is claimed.

Request for Non-Publication of ApplicationApplication Serial No. UnassignedAttorney's Docket No. 0026-0002

Page 2

I further understand that if applicant(s) subsequently file(s) an application directed to the

invention disclosed in the attached application in another country, or under a multilateral

international agreement, that requires publication of applications eighteen months after filing, the

United States Patent and Trademark Office must be notified of such filing within forty-five (45)

days after the date of the filing of such foreign or international application. I also understand that

of this application.

failure by applicant(s) to so notify the Patent and Trademark Office will result in abandonment


By:BQ~~Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574


1111\\1111111 \\11 11111 1111111\ \I1II

26615



.'

'"".



UTILITY PATENTAPPLICATION TRANSMITTAL LETTER

Box PATENT APPLICATIONCommissioner for Patents and TrademarksWashington, D.C. 20231

Sir:

Enclosed for filing is the utility patent application of Sergey BRIN for SYSTEMS ANDMETHODS FOR ENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEB SITE.

Also enclosed are:

[g] 10 sheet(s) of [g] formal 0 informal drawing(s);

o claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. §§ 119 and/or 365 is 0 hereby made to_ filed in _ on_;

o in the declaration;

o a certified copy of the priority document;

o a General Authorization for Petitions for Extensions of Time and Payment of Fees;

o applicant(s) is/are entitled to Small Entity Status;

~an Assignment document and Assignment Recordation Cover Sheet;

1ZI an Information Disclosure Statement and PTO-1449; and 2 references.

l:8J Other: Request for Non-Publication;

1ZI An 1ZI executed 0 unexecuted declaration of the inventor(s)

1ZI also is enclosed 0 will follow.

o Please amend the specification by inserting before the first line the sentence -- Thisapplication claims priority under 35 U.S.C. §§ 119 and/or 365 to _filed in _on _; the entirecontent of which is hereby incorporated by reference.--

o A bibliographic data entry sheet is enclosed.


Page 2

lZI The filing fee has been calculated as follows 0 and in accordance with the enclosedpreliminary amendment:

CLAIMS

No. of Extra Rate FeeClaims Claims

Basic Application Fee $710.00

t;} Total Claims 27 Minus 20 = 7 x $18.00 = $126.00

;~3 Ind. Claims 8 Minus 3 = 5 x $ 80.00 = $400.00,~

:~~Ifmultiple dependent claims are presented, add $270.00

Total Application Fee $1,236.00

If Small entity status is claimed, subtract 50% of Total Application Fee,

Add Assignment Recording Fee if Assignment document is enclosed $40.00

TOTAL APPLICATION FEE DUE $1,276.00

o This application is being filed without a filing fee. Issuance of a Notice to File Missing Partsof Application is respectfully requested.

[gj A check in the amount of $1,236.00 (application filing fee and claims fees) is enclosed forthe fee due.

lZI A check in the amount of $ 40.00 (Assignment Recordation fee) is enclosed for thefee due.

o Charge $_ to Deposit Account No. 50-1070 for the fee due.


Page 3

~ The Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge any appropriate fees under 37 C.F.R. §§1.16, 1.17, and 1.21 that may be required by this paper, and to credit any overpayment, toDeposit Account No. 50-1070. This paper is submitted in duplicate.

1111111111111111111111111111111111\

26615





BY:BO~~Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574




SergeyBRIN





REQUEST FOR NON-PUBLICATION OF APPLICATION ANDCERTIFICATION UNDER 35 U.S.C. &122 (b)(2)(B)(i)


Sir:

As an authorized agent of the above-identified applicant(s), the undersigned attorney

hereby certifies that the invention disclosed in the attached application has not and will not be the

subject of an application filed in another country, or under a multilateral agreement, that requires

publication at eighteen months after filing. I hereby request that the attached application not be

published under 35 U.S.c. §122(b).

I further understand that this non-publication request may be rescinded at any time and if

so, the application will be scheduled for publication at eighteen months from the earliest claimed

filing date for which a benefit is claimed.

Request for Non-Publication of ApplicationApplication Serial No. UnassignedAttorney's Docket No. 0026-0002

Page 2

I further understand that if applicant(s) subsequently file(s) an application directed to the

invention disclosed in the attached application in another country, or under a multilateral

international agreement, that requires publication of applications eighteen months after filing, the

United States Patent and Trademark Office must be notified of such filing within forty-five (45)

days after the date of the filing of such foreign or international application. I also understand that

of this application.

failure by applicant(s) to so notify the Patent and Trademark Office will result in abandonment


By:BQ~~Paul A. HarrityReg. No. 39,574


1111\\1111111 \\11 11111 1111111\ \I1II

26615



Attorney Docket No. 0026-0002

UNITED STATES PATENT APPLICATION

OF

SergeyBRIN

FOR

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR

ENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEB SITE


[0001) SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENTICING USERS TO ACCESS A WEB SITE

[0002) RELATED APPLICATION

[0003) This application claims priority under 35 U.S.c. § 119(e) based on U.S. Provisional

Application Serial No. 60/200,957, filed May 1,2000, the disclosure of which is incorporated

herein by reference.

[0004) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

[0005) Field of the Invention

[0006) The present invention relates generally to client-server networks and, more particularly,

to systems and methods that provide mechanisms for attracting users to a site on a network.

[0007) Description ofRelated Art

[0008] Today, many operators ofweb sites on the Internet use animated images, such as

animated Graphic Interchange Format (GIF) images, in web pages to make the web pages more

dynamic and visually appealing to users. The philosophy is that if the web pages are visually

appealing, then the users will visit the web site often.

[0009) There are disadvantages, however, to using animated images. For example, if a user

visits a site regularly, the user quickly begins to ignore the animated images. In other words,

although animated images can make web pages more appealing to users initially, they typically

do not entice the users to return to the web page.

1


[0010] With many web sites, it would be desirable to have users access the web site frequently.

Online businesses, for example, would benefit from having users (i.e., customers) return to their

web site on a regular basis. Additionally, web sites that display advertisements can obtain more

revenue from their advertisers if users regularly visit the web sites.

[0011] As a result, there exists a need for mechanisms that entice users to return to a web site

on a regular basis.

[0012] SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

[0013] Systems and methods consistent with the present invention address this and other needs

through the use of an animated story line or a modified/customized company logo ("special event

logo") displayed on a web page. The story line may change periodically (e.g., hourly, daily, or

weekly) to entice users to repeatedly access the web page to view the next episode in the

changing story line. The special event logo may be provided for special occasions, such as

holidays and other special events. The special event logo may be selectable by a user and lead to

a page of search results related to the holiday or special event.

[0014] In accordance with the purpose of the invention as embodied and broadly described

herein, a computer-readable medium stores instructions executable by one or more processors to

perform a method for attracting users to a web page. The computer-readable medium includes

instructions for uploading an initial object in a story line to the web page and instructions for

2


periodically uploading successive objects, following the initial object, to the web page according

to the story line.

[0015] In another implementation consistent with the present invention, a server includes a

memory that is configured to store instructions and a processor. The processor is configured to

execute the instructions to upload an initial object in a story line to a site on a network and

periodically upload successive objects, following the initial object, to the site according to the

story line to entice users to return to the site.

[0016] In yet another implementation consistent with the present invention, a method for

attracting users to a site on a network includes receiving a plurality of images that tell a story

according to a story line and successively displaying the images on the site according to the story

line.

[0017] In another implementation consistent with the present invention, a method for enticing

users to return to a web page includes receiving a plurality of objects that tell a story according to

a story line; providing a first one of the objects on the web page for a predetermined amount of

time; and providing next ones of the objects on the web page, each for the predetermined amount

oftime after the first one ofthe objects.

[0018] In a further implementation consistent with the present invention, a method for enticing

users to access a web page includes modifying a standard company logo to create a special event

logo; associating one or more search terms with the special event logo; uploading the special

3


event logo to the web page; receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and providing

search results relating to the special event logo.

[0019] In another implementation consistent with the present invention, a computer-readable

medium stores instructions executable by one or more processors to perform a method for

attracting users to a web page. The computer-readable medium includes instructions for creating

a special event logo by modifying a standard company logo; instructions for associating at least

one of a link and search results with the special event logo; instructions for uploading the special

event logo to the web page; instructions for receiving a user selection of the special event logo;

and instructions for providing the link or search results associated with the special event logo.

[0020] In yet another implementation consistent with the present invention, a server, connected

to a network, includes a memory configured to store instructions and a processor configured to

execute the instructions to determine a home page for a web page on the network, identify a

standard company logo on the home page, modify the standard company logo with special event



[0021] BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0022] The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part ofthis

specification, illustrate an embodiment of the invention and, together with the description,

explain the invention. In the drawings,

4


[0023] Fig. 1 is a diagram of an exemplary network in which systems and methods consistent

with the present invention may be implemented;

[0024] Fig. 2 is an exemplary diagram of a server ofFig. 1 in an implementation consistent

with the present invention;

[0025] Fig. 3 is a diagram of an exemplary web page for a changing story line according to an

implementation consistent with the present invention;

[0026] Fig. 4 is an exemplary diagram of a changing story line according to an implementation

consistent with the present invention;

[0027] Fig. 5 is an exemplary diagram of another changing story line according to an


[0028] Fig. 6 is a flowchart of processing for enticing users to return to a web page using a

changing story line in accordance with an implementation consistent with the present invention;

[0029] Fig. 7 is a diagram of an exemplary web page for a special event logo according to an


[0030] Fig. 8 is an exemplary diagram of search results that may be provided in response to

selection of the special event logo of Fig. 7 according to an implementation consistent with the

present invention;

[0031] Fig. 9 is a diagram ofexamples of special event logos according to implementations

consistent with the present invention; and

5


[0032] Fig. lOis a flowchart of processing for enticing users to return to a web page using a

special event logo in accordance with an implementation consistent with the present invention.

[0033] DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0034] The following detailed description of the invention refers to the accompanying

drawings. The same reference numbers in different drawings identify the same or similar

elements. Also, the following detailed description does not limit the invention. Instead, the

scope of the invention is defined by the appended claims and equivalents.

[0035] Systems and methods consistent with the present invention entice users to return to a

web page by providing a changing animated story line and/or a special event logo on the web

page.

[0036] EXEMPLARY NETWORK

[0037] Fig. 1 is an exemplary diagram ofa network 100 in which systems and methods

consistent with the present invention may be implemented. The network 100 may include

multiple clients 110 connected to multiple servers 120 via a network 130. The network 130 may

include a local area network (LAN), a wide area network (WAN), a telephone network, such as

the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN), an intranet, the Internet, a similar or dissimilar

network, or a combination ofnetworks. Four clients 110 and three servers 120 have been

illustrated as connected to network 130 in Fig. 1 for simplicity. In practice, there may be more or

less clients 110 and servers 120.

6


[0038] The clients 110 may include devices, such as wireless telephones, personal computers,

personal digital assistants (PDAs), lap tops, etc., threads or processes running on these devices,

and/or objects executable by these devices. The servers 120 may include server devices, threads,

and/or objects that operate or maintain web sites in a manner consistent with the present

invention. The clients 110 and servers 120 may connect to the network 130 via wired, wireless,

or optical connections.

[0039] Fig. 2 is an exemplary diagram ofa server 120 in an implementation consistent with the

present invention. The server 120 may include a bus 210, a processor 220, a main memory 230,

a read only memory (ROM) 240, a storage device 250, one or more input devices 260, one or

more output devices 270, and a communication interface 280. The bus 210 may include one or

more conductors that permit communication among the components of the server 120.

[0040] The processor 220 may include any type of conventional processor or microprocessor

that interprets and executes instructions. The main memory 230 may include a random access

memory (RAM) or another dynamic storage device that stores information and instructions for

execution by the processor 220. The ROM 240 may include a conventional ROM device or

another type of static storage device that stores static information and instructions for use by the

processor 220. The storage device 250 may include a magnetic and/or optical recording medium

and its corresponding drive.

[0041] The input devices 260 may include one or more conventional mechanisms that permit

an operator to input information to the server 120, such as a keyboard, a mouse, a pen, voice

7


recognition and/or biometric mechanisms, etc. The output devices 270 may include one or more

conventional mechanisms that output information to the operator, including a display, a printer, a

speaker, etc. The communication interface 280 may include any transceiver-like mechanism that

enables the server 120 to communicate with other devices and/or systems. For example, the

communication interface 280 may include mechanisms for communicating with another device

or system via a network, such as network 130.

[0042] As will be described in detail below, a server 120, consistent with the present invention,

provides an animated story line and/or a special event logo on a web page to entice users to

return to the web site on a regular basis. The server 120 may perform this task in response to

processor 220 executing software instructions contained in a computer-readable medium, such as

memory 230. A computer-readable medium may be defined as one or more memory devices

and/or carrier waves.

[0043] The software instructions may be read into memory 230 from another computer

readable medium, such as the data storage device 250, or from another device via the

communication interface 280. The software instructions contained in memory 230 causes

processor 220 to perform processes that will be described later. Alternatively, hardwired

circuitry may be used in place of or in combination with software instructions to implement

processes consistent with the present invention. Thus, the present invention is not limited to any

specific combination of hardware circuitry and software.

8


[0044] EXEMPLARY WEB PAGE FOR ANIMATED STORY LINE

[0045] Fig. 3 is a diagram of an exemplary web page 300 maintained by a server 120 according

to an implementation consistent with the present invention. The web page 300 may include a

company logo 310 and one or more animated objects 320. The animated objects 320 may

include images, video, and/or audio information and may be strategically located on the web

page 300 to draw users' attention to one or more portions of the web page 300, such as the

company's name or an advertiser's display.

[0046] According to implementations consistent with the present invention, the server 120 may

update the animated objects 320 periodically, such as hourly, daily, weekly, etc., according to an

animated story line. For example, the server 120 may periodically upload a new animated object

to the web site 300.

[0047] Fig. 4 is a diagram of an exemplary story line 400 according to an implementation

consistent with the present invention. In this example, the story line 400 involves aliens that

steal a company's logo and includes five animated images 410-450. The animated image 410

represents the beginning of the story and shows an alien spacecraft approaching the company

logo. The animated image 420 shows the alien spacecraft landing on the company logo and an

alien inspecting the logo. The animated image 430 shows the aliens leaving their spacecraft to

further inspect the company logo. The animated image 440 shows the aliens hauling away the

company logo with their spacecraft. Finally, the animated image 450 shows the company logo

after being deposited on another world by the aliens.

9


[0048] Fig. 5 is a diagram of another exemplary story line 500 according to an implementation

consistent with the present invention. In this example, the story line 500 involves the founding

fathers celebrating the Fourth of July and includes four animated images 510-540. The animated

image 510 represents the beginning of the story and shows the founding fathers executing the

Declaration of Independence. The animated image 520 shows the founding fathers celebrating

the execution of the Declaration of Independence with a cook-out. The animated image 530

shows the founding fathers watching fireworks that have the effect of removing the color from a

company's logo. Finally, the animated image 540 shows one of the founding fathers repainting

the company logo.

[0049] EXEMPLARY PROCESSING FOR ANIMATED STORY LINE

[0050] Fig. 6 is a flowchart of processing for enticing users to return to a web page using a

changing story line according to an implementation consistent with the present invention.

Processing may begin with the generation of animated objects for a story line [act 610]. The

animated objects may be generated using conventional techniques and software and stored as a

single object file or as multiple object files on the server 120 (Fig. 1). The object file(s) may be

downloaded to the server 120 at one time or over a period of time using, for example, a

computer-readable medium, such as a removable memory or a network transmission.

[0051] When at least the first animated object in the story line is completed, the first animated

object may be uploaded to the web page [act 620]. The first animated object may then be

viewable or accessible on the web page via a network, such as network 130. Then after a

10


predetermined or random amount of time, such as an hour, day, week, etc., the next animated

object in the story line may be uploaded to the web page [act 630]. If there are more animated

objects to be loaded [act 640], these objects may be uploaded to the web page after each passing

of the predetermined or random amount of time [act 630]. lfno more animated objects remain

[act 640], it may be determined whether another story line is to be presented [act 650]. If another

story line is to be presented, then processing may continue at act 610 with the generation of the

animated objects for that story line. Ifno other story line is to be presented, processing may end.

[0052] The foregoing processing may be performed automatically by the server 120 or one or

more devices connected directly or indirectly (i.e., via a network) to the server 120.

Alternatively, some ofthe acts may be performed by one or more human operators.

[0053] Also, while systems and methods have been described for presenting animated objects

of a story, other types of information may be presented to entice users to return to a web page.

For example, video data, audio data, and/or a series of pictures may be used. It has also been

described that a single animated object may be uploaded to the web page periodically and

presented (e.g., displayed) for a predetermined or random amount of time. Alternatively, a series

of animated objects may be uploaded and presented at the same time to form a sort of cartoon

that tells a story.

[0054] EXEMPLARY WEB PAGE FOR SPECIAL EVENT LOGO

[0055] Fig. 7 is a diagram of an exemplary web page 700 maintained by a server 120 according

to an implementation consistent with the present invention. The web page 700 may include a

11


special event logo 710. The special event logo 710 may include a standard company logo 720

modified or customized with one or more animated objects 730. The animated objects 730 may

include images, video, and/or audio information and may be strategically located next to or

integrated with the logo 720 to draw users' attention to the company's name or, perhaps, an

advertiser's display.

[0056] According to implementations consistent with the present invention, the server 120 may

provide the special event logo 710 for holidays and other special events. For example, the

special event logo 710 shown in Fig. 7 relates to Valentine's Day.

[0057] The server 120 may also provide one or more search terms, one or more links to a

document, or search results relating to the special event logo 710. Therefore, when a user selects

(e.g., clicks on) the special event logo 710, the server 120 may provide a page of a document,

such as a web site, or search results relating to the holiday or special event for which the special

event logo 710 was provided. In the example shown in Fig. 7, selection ofthe special event logo

710 may lead to a page containing search results relating to Valentine's Day.

[0058] Fig. 8 is an exemplary diagram of search results that may be provided in response to

selection of the special event logo 710 according to an implementation consistent with the

present invention. As shown, the search results contain links to one or more documents relating

to Valentine's Day.

[0059] Fig. 9 is a diagram of examples 910-950 of special event logos according to

implementations consistent with the present invention. In the example 910, a company logo is

12


modified with a leprechaun's pot ofgold for Saint Patrick's Day. In the example 920, a company

logo- is modified with animated characters celebrating New Year's Day. In the example 930, a

company logo is modified with a turkey for Thanksgiving. In the example 940, a company logo

is modified with a voter's button for Election Day. Finally, in the example 950, a company logo

is modified with an animated character for the Olympics.

[0060] EXEMPLARY PROCESSING FOR SPECIAL EVENT LOGO

[0061] Fig. lOis a flowchart of processing for enticing users to return to a web page using a

special event logo according to an implementation consistent with the present invention.

Processing may begin with the generation of a modified or customized company logo [act 1010].

A standard company logo on a web site, for example, may be modified or customized with one or

more animated objects for a special occasion, such as a holiday or special event. The animated

object(s) may be separate from the company logo or may be integrated therewith. The special

event logo may be generated using conventional techniques and software and stored as a single

object file or as multiple object files on the server 120 (Fig. 1). The object fi1e(s) may be

downloaded to the server 120 at one time or over a period oftime using, for example, a

computer-readable medium, such as a removable memory or a network transmission.

[0062] To generate a modified or customized logo, the server 120 may identify a home page

for a document, such as a web site, on a network, such as the Internet. The server 120 may then

locate the standard logo used on the home page to identify the operator of the web site. The

server 120 may modify the standard logo with one or more animated objects.

13


[0063] The server 120 may associate one or more search terms with the special event logo [act

1020]. For Valentine's Day, for example, the search terms of "valentine's day" may be associated

with the special event logo. In an alternative implementation consistent with the present

invention, the server 120 may associate a document, such as a web page, or search results with

the special event logo.

[0064] The server 120 may upload the special event logo to the web page [act 1030]. For

example, the server 120 may upload the special event logo when the special occasion

corresponding to the special event logo occurs. The server 120 may leave the special event logo

on the web page for one or more days corresponding to the special occasion or may periodically

change the special event logo during the one or more days of the special occasion.

[0065] At some point, a user may select the special event logo by, for example, clicking on the

logo using an input device, such as a mouse [act 1040]. Ifuser selection occurs, the server 120

may use the associated search term(s) to generate a search query. The server 120 may use the

search query to search an index, a directory, or a network, such as the Internet. The server 120

may then provide search results relating to the special event logo to the user [act 1050].

[0066] In an alternative implementation, the server 120 uses the document or search results

previously associated with the special event logo as the search results relating to the special event

logo. In this case, the server 120 may simply retrieve the document or search results from

memory.

14


[0067] The foregoing processiIig may be performed automatically by the server 120 or one or

more devices connected directly or indirectly (i.e., via a network) to the server 120.

Alternatively, some of the acts may be performed by one or more human operators.

[0068] Also, while systems and methods have been described for using one or more animated

objects to modify or customize a company logo, other types of information may be used to entice

users to return to a web page. For example, video and/or audio data may be used.

[0069] CONCLUSION

[0070] Systems and methods consistent with the present invention provide mechanisms to

entice users to return to a web page by presenting animated objects that change in time to tell a

story and/or a company logo modified or customized for a special occasion. In this manner,

users are encouraged to access the web page to view the story and/or the special event logo.

[0071] The foregoing description of preferred embodiments of the present invention provides

illustration and description, but is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the

precise form disclosed. Modifications and variations are possible in light of the above teachings

or may be acquired from practice of the invention. For example, while series of acts have been

described with regard to Figs. 6 and 10, the order of the acts may be modified in other

implementations consistent with the present invention.

[0072] The scope of the invention is defined by the claims and their equivalents.

15


WHAT IS CLAIMED IS


uploading a first image in a story line to the web page; and

periodically uploading successive images, following the first image, to the web page

according to the story line.


generating a plurality of images that tell a story according to the story line, the images

including the first image and the successive images; and

storing the images on a server associated with the web page.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the first image and the successive images include

animated images.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein each of the first image and the successive images

includes a series ofanimated images.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the uploading includes:

presenting the first image for viewing over a network; and

wherein the periodically uploading includes:

16


presenting the successive images for viewing over the network.

6. The method of claim 5, wherein the presenting the first image includes:

displaying the first image on the web page; and

wherein the presenting the successive images includes:

displaying the successive images on the web page.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein the first image and the successive images are

displayed near or with at least one of a company's logo and an advertisement.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein the periodically uploading includes:

uploading the successive images after each predetermined period of time.

9. The method of claim 1, wherein the periodically uploading includes:

uploading the successive images after random periods of time.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein the first image and the successive images include

video images.

11. A system for attracting users to a web page, comprising:

17


means for uploading a first image in a story line to the web page; and

means for periodically uploading successive images, following the first image, to the web

page according to the story line.


processors to perform a method for attracting users to a web page, comprising:

instructions for uploading an initial object in a story line to the web page; and

instructions for periodically uploading successive objects, following the initial object, to

the web page according to the story line.

13. The computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the initial and successive

objects include at least one of animated images, video images, and audio information.

14. A server, comprising:



upload an initial object in a story line to a site on a network, and

periodically upload successive objects, following the initial object, to the site

according to the story line to entice users to return to the site.

18


15. A method for attracting users to a site on a network, comprising:

receiving a plurality of images that tell a story according to a story line; and

successively displaying the images on the site according to the story line.

16. The method of claim 15, wherein the successively displaying includes:

displaying a first one of the images on the site for a predetermined amount of

time, and

displaying next ones of the images on the site after each predetermined amount of

time.

17. The method of claim 15, wherein the successively displaying includes:

displaying a first one of the images on the site for a first amount of time, and

displaying next ones of the images on the site for random amounts of time after

the first amount of time.






19




includes:


animated images.


includes:


of video and audio data.

21. The method of claim 18, wherein the special event includes a holiday.

22. The method of claim 18, wherein the associating one or more search terms

includes:


23. The method of claim 18, wherein the uploading the special event logo includes:


20


24. The method of claim 18, wherein the providing search results includes:


using the search query to search at least one of a network, an index, and a directory, and



includes:



modifying the standard company logo with special event infonnation to create the special

event logo.


processors to perfonn a method for attracting users to a web page, comprising:


instructions for associating at least one of a link and search results with the special event

logo;



21



27. A server connected to a network, comprising:








event.

22

[0073] ABSTRACT


[0074] A system provides a periodically changing story line and/or a special event company

logo to entice users to access a web page. For the story line, the system may receive objects that

tell a story according to the story line and successively provide the objects on the web page for

predetermined or random amounts oftime. For the special event company logo, the system may

modify a standard company logo for a special event to create a special event logo, associate one

or more search terms with the special event logo, and upload the special event logo to the web

page. The system may then receive a user selection of the special event logo and provide search

results relating to the special event.

23

100~

SERVERCLIENT

110

CLIENT!J..;;...L!Iilllll!l

120

CLIENT~ t

110 / / SERVER"V' '\..

NETWORKill 120

--X--\.. ~ --x-- WEll '~~

130

CLIENT"""'--- =

110 / ~SERVER

~

120

FIG. 1

120~

INPUT DEVICES

260

OUTPUT DEVICES....

MAINMEMORY

230

•

ROM

240

STORAGEDEVICE

250

270

COMMUNICATIONINTERFACE

280

.-~

••

,

FIG.2

•

PROCESSOR

220

"-- BUS210

300

GOOGLE WEB SITE

FILE EDIT VIEW GO WINDOW HELP

§§~~~~

[;]~~

IBOOKMARKS IYJ LOCATION: Ihttp://WWW.Google.com ---------IYJ

310~ A-..-/320 ~ADVANCED SEARCH - LANGUAGE, DISPLAY, & FILTERING OPTIONS

I IGOOGLE INDEX: 1,060,000,000 WEB PAGES

DOCUMENT DONE

FIG. 3

IYJ

400~

~420

~410

~430

Google~' ." ~,

G·· :.... :;,u:\lol-'··'ec . :SC"ci)

'>". '4"'0," ""'''' ~~~+ '

fl.£.,.-

,,~ ~

"" - S~1f"

,~\, '''' '. • , ,or'" '. ' ,". .c.'~ , r.~~ : i ~,':- re(t,,, '

"'0,: "">'c, ~

~440

~450

FIG. 4

:=~ :::=:

500~

vt.- -" ..

'<',tj ~530

FIG. 5

~540

GENERATE ANIMATED OBJECTSFOR STORY LINE

610

UPLOAD FIRST ANIMATED OBJECTOF STORY LINE TO WEB PAGE 620

630

YES

YES

UPLOAD NEXT ANIMATEDOBJECT OF STORY LINE

NO

NO

FIG. 6

640

650

700~

GOOGLE WEB SITE

FILE EDIT VIEW GO WINDOW HELP- - - --

~§~~~~IBOOKMARKS IYI LOCATION: Ihttp://www.Google.comlYl

710 '---A...

730~

..ADVANCED SEARCH - LANGUAGE, DISPLAY, & FILTERING OPTIONS

I IGOOGLE INDEX: 1,060,000,000 WEB PAGES

DOCUMENT DONE

FIG.7

[;)~f8]

~

lYl

700

GOOGLE WEB SITE [;]~~FILE EDIT VIEW GO WINDOW HELP

[g§~~~~IBOOKMARKS ~ LOCATION: Ihttp://www.Google.com ~I Searched the web for valentine's day. Results 1-50 of about 1,060,000. Search took 0.63 seconds I ~

Category: Society> Holidays> Valentine's Day

0happy valentine's day!Happy Valentine's day from TheHolidaySpot ! valentine's day greeting cards.... Free LoveLetterheads for Valentine's day Give that special touch with your pen. '"Description: History and recipes, cards and a message board to celebrate Valentine's Day.Category: Society> Holidays> Valentine's Daywww.theholidayspot.com/valentine/ - 9k - Cached - Similar pages

Billy Bear's Happy Valentine's DayBillyBear4Kids.Com Welcomes YOU! Click Here advertisementbanner. HOME I Clipart I Animals I Fun ...Description: Online games, crafts, print and play pages, e-cards, screensavers, and desktop sets.Category: Kids and Teens> People and Society> ... > Valentine's Daywww.billybear4kids.com/holidays/valentin/fun.htm - 12k - Cached - Similar pages

~I I DOCUMENT DONE

FIG. 8

~910

~930

Geogle'" Ah-/940

~",

FIG. 9

NO

START

GENERATE MODIFIED/CUSTOMIZED LOGO

ASSOCIATE SEARCHTERM(S) WITH MODIFIED/

CUSTOMIZED LOGO

UPLOAD MODIFIED/CUSTOMIZEDLOGO TO WEB PAGE

YES

PROVIDE SEARCH RESULTSRELATING TO MODIFIED/

CUSTOMIZED LOGO

FIG. 10

1010

1020

1030

1040

1050

Received: 4/27/01 5:08PM; -> 5714320800; Page 4

, 04/2772001 PRI 14:08 FAX GOOGLE INC. I4l 004/016

Page I of3

Attorney's Docket No_ 0026-0002

DECLARATION AND POWER OF ATTORNEY

As a below named inventor, I hereby declare that my residence, post office address and citizenship are as statedbelow next to my name; I believe I am the original, first and sole inventor (ifonly one name is listed below) or anoriginal, first and joint inventor (ifplural names are listed below) ofthe subject matter which is claimed and forwhich a patent is sought on the invention entitled: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENTICING USERS TOACCESS A WEB SITE. the specification ofwhich 0 was filed _or ~ is attached hereto.

I hereby state that I have reviewed and understand the contents ofthe above-identified specification, including tbeclaims, as amended by any amendment referred to above. I acknowledge the duty to disclose information which ismaterial to the examination of this application in accordance with Title 37, Code ofFederal Regulations, § 1.56.

I hereby claim the benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) of any United States provisional application(s) listed below:

I hereby claim foreign priority benefits under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or § 365(b) ofany foreign application(s) forpatent or inventor's certificate or § 365(a) of any PCT international application(s), designating at least one countryother than the United States, listed below and have also identified below any foreign application(s) for patent orinventor's certificate, or any PCT international application(s) having a filing date before that of the application(s) ofwhich priority is claimed:

Country Application Number Date ofFiling Priority Claimed Under3S U.S.C. 119

DYES 0 NO

DYES 0 NO

Date ofFilingApplication Number

I hereby claim the benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120 of any United States application(s) or § 365(c) ofany PCTinternational application(s) designating the United States, listed below and, insofar as the subject matter of each ofthe claims of this application is not disclosed in the prior United States or PCT international application(s) in themanner provided by the first paragraph of35 U.S.C. § 112, I acknowledge the duty to disclose information which ismaterial to patentability as defined in 37 CFR § 1.56 which became available between the filing date of the priorapplication(s) and the national or PCT international filing date of this application:

Received: 4/27/01 5:08PM;

1 04/2112001 FRI 14:08 FAX GOOGLE INC.

-> 5714320800; Page 5

@I 005/016

Page 2 00

Combined Declaration and Power ofAttorneyAttorney's Docket No. 0026-0002

u.s. Applications Status (Check One)

U.S. Application U.S. Filing Date Patented Pending AbandonedNumber

and Kulpreet S. Rana, Reg. No. 43,127.

HARRITY & SNYDER, L.L.P.11240 Waples Mill RoadSuite 300Fairfax, Virginia 22030

U.s. SerialNumberAssigned (ifany)

PCT Filing Date

PCT Applications Designating the U.S.

PCT Application No.

I hereby appoint the following attorney anellor agent(s) to prosecute this application and transact all business in thePatent and Trademark Office connected therewith. HARRITY & SNYDER, L.L.P.; Paul A Harrity, Reg.No. 39,574; Glenn Snyder, Reg. No. 41,428; John E. Harrity, Reg. No. 43,367; Tony M. Cole, Reg. No. 43,417;Brian E. Ledell, Reg. No. 42,784; and Alan Pedersen-Giles, Reg. No. 39,996; all of

Please address all correspondence toHARRITY & SNYDER, L.L.P.11240 Waples Mill RoadSuite 300Fairfax, Virginia 22030Telephone No. (571) 432-0800.

I hereby declare that all statements made herein ofmy own knowledge are true and that all statements made oninfonnation and belief are believed to be true; and further that these statements were made with the knowledge thatwillful false statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under section 1001 ofTitle 18 of the United States Code, and that such willful false statements may jeopardize the validity of theapplication or any patent issuing thereon.

Received: 4/27/01 5:08PM;

• 04/27./2001 FRI 14: 09 FAX GOOGLE INC.

-> 5714320800; Page 6

Page 3 of3

Combined Declaration and Power ofAttorneyAttorney's Docket No. 0026-0002

141 006/016

Full Name of First Inventor Inventor's Signature Date

:~-:1? ~ (oz., (0 ISergeyBRIN <

Residence Country ofCitizenship

Palo Alto, California U.S.A.

Post Office Address

555 Bryant Street, Palo Alto, California 94301

Full Name of Second Inventor Inventor's Signature Date

Residence Country ofCitizenship

Post Office Address

Full Name ofThird Inventor Inventor's Signature Date

Residence Country of Citizenship

Post Office Address

PATENT APPLICATION SERIAL NO. _

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEPATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

FEE RECORD SHEET

05/01/2001 WABRHA"l 00000055 09843923

01 FC 101 710.00 OP02 FC 103 126.00 OP03 FC 102 400.00 OP

PTO-1556(5/87)

·U.S. GPO: 2000-466-987139595

.plication or Docket Number

PATENT APPLICATION FEE DETERMINATION RECORDEffective October 1, 2000

OTHER THANOR SMALL ENTITY

RATE FEE

OR ASIC FEE 710.00

OR X$18=

OR. X80=

X80=OR1----1----1

OR X$18=

OR +270=

. . TOTALOR ADDIT. FEE....__-4I

OR +270=

OR TOTAL ...._-... OTHERTHAN

SMALL ENTITY OR SMALL ENTITY

ADDI- .RATE TIONAL

"FEE

RATE FEE

BASIC FEE 355.00

X$9=

X40=,

+135=

TOTAL

SMALL ENTITYTYPE c::::J

ADDI-RATE TIONAL

FEE

X$9=

X40=

+135=

TOTALADOiT. FEE

o

PRESENTEXTRA

Column 3

NUMBER EXTRA

**

minus 3 =

_minus 20= *

NUMBER FILED

-~.'

Minus

Minus

CLAIMS AS AMENDED - PART II

Independent *

Total

FIRST PRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAiM

TOTAL CLAIMS

TOTAL CHARGEABLE CLAIMS

FOR

MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM PRESENT

* If the difference in column 1 is less than zero, enter "0" in column 2

INDEPENDENT CLAIMS

FIRST PRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM

Ind pendent * Minus *** =Total * Minus **

PRESENT. ,EXTRA

=

ADDI-RATE TIONAL

FEE

X$ 9=

X40=.. .'

+135=

TOTALADDIT. FEE

ADDI- .RATE TIONAL

FEE

OR X$18=

R X80='o 1--_--11--_--1

OR +270=

.. TOTALOR ADDIT. FEE....__..

/~

..J

ADDI- :flATE TIONAL

FEE

O X80=Ra--__......__....

OR X$18=

ADDI-RATE TIONAL

FEE

X$.9=

X40=/

+135= .

TOTALAOOIT. FEE

PRESENTEXTRA

=**Minus

FIRST PRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM

Ind pendent Minus *** =Total

OR' +270=• If th entry in column 1 is less than the entry in column 2, write "0. in column 3. TOTAL•• If the "Highest Number Previously Paid For" IN THIS SPACE is less than 20, nter "20: OR ADOlf: FEE ....__..·*·11 the "Highest Number Previously Paid For" IN THIS SPACE is less than 3, enter "3:

The "Highest Number Previously Paid For" (Total or Indep ndent) is the highest numb r found in the appropriate box in column 1.

FORM PT0-875(Rev. SlOO)

Palent and Trademark Office. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE·u.s. GPO: ~708130103

SERIAl NO. AUNGDATE

CLAIMS ONLY 1') :.;;; Y' JY2 ~ rJ v"/-</) / /.l /"APPUCANT(S)

CLAIMSAFTER AFTER * I" I"ASALED 1.1 AMENDMENT 2nd AMENDMENT

IND. DEP. IND. DEP. IND. DEP. IND. DEP. IND. DEP. IND. DEP.

1 I 51

2 I 523 I 534 I 54

5 / 55

6 I 56

7 I 578 58

9 ; 59

10 j 60

11 I 6112 I 6213 I 6314 I 64

15 / 6516 I 6617 / 6718 I 6819 6920 J 7021 7122 / 7223 I 7324 J 7425 I 7526 / 7627 I n28 7829 7930 8031 8132 8233 8334 84

35 8536 86

37 8738 88

39 8940 9041 9142 92

43 9344 94

45 9546 9647 9748 9849 9950 100

TOTAL 9. • • • TOTAL , -.'IND. IND• .'TOTAL /'/ • • • TOTAL •DEP. DEP.TOTAL lri t- ~I~CLAIMS

*MAY BE USED FOR ADDITIONAL CLAIMS OR ADMENDMENTS

U.S.DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEFORM PT().2022 (1-98) Paten! and TrademaJ1< 0fIlce

·U.S. Government PmtingOffice: 1998· (J3.214170303




Sergey BRIN



Title: SYSTEMS AND METHODSFOR ENTICING USERS TOACCESS A WEB SITE


INFORMATION DISCLOSURE STATEMENT UNDER 37 C.FeR. § 1.97<b)


Sir:

Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 1.56 and 1.97(b), App1icant(s) bring to the attention of the

Examiner the documents listed on the attached PTO 1449. This Information Disclosure

Statement is being filed before the mailing date of a first Office Action in the above-referenced

application. As such, no certification or fee is required. Copies of the listed documents are

attached.

Applicant(s) respectfully request(s) that the Examiner consider the listed documents and

indicate that they were considered by making appropriate notations on the attached form.

lnfonnation Disclosure Statement Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.97(b)Application Serial No. UnassignedAttorney's Docket No. 0026-0002

Page 2

If any copending application(s) is/are cited on the attached PTO 1449, the Examiner's

attention is directed to the foregoing application(s) in compliance with §2001.06(b) of the

Manual of Patent Examining Procedures. By identifying the copending application(s), the

assignee and/or applicant of the application(s) do not waive confidentiality of the application(s).

Accordingly, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is requested to maintain the confidentiality

of the copending application(s) under 35 U.S.c. §122.

This submission does not represent that a search has been made and does not constitute

an admission that each or all of the listed documents are material orconstitute "prior art." If the

Examiner applies any of the documents as prior art against any claim in the application and

Applicant(s) detennine(s) that the citedodocument(s) do not constitute "prior art" under United

States law, Applicant(s) reserve(s) the right to present to the Office the relevant facts and law

regarding the appropriate status of such documents.

Applicant(s) further reserve(s) the right to take appropriate action to establish the

patentability of the disclosed invention over the listed documents, should one or more of the

documents be applied against the claims of the present application.

Infonnation Disclosure Statement Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.97(b)Application Serial No. UnassignedAttorney's Docket No. 0026-0002

Page 3

If there is any fee due in connection with the filing of this Statement, please charge the

fee to our Deposit Account No. 50-1070.


1111111111111111111111111I111111111

26615




By: -l.:e~?Q~~~~~S?~_Paul A. Harrity ~Reg. No. 39,574

SHEET OF-

IIII~I ~IIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIATTORNEY'S DKT No. ApPLICATION No.

J~INFORMATION 0026-0002 Unassigned p

26615 ApPLlCANT(S)CI.~I~DISCLOSURE Sergey BRIN ·~o

~!I!ln !JJoJ:El4I.J.XCJlllllI:l!FILING DATE GROUP

"11~iCITATION ~~oApril 30. 2001 Unassigned cD M

PTO·1449

~WU.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS

EXAMINER'S FILINGINITIALS PATENT NO. DATE NAME CLASS SUBCLASS DATE


EXAMINER'S TranslationINITIALS PATENT NO. DATE COUNTRY CLASS SUBCLASS Yes No

OTHER DOCUMENTS (Including Author, Title, Date, Pertinent Pages, Etc.)

Google; Google Holiday Logos; www.google.com/holidaylogos; pages 1-8; 2001 (printdate).

Google; Mentalplex; www.google.com/holidaylogos; pages 1-4; April 1. 2000.

II EXAMINER I DATE CONSIDERED

EXAMINER: Initial if reference considered, whether or not citation is in conformance with MPEP 609; draw line through citation if not inconformance and not considered. Include copy of this form with next communication to applicant(s).