`
`(THIRD PARTY REQUESTER'S CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS)
`
`FISH & RICHARDSON, PC
`
`P.O. BOX 1022
`
`MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55440-1022
`
`Corrmissioner for Paten1S
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria. VA 22313-1450
`'I/INIJNUSJ)I'O.Qcaf
`
`MAILED
`JUL298
`
`CENTRAL REEXAMINATION UNIT
`
`EX PARTE REEXAMINATION COMMUNICATION TRANSMITTAL FORM
`
`REEXAMINATION CONTROL NO. 901011.014.
`
`PATENT NO. 5.832.494.
`
`ART UNIT 3992.
`
`Enclosed is a copy of the latest communication from the United States Patent and Trademark
`Office in the above identified ex parte reexamination proceeding (37 CFR 1.550(f)).
`
`Where this copy is supplied after the reply by requester, 37 CFR 1.535, or the time for filing a
`reply has passed, no submission on behalf of the ex parte reexamination requester will be
`acknowledged or considered (37 CFR 1.550(g)).
`
`PTOL-465 (Rev.07-Q4)
`
`001
`
`001
`
`Facebook Ex. 1002 Part 4
`
`
`
`Notice of Intent to Issue
`Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate
`
`Control No.
`
`90/011,014
`
`Examiner
`
`Patent Under Reexamination
`
`5,832,494
`
`Art Unit
`
`3992
`JOSHUA CAMPBELL
`-- The MAILING DATE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`1. ~ Prosecution on the merits is (or remains) closed in this ex parle reexamination proceeding. This proceeding is
`subject to reopening at the initiative of the Office or upon petition. Cf. 37 CFR 1.313(a). A Certificate will be
`issued in view of
`(a) [gJ Patent owner's communication(s) filed: 13 June 2011.
`(b) 0 Patent owner's late response filed: __ .
`(c) D Patent owner's failure to file an appropriate response to the Office action mailed: __ .
`(d) 0 Patent owner's failure to timely file an Appeal Brief (37 CFR 41.31 ).
`(e) D Other: __
`Status of Ex Parte Reexamination:
`(f) Change in the Specification: DYes [gJ No
`DYes [gJ No
`(g) Change in the Drawing(s):
`(h) Status of the Claim(s):
`(1) Patent claim(s) confirmed: 1-3,5, 7-16 and 18-21.
`(2) Patent claim(s) amended (including dependent on amended claim(s)): __
`(3) Patent claim(s) canceled: 23-25 and 31-33.
`(4) Newly presented claim(s) patentable: 34-54.
`(5) ·Newly presented canceled claims: 55-57.
`
`(6) Patent claim(s) D previously D currently disclaimed: __
`
`(7) Patent claim(s) not subject to reexamination: 4,6, 17,22 and 26-30.
`
`2. D Note the attached statement of reasons for patentability and/or confirmation. Any comments considered
`necessary by patent owner regarding reasons for patentability and/or confirmation must be submitted promptly
`to avoid processing delays. Such submission(s) should be labeled: "Comments On Statement of Reasons for
`Patentability and/or Confirmation."
`3. 0 Note attached NOTICE OF REFERENCES CITED {PT0-892).
`4. ~ Note attached LIST OF REFERENCES CITED (PTO/SB/08 or PTO/SB/08 substitute).
`
`5. D The drawing correction request filed on __ is: D approved
`D disapproved.
`6. D Acknowledgment is made of the priority claim under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`a)O All b)O Some*
`c)O None
`of the certified copies have
`0 been received.
`,
`D not been received.
`D been filed in Application No. __ .
`D been filed in reexamination Control No.
`.
`D been received by the International Bureau in PCT Application No. __ .
`
`• Certified copies not received: __ .
`7. 0 Note attached Examiner's Amendment.
`8. D Note attached Interview Summary (PT0-474).
`9. 0 Other: __ .
`
`cc: Requester (if third party requester)
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`Notice of Intent to Issue Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate
`PTOL-469 (Rev. 05-10)
`
`Part of Paper No 20110624
`
`002
`
`002
`
`Facebook Ex. 1002 Part 4
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/011 ,014
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`1)
`
`This Office action addresses claims 1-3, 5, 7-16, 18-21 , 23-25, and 31-33 and new claims
`
`34-57 of United States Patent No. 5,832,494 (hereinafter "Egger"), for which it has been
`
`determined in the Order Granting Ex Parte Reexamination (hereafter the "Order") mailed
`
`8/6/2010 that a substantial new question of patentability was raised in the Request for Ex Parte
`
`reexamination filed on 5/26/2010 (hereafter the "Request"). Claims 1-3, 5, 7-16, 18-21,23-25,
`
`and 31-57 are subject to reexamination. Claims 4, 6, 17, 22 and 26-30 are not subject to
`
`reexamination. Claims 23-25, 31-33, and 55-57 have been cancelled.
`
`2)
`
`This is a response to the amendment filed on 6/13/2011. Claims 1-3, 5, 7-16, 18-21, and
`
`34-54 are confirmed and/or patentable below.
`
`Information Disclos11re Statement
`
`3)
`
`Where the IDS citations are submitted but not described, the examiner is only responsible
`
`for cursorily reviewing the references. The initials of the examiner on the PT0-1449 indicate
`
`only that degree of review unless the reference is either applied against the claims, or discussed
`
`by the examiner as pertinent art of interest, in a subsequent office action. See Guidelines for
`
`Reexamination of Cases in View of In re Portola Packaging, Inc., 1 I 0 F.3d 786, 42 USPQ2d
`
`1295 (Fed. Cir. 1997), 64 FRat 15347, 1223 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office at 125 (response to comment
`
`6).
`
`Consideration by the examiner of the information submitted in an IDS means that the
`
`examiner will consider the documents in the same manner as other documents in Office search
`
`files are considered by the examiner while conducting a search of the prior art in a proper field of
`
`003
`
`003
`
`Facebook Ex. 1002 Part 4
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/011,014
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 3
`
`search. The initials of the examiner placed adjacent to the citations on the PT0- 1449 or
`
`PTO/SB/08A and 08B or its equivalent me~n that the information has been considered by the
`
`examiner to the extent noted above.
`
`Regarding IDS submissions MPEP 2256 recites the following: "Where patents,
`
`publications, and other such items of information are submitted by a party (patent owner or
`
`requester) in compliance with the requirements of the rules, the requisite degree of consideration
`
`to be given to such information will be normally limited by the degree to which the party filing
`
`the information citation has explained the content and relevance of the information."
`
`Accordingly, the IDS submissions have been considered by the Examiner only with the
`
`scope required by MPEP 2256, unless otherwise noted.
`
`4)
`
`The rejections mailed utilized the following prior art references:
`
`Refer ences Utilized
`
`a.
`
`LucareJia- D. Lucarel1a, "A Model for Hypertext-Based Information Retrieval,"
`
`Proceedings of the ECHT'90, Cambridge University Press, N. Streitz, A. Rizk and J.
`
`Andre, eds., pp. 81-94, November 1990
`
`b.
`
`Baase- S. Baase, Computer Algorithms: Introduction to Design and Analysis,
`
`2nd Edition, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1988
`
`c.
`
`Fox- E. Fox, "Extending the Boolean and Vector Space Models oflnformation
`
`Retrieval with P-Norm Queries and Multiple Concept Types," Cornell University, 1983
`
`d.
`
`Fr ei & Stieger - H.P. Frei and D. Stieger, "Making Use of Hypertext Links when
`
`Retrieving Information," ACM, 1992
`
`004
`
`004
`
`Facebook Ex. 1002 Part 4
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/0 ll ,014
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page4
`
`e.
`
`Doyle- U.S. Patent No. 5,838,906 to Michael D. Doyle, et al., Issued November
`
`17, 1998
`
`Statement of Reasons for Patentability and/or Confirmation
`
`5)
`
`Claims 1-3, 5, 7-16, 18-2~. and 34-54 are confirmed and/or patentable.
`
`6)
`
`With regard to the rejections utilizing Lucarella, patent owner (PO) has shown that
`
`Lucarella discloses the use of concept links between objects based on analyzing a group of
`
`'
`objects based on a query. Therefore Lucarella does not teach generating a candidate cluster link
`
`set, the cluster links being functions of the weights associated with the direct links and the
`
`weight of the previous cluster link, (see Fig. 3G of the Egger Patent and the corresponding
`
`discussion) from which actual cluster li~s are derived.
`
`With regard to the rejections utilizing Baase, patent owner (PO) has shown that while
`
`Baase discloses using links to analyze the relationships between objects, Baase does not teach
`
`generating a candidate cluster link set, cluster links being functions of the weights associated
`
`with the direct links and the weight of the previous cluster link (see Fig. 3G of the Egger Patent
`
`and the corresponding discussion).
`
`With regard to the rejections utilizing Fox, patent owner (PO) has shown that Fox
`
`discloses that the first numerical representation and second numerical representation are created
`
`independently from each other and therefore does not teach generating a second numerical
`
`representation of each object indicating indirect relationships based on the analysis of the first
`
`005
`
`005
`
`Facebook Ex. 1002 Part 4
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/011,014
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 5
`
`numerical representation which indicates direct relationships. PO has also shown that Fox does
`
`not weight different indirect relationships differently.
`
`As PO has overcome the teachings of Lucarella, Baase, and Fox, any proposed
`
`combinations utilizing Lucarella, Baase, and Fox as the primary references are also overcome.
`
`7)
`
`Thus, the following is an examiner's statement of reasons for patentability and/or
`
`confirmation of the claims found patentable in this reexamination proceeding:
`
`Referring to claim 1, the claim is allowable over the prior art that was explained in the
`
`request and determined to raise a substantial new question of patentability in the order granting
`
`reexamination and over the prior art that was applied and discussed by the examiner in the
`
`present reexamination proceeding because the prior art does not explicitly teach generating
`
`candidate cluster links for the selected node, wherein the step of generating comprises an
`
`analysis of one or more indirect relationships in the database in combination with the remaining
`
`elements or features of the claimed invention. ·
`
`·>
`Referring to claim 12, the claim is allowable over the prior art that was explained in the
`
`request and determined to raise a substantial new question of patentability in the order granting
`
`reexamination and over the prior art that was applied and discussed by the examiner in the
`
`present reexamination proceeding because the prior art does not explicitly teach generating a
`
`candidate cluster link set for the selected object, wherein the generating step includes an analysis
`
`of one or more indirect relationships in the database in combination with the remaining elements
`
`or features of the claimed invention.
`
`006
`
`006
`
`Facebook Ex. 1002 Part 4
`
`
`
`. ;
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/011,014
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 6
`
`Referring to claim 14, the claim is allowable over the prior art that was explained in the
`
`request and determined to raise a substantial new question of patentability in the order granting
`
`reexamination and over the prior art that was applied and discussed by the examiner in the
`
`present reexamination proceeding because the prior art does riot explicitly teach initializing a set
`
`of candidate cluster link and storing the determined weights as candidate cluster links in
`
`combination with the remaining elements or features of the claimed invention.
`
`Referring to claim 18, the claim is allowable over the prior art that was explained in the
`
`request and determined to raise a substantial new question of patentability in the order granting
`
`reexamination and over the prior art that was applied and discussed by the examiner in the
`
`present reexamination proceeding because the prior art does not explicitly teach analyzing the
`
`first numerical representations for indirect relationships existing between or among objects in the
`
`database, generating a second numerical representation of each object based on the analysis of
`
`the first numerical representation, and storing the second numerical representation for use in
`
`computerized searching in combination with the remaining elements or features of the claimed
`
`invention.
`
`Claims 2, 3, 5, 7-11. 13, 15, 16, 19-21,34-54 depend on confirmed independent claims,
`
`and are therefore also patentable and/or confirmed.
`
`8)
`
`Any comments considered necessary by PATENT OWNER regarding the above
`
`statement must be submitted promptly to avoid processing delays. Such submission by the
`
`patent owner should be labeled: "Comments on Statement of Reasons for Patentability and/or
`
`Confirmation" and will be placed in the reexamination file.
`
`007
`
`007
`
`Facebook Ex. 1002 Part 4
`
`
`
`'
`
`I
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/011,014
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 7
`
`All correspondence relating to this ex parte reexamination proceeding should be directed
`
`Conclusion
`
`as follows:
`
`By U.S. Postal Service Mail to:
`
`Mail Stop Ex Parte Reexam
`ATTN: Central Reexamination Unit
`Commissioner for Patents
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`By FAX to:
`
`(571) 273-9900
`Central Reexamination Unit
`
`By hand to:
`
`Customer Service Window
`Randolph Building
`401 Dulany St.
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`
`By EFS'-Web:
`
`Registered users of EFS-Web may alternatively submit such correspondence via the
`electronic filing system EFS-Web, at
`
`https://sportal.uspto.gov/authenticate/authenticateuserlocalepf.html
`
`EFS-Web offers the benefit of quick submission to the particular area of the Office that
`needs to act on the correspondence. Also, EFS-Web submissions are "soft scanned" (i.e.,
`electronically uploaded) directly into the official file for the reexamination proceeding, which
`offers parties the opportunity to review the content of their submissions after the "soft scanning"
`process is complete.
`
`008
`
`008
`
`Facebook Ex. 1002 Part 4
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/011,014
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 8
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`Reexamination Legal Advisor or Examiner, or as to the status of this proceeding, should be
`
`directed to the Central Reexamination Unit at telephone number (571) 272-7705.
`
`/Joshua D Campbell/
`Primary Examiner, Art.Unit 3992
`
`009
`
`009
`
`Facebook Ex. 1002 Part 4
`
`
`
`Application Number
`
`II II II II~ I Ill Ill II
`
`ApplicationiControl No.
`
`Applicant(s)IPatent Under
`Reexamination
`
`9001101 4
`
`5,832,494
`
`Document Code - DIST
`
`Internal Document- DO NOT MAIL
`
`TERMINAL
`DISCLAIMER
`
`~ APPROVED
`
`0 DISAPPROVED
`
`Date Filed: 06/13/2011
`
`This patent is subject
`
`to a Terminal
`
`Disclaimer
`
`Approved/Disapproved by:
`Karen Ward
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`010
`
`010
`
`Facebook Ex. 1002 Part 4