Prior art — US Patent 11610226

Based on a review of the USPTO public records for US patent 11,610,226, the following prior art references were cited during the patent's prosecution and are considered relevant to its claims.

Analysis of Cited Prior Art

Below is an analysis of key prior art references and their potential impact on the claims of US patent 11,610,226 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (Anticipation). For a reference to anticipate a claim, it must disclose every single element of that claim, arranged as in the claim.

1. US Patent 7,136,875 B1 ("O'Phelan '875")

Full Citation: US Patent 7,136,875 B1, "Dynamic delivery of network advertising."
Assignee: DoubleClick Inc.
Date: Filed January 21, 2000; Published November 14, 2006.
Brief Description: The O'Phelan '875 patent is a foundational piece of prior art in online advertising. It describes a third-party ad server system that uses cookies to recognize a user's browser across different publisher websites. The system collects data about the user's browsing history and ad interactions into a profile, which is then used to select and serve targeted advertisements to that user's browser.
Potential Anticipation Analysis (§ 102):
- This reference discloses the concept of a central computer system recording behavioral profile information associated with a user's device (element 1(a)) and later serving an ad based on that profile (element 1(e)).
- However, O'Phelan '875 does not appear to anticipate the independent claims (1, 13, 25) of US 11,610,226. The key missing elements are:
  - Cross-Device Identification (Claim 1(b)): The patent primarily focuses on tracking a single device (a web browser) via cookies. It does not teach using personally identifiable information (PII) to link that device to a separate, second computerized device (e.g., a smart TV or mobile phone) belonging to the same user.
  - Privacy-Preserving Information Transfer (Claim 1(c)): The DoubleClick model described involves its own server reading its own cookie and directly accessing the profile to make an ad decision. It does not teach the specific mechanism of causing a second, unaffiliated computer system to receive only "tag information" while explicitly withholding the behavioral profile data from that second system.
  - External Condition Check (Claim 1(d)): It does not disclose transferring a specific "condition" to the second system, which the second system then checks independently to trigger the ad serving process.

2. US Patent Application Pub. No. 2005/0192873 A1 ("Ben-Natan '873")

Full Citation: US 2005/0192873 A1, "Method and system for providing cross-channel offer presentment."
Assignee: Accenture Global Services GmbH
Date: Filed February 27, 2004; Published September 1, 2005.
Brief Description: The Ben-Natan '873 application describes a system for integrated, cross-channel marketing. It teaches consolidating customer data from multiple sources (e.g., website visits, call center interactions, in-store purchases) into a single, unified customer profile. This profile is then used to deliver consistent and targeted marketing offers to the user across these different channels.
Potential Anticipation Analysis (§ 102):
- This reference strongly teaches the concept of linking a user's activities across different channels or devices, which is highly relevant to claim element 1(b) concerning the use of PII to identify a second device. It also clearly discloses creating profiles based on user actions (1(a)).
- Despite this, Ben-Natan '873 likely fails to anticipate the claims. The architecture described in the application centers on a single entity creating a master profile and using it directly to push offers. It does not appear to disclose the specific, distributed architecture required by the claims of US 11,610,226:
  - It lacks the specific handoff where a first entity's system provides limited "tag information" and a "condition" to a second, independent entity's system that controls ad space (claims 1(c) and 1(d)). The claims require that the entity controlling the ad space (the "second computer system") does not receive the actual behavioral profile, which is a key distinction from the integrated model in Ben-Natan '873.

3. US Patent 7,668,753 B2 ("Raux '753")

Full Citation: US Patent 7,668,753 B2, "Method and system for providing a visitor with a personalized display."
Assignee: Criteo
Date: Filed May 18, 2007; Published February 23, 2010.
Brief Description: The Raux '753 patent describes a method for ad retargeting. A user who visits a merchant's website is tagged (e.g., with a cookie). When that same user later visits a different website (e.g., a publisher site), the tag is recognized, and a personalized ad, often related to the products the user viewed on the merchant's site, is displayed. The system aims to optimize which ad to show based on the user's inferred interests.
Potential Anticipation Analysis (§ 102):
- This reference clearly describes recording user behavior on a first property (element 1(a)), tagging that user, and using that information to serve a targeted ad on a second property (element 1(e)).
- However, like O'Phelan '875, Raux '753 does not appear to anticipate the claims for similar reasons:
  - Cross-Device Identification (Claim 1(b)): The teachings are primarily focused on cookie-based tracking of a single browser, not on linking multiple, distinct devices of a single user via PII.
  - Ad Space in Video Streams: The patent's examples focus on display advertising on web pages, whereas the claims of US 11,610,226 are specifically directed to ad space in a "plurality of video streams."
  - Information Handoff and Condition (Claims 1(c) and 1(d)): The architecture described involves a retargeting platform that identifies the user and serves the ad. It does not explicitly teach the claimed, two-step process of first providing only tag information and a condition to an independent ad space controller, and then having that controller check the condition to initiate the ad service from the first system.