Prior art — US Patent 9531665

Prior art analysis

A thorough review of the prior art cited during the prosecution of US patent 9,531,665 reveals the landscape of existing technology the examiner considered before granting the patent. The patent itself cites only one prior art reference. This analysis examines that reference to determine its potential impact on the patent's claims, particularly independent claims 1 and 7.

Cited Prior Art References

Only one prior art reference was cited by the examiner and listed on the face of the granted US patent 9,531,665.

1. US 2006/0178903 A1 ("Commoca")

Full Citation: US Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0178903 A1
Title: Method and system for converged communications directory search and advertising services
Publication Date: August 10, 2006
Filing Date: January 21, 2005
Assignee: Commoca, Inc.

Brief Description:
The Commoca reference describes a unified system for managing communications, directory searches, and advertising. A central server provides a directory service that users can query from various devices, including mobile phones. The system allows advertisers (vendors) to target users based on their searches or profile information. A key feature is the ability for a user to interact with an advertisement, such as by clicking a "call me" button, which connects the user with the advertiser. The system logs these interactions and can use them to deliver further targeted content. For instance, if a user searches for "pizza" and interacts with a Pizza Hut ad, the system records this event.

Potential Anticipation of Claims:

The Commoca reference appears highly relevant and potentially anticipates the core concepts of the independent claims of US patent 9,531,665.

Claim 1 & 7 (The method and server): These claims require a sequence where a user's acceptance of a message from a first vendor triggers the sending of a message from a second vendor.
- "sending...a first vendor message...to the first communication address of the first mobile user": Commoca describes sending targeted advertising from a first vendor (e.g., Pizza Hut) to a user based on a directory search (Commoca, ¶). This advertising message is the "first vendor message."
- "receiving...acceptance information indicating the first mobile user's acceptance of the first vendor message": Commoca details that a user can interact with the advertisement, such as by clicking to initiate a call or save contact information (Commoca, ¶,). This user interaction is a form of "acceptance," as it is an affirmative action showing interest in the vendor's message. The system explicitly logs this interaction as an "event" (Commoca, ¶).
- "sending...a first vendor message of the plurality of vendor messages of the second vendor, to the first communication address of the first mobile user only after the verifying of the first mobile user having accepted the first vendor message of the first vendor": This is the critical step. Commoca teaches that the system can use logged events (like the acceptance of the first vendor's ad) to deliver subsequent, targeted advertising. It states that advertisers can target users based on "call history" or "session history" (Commoca, ¶). Therefore, after the user accepts the Pizza Hut ad, the system logs this event. A second vendor (e.g., Domino's Pizza, a competitor) could then use the Commoca platform to target users who have recently shown interest in pizza by interacting with the Pizza Hut ad. This constitutes sending a message from a second vendor based on the acceptance of a message from the first. Claim 4, which specifies that the vendors can be competitors, is directly supported by this scenario.

Conclusion on Commoca:
The Commoca reference discloses a system where user interaction with a first vendor's advertisement is recorded and used as a basis for targeting advertisements from other vendors. This aligns directly with the process recited in independent claims 1 and 7. An argument for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 appears strong, as the sequence of sending a message, receiving an acceptance, and then sending a second vendor's message based on that acceptance is taught by Commoca's advertising and event-logging system. While the patent examiner allowed the claims over this reference, a defendant in litigation would likely re-argue its relevance with much greater scrutiny.