Google Inc.

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Oct 8, 2020

15065439 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Oct. 8, 2020)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
15/065,439 03/09/2016 Anurag Agrawal 16113-4762002 1242
26192 7590 10/08/2020
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
PO BOX 1022
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55440-1022
EXAMINER
BRANDENBURG, WILLIAM A
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3681
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
10/08/2020 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
PATDOCTC@fr.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte ANURAG AGRAWAL, ANSHUL KOTHARI, TAO HUANG,
GIRISH BALLIGA, and SEUNG YI
Appeal 2019-004106
Application 15/065,439
Technology Center 3600
Before JEAN R. HOMERE, TREVOR M. JEFFERSON, and
MIRIAM L. QUINN, Administrative Patent Judges.
QUINN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant1 appeals from the
Examiner’s decision to reject claims 2–4, 6–12, 14–17, and 19–21, which
constitute all of the pending claims.2 See Final Act. 1. We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.

1 We use the word Appellant to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as Google LLC. Appeal
Br. 1.
2 Claims 1, 5, 13, and 18 have been cancelled. Claims App.
Appeal 2019-004106
Application 15/065,439

2
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
The claims are directed to a dynamic telephone number assignment.
Spec. ¶ 4. Claim 2, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject
matter, showing in italics the claim language that is further discussed in our
analysis:
2. A method comprising:
providing a data structure associated with a pool of
telephone numbers, the telephone numbers being initially
available for assigning to content items that are presented to
users, wherein the data structure includes entries for telephone
numbers that have been assigned in a previous time period and
wherein an entry includes an identifier for a telephone number
from the pool that was assigned based on an impression of a
content item to a user, an identifier for the user, and an
identifier for a content sponsor for the content item, wherein the
data structure includes plural entries for a same telephone
number with each entry including a different combination of
user and content sponsor identifiers;
identifying an opportunity to deliver a content item to a
user;
dynamically, by one or more processors, assigning a
telephone number from the pool of telephone numbers to the
content item, wherein assigning includes evaluating by the one
or more processors, the data structure to locate a telephone
number that has not been previously assigned to a combination
of the user and a sponsor of the content item, and associating
the telephone number with the content item;
receiving an indication of a user interaction with a
control that initiates a call to the sponsor of the content item,
wherein the received indication includes an identifier
corresponding to a presentation of the content item on the
device;
Appeal 2019-004106
Application 15/065,439

3
facilitating a call between the user and the sponsor of the
content item, wherein the call is initiated based on the user
interaction and the call is made to the telephone number that
was assigned to the content item;
storing, in the data structure, an association between the
user, the assigned telephone number and the sponsor of the
content item, wherein the association causes calls from the user
to the telephone number to be routed to the sponsor of the
content item even after the assigned telephone number has been
returned to the pool of available telephone numbers or
reassigned;
after storing the association, reassigning the telephone
number to a different sponsor that provides a different content
item;
after reassigning the telephone number to the different
sponsor of a different content item, identifying, by the one or
more processors, a telephone call from the user to the
telephone number; and
after reassigning the telephone number to the different
sponsor and identifying the telephone call from the user to the
telephone number, connecting the user to the sponsor of the
content item rather than the different sponsor that is assigned
the telephone number after the reassigning based on the stored
association between the user, the assigned telephone number,
and the sponsor of the content item.
Appeal Br. 14−15 (Claim Appendix).
REFERENCE
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Name Reference Date
Wojcicki US 2011/0066498 A1 Mar. 17, 2011
Appeal 2019-004106
Application 15/065,439

4
REJECTION3
Claims Rejected 35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/Basis
2–4, 6–12, 14–17, and
19–21
102(a) Wojcicki

OPINION
We review the appealed rejections for error based upon the issues
identified by Appellant, and in light of the arguments and evidence produced
thereon. Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1075 (BPAI 2010) (precedential).
To the extent Appellant has not advanced separate, substantive arguments
for particular claims, or other issues, such arguments are waived. 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.37(c)(1)(iv) (2017). For instance, Appellant presents arguments
focused on the language of claim 2. Appeal Br. 6−10. Therefore, we decide
the entire appeal based on the arguments presented with respect to claim 2.
Id.; In re Kaslow, 707 F.2d 1366, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (“Since the claims
are not separately argued, they all stand or fall together.”).
Claim 2 recites a method of assigning to a content item a telephone
number from a pool of telephone numbers. The Specification points out that
assigning unique telephone numbers to each content item is not practical
because the number of content items that the system provides may exceed a
number of available telephone numbers. Spec. ¶ 32. Thus, the claim recites
“dynamically . . . assigning” and then “reassigning” the telephone numbers.
Claim 2 facilitates the reassignment by storing an association between the

3 Appellant appeals one additional rejection of all pending claims under 35
U.S.C. § 101. Appeal Br. 10−13. The Examiner has withdrawn the § 101
rejection. Ans. 3. Accordingly, this decision addresses only the pending
§ 102 rejection.
Appeal 2019-004106
Application 15/065,439

5
user, the assigned telephone number, and the sponsor of the content item.
This association ensures that when the user calls the assigned telephone
number, the call will be routed to the appropriate sponsor notwithstanding
the subsequent reassignment of the telephone number to a different
sponsor’s content item. Appellant argues that Wojcicki does not disclose the
claim’s requirement that “after reassigning the telephone number,” upon
receiving a telephone call from the user, the system connects the user to the
initial sponsor of the content item, not the different sponsor to which the
telephone number has been reassigned. Appeal Br. 7. We agree with
Appellant that Wojcicki does not disclose this claim requirement.
Wojcicki describes a number allocator that controls the assignment of
telephone numbers to specific advertising campaigns. Wojcicki ¶ 29. The
number allocator also recycles previously-used telephone numbers such that
a reassigned telephone number may be been used by the same or different
merchant in a previous advertising campaign. Id. Wojcicki’s number
allocator, however, ensures that the reallocation or reassignment of the
telephone number to a different advertising campaign follows a “cooling off
period.” Id. ¶ 47. Such a period “ensures that a connection that was
intended for the prior-running advertisement but was made slightly after the
end of the prior-running campaign, is not accidentally connected to another
advertiser or counted toward the statistics for the later advertiser.” Id.
Wojcicki executes this “cooling off period” by preventing the reuse of the
number for a specific time period after the last-used date has sufficiently
passed, e.g., more than two weeks or longer. Id. ¶ 30. The significance of
implementing the “cooling off period” in this manner is that a Wojcicki user
who calls the telephone number during the “cooling off period” may be
Appeal 2019-004106
Application 15/065,439

6
connected to the initial merchant, of the previous advertising campaign. But
after the “cooling off period” has passed and the telephone number has been
reassigned, the user will be connected to a new merchant sponsoring a
different advertising campaign. See id. ¶ 30. The claim requires, however,
that “after reassigning the telephone number” the user is connected to the
“sponsor of the content item rather than the different sponsor that is assigned
the telephone number after the reassigning based on the stored association
between the user, the assigned telephone number, and the sponsor of the
content item.”
The Examiner’s response to Appellant’s argument does not persuade
us that Wojcicki may be understood to disclose the claim limitation
discussed above. The Examiner states that Appellant’s argument is that
Wojcicki does not “concern itself with the actual routing and connection of
the telephone call and/or the processing of the call after the reassignment.”
Ans. 8, 11. We do not agree with this characterization of Appellant’s
argument. Appellant’s argument is that Wojcicki’s reassignment of the
telephone calls does not route the current call “to someone other than the
merchant who is presently assigned the called number.” Appeal Br. 8.
Appellant notes that, during the “cooling off period,” Wojcicki’s telephone
numbers are not “reassigned” yet. Id. at 8−9. The argument by Appellant
addresses the claimed limitation that requires, after reassignment,
connecting the user to the sponsor of the initial content item, not the newly
reassigned sponsor. Thus, we are not persuaded by the Examiner’s response
that Appellant’s argument focuses on details of a “connection” or “routing”
that are not claimed.
Appeal 2019-004106
Application 15/065,439

7
The Examiner also responds that Wojcicki discloses that during the
“cooling off period” the user is connected to the sponsor of the initial
advertisement, and that this operation meets the claim limitation. Ans.
10−11. We do not agree. Wojcicki reassigns the telephone number to a new
merchant after the “cooling off period” has passed. Wojcicki ¶ 47. The
focus of the claim is what occurs after reassignment of the telephone
number. The claim requires a particular timing of events: (1) telephone
number is reassigned to a new sponsor, (2) user calls the telephone number,
(3) user is connected to the previous sponsor, not the newly reassigned
sponsor. Wojcicki reassigns the telephone number after the “cooling off
period,” which means that, after reassignment, the system will route the call
according to the new assignment: (1) telephone number is reassigned to ad
campaign of a new merchant, (2) user calls the telephone number, (3) user is
connected to new merchant. Wojcicki ¶ 47. Indeed, Wojcicki discloses that
for customers to be connected to a merchant of a previous advertising
campaign, the merchant may reserve the telephone number. Wojcicki ¶ 30.
That is, Wojcicki may connect users to the previous merchant in only three
situations: (1) when the telephone number is assigned to the previous
merchant (while the campaign is running) (id. ¶ 28); (2) during the cooling
off period, because the tracking system records that the number was
previously assigned to a particular advertisement (id. ¶ 47); and (3) if the
merchant reserves the telephone number, which means the telephone number
is reassigned no more (id. ¶ 30). None of these three scenarios meets the
claim’s “after reassigning” limitations:
after reassigning the telephone number to the different
sponsor of a different content item, identifying, by the one or
Appeal 2019-004106
Application 15/065,439

8
more processors, a telephone call from the user to the telephone
number; and
after reassigning the telephone number to the different
sponsor and identifying the telephone call from the user to the
telephone number, connecting the user to the sponsor of the
content item rather than the different sponsor that is assigned
the telephone number after the reassigning based on the stored
association between the user, the assigned telephone number,
and the sponsor of the content item.
CONCLUSION
The Examiner’s rejection is reversed.
DECISION SUMMARY
Claims
Rejected
35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed
2–4, 6–12,
14–17, 19–
21
102(a) Wojcicki 2–4, 6–12,
14–17, 19–
21

REVERSED