Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 7-9, 12-16, 18, 20-23, has been reviewed and are addressed below. Claims 2-6, 10-11, 17,19, 24-25 have been previously cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 12/24/25 has been entered and are addressed below.
With respect to applicant’s argument regarding the specialized device for tracking caregiver services, Applicant argues that the “specialized services tracking device” that it is not recite a general computer, however does not cite where in the specifications it is recited. This device is a generic computer which is being used to track services (intended use, per applicant’s own admission in the response filed 2-25-22 page 11 first paragraph) additionally, paragraph 92 recites “the processing machine used to implement the invention may be a general-purpose computer. However, the processing machine described above may also utilize any of a wide variety of other technologies including a special purpose computer, a computer system including a microcomputer, mini-computer or mainframe for example, a programmed microprocessor, a micro-controller, a peripheral integrated circuit element, a CSIC (Customer Specific Integrated Circuit) or ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) or other integrated circuit, a logic circuit, a digital signal processor, a programmable logic device such as a FPGA, PLD, PLA or PAL, or any other device or arrangement of devices that is capable of implementing the steps of the process of the invention”. The limitation of “a specialized services tracking device” is not defined or supported by the applicant’s specifications, if the applicant this to mean as a generic computer, then applicant should amend the claim to recite as such or please cite in applicant’s specifications, where it describes what type of “specialized services tracking device” comprises. The recitation of ‘special purpose computer” does not equate to specialized services tracking device.
Applicant argues that the claims were lumped all of applicant’s entire claim together and then draws a conclusion without analysis or explanation. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner identified which limitations were considered as abstract, specifically, certain methods of organizing human activity, then the additional elements were deemed generic computer components to execute the abstract idea and then some elements were identified as extra solution activity to input/collect data and display/transmit data.
Applicant argues that the claim elements is not between a claimant and a computer devices rather two computer elements over a network. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner respectfully disagrees, the two computer elements are just used to execute the identified abstract idea. The instant claim collects data from human caregiver regarding a claimant, these elements are “people” and the claim limitations are directed to their interaction including a tracking device (generic computer with the user interface). Additionally the instant claim is similar to that of Electric Power Group v Alstom where in it collects data from devices then analyses that data. There is no particular machine implementing integrated in the instant claim rather the use of generic computer components executing the abstract idea.
Applicant’s argues that the amendment regarding the specialized device for tracking caregiver services that includes a memory portion that stores the collected data. Applicant alleges that this device is not generic computer and cites Fig 12, however this does not support any “specialized device” this device is a generic computer which is being used to track services (intended use, per applicant’s own admission in the response filed 2-25-22 page 11 first paragraph) additionally, paragraph 92 recites “the processing machine used to implement the invention may be a general-purpose computer. However, the processing machine described above may also utilize any of a wide variety of other technologies including a special purpose computer, a computer system including a microcomputer, mini-computer or mainframe for example, a programmed microprocessor, a micro-controller, a peripheral integrated circuit element, a CSIC (Customer Specific Integrated Circuit) or ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) or other integrated circuit, a logic circuit, a digital signal processor, a programmable logic device such as a FPGA, PLD, PLA or PAL, or any other device or arrangement of devices that is capable of implementing the steps of the process of the invention”. Applicant has not provided citation from the specification that these components are not generic. Installing a software to a generic computer does not make the device “specialized device for tracking caregiver services”. The memory portion the stores collected data is a generic computer component that stores data. Applicant’s specifications in paragraph 90 recites ““it is appreciated that the systems of the invention or portions of the systems of the invention may be in the form of a "processing machine," such as a general purpose computer, for example. As used herein, the term "processing machine" is to be understood to include at least one processor that uses at least one memory. The at least one memory stores a set of instructions. The instructions may be either permanently or temporarily stored in the memory or memories of the processing machine. The processor executes the instructions that are stored in the memory or memories in order to process data.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1, 7-9, 12-16, 18, 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 recites disposing a data input portion comprising a specialized services tracking device. According to applicant’s specifications in paragraph 54 recites that “FIG. 12 is a diagram showing a user interface portion 32 of a data input portion 30 in accordance with one embodiment of the invention. The user interface portion 32 includes a check-in button 82 and a checkout button 84. Further, the user interface portion 32 includes numerical buttons 86. The numerical buttons 86 may be used by a caregiver to enter the caregiver's identification "caregiver code". The buttons 82, 84 and 86 may be used to practice the process of FIG. 9 including steps 300 to 380. The user interface portion 32 of FIG. 12 also includes a "directions" panel 89, which provides directions for use of the data input portion 30” and paragraph 102 states that “a variety of "user interfaces" may be utilized to allow a user to interface with the processing machine or machines that are used to implement the invention. As used herein, a user interface includes any hardware, software, or combination of hardware and software used by the processing machine that allows a user to interact with the processing machine”. Examiner is unable to find the specific specialized services tracking device, rather a generic computer is used with the user interface.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 7-9, 12-16, 18, 20-23, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claims 1, 7-9, 12-16, 18, 20-23 are drawn to method, system and non-transitory computer-readable medium, which is/are statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A Prong One:
Independent claims 1, 20 recite “disposing a data input portion ……configured to accept a human caregiver identification code for the human caregiver, a check-in time for the human caregiver, one or more services identified by the human caregiver interaction... a begin time and an end time for each of the one or more identified services and a check-out time for the human caregiver in the home of the claimant such that the data input portion is disposed in the home of the claimant continuously over a period of time inclusive of a plurality of visits of the human caregiver and such that over such period of time the data input portion is retained by the claimant in the home of the claimant and not retained by the human caregiver, and during such period of time the data is collected by the data input portion from the human caregiver….and the servicing entity comprises an insurance company ”, “the data input portion documenting a period of time….”, “outputting the processed collected data to the servicing entity”, “the data input portion interface with the human caregiver is constituted by the data input portion effecting such using the plurality of user inputs that the caregiver physically presses”, “wherein the output of processed collected data triggers the creation of an invoice, the invoice documenting information obtained by the servicing entity from the data input portion and the collected data”, “in such manner to identify completion of service….”, “transmitting the collected data to the servicing entity in one of real time and a periodic schedule, wherein the periodic schedule is one of daily, weekly and monthly”, “identification of service being performed and a start time for the performance of the service…”, “wherein the second data set is associated with the first data set includes a stop time for performance of the service at least one of the caregiver code and service information”, “wherein after the transmitting of the collected data…..the servicing entity determines a predetermined rate….”, “wherein after the second information indicating completion of the service has been received by the data input portion, the data input portion receives a third data set, the third data set being entered prior to the human caregiver beginning additional service….”, “determines reimbursement amount based on the collected data, the reimbursement amount being the amount of monies to be forwarded from the servicing entity to the claimant so that the claimant may be reimbursement for payments to the human caregiver”.
The steps of claim 1 as drafted, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions), then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (Step 2A Prong One: YES).
Step 2A Prong Two:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are abstract but for the inclusion of the additional elements including “data input portion…”, “and “a memory portion that stores the collected data prior to the collected data being transmitted to the servicing entity”, “communication interface”, “processor”, “interface”, “specialized services tracking device”, “wherein the transmitting is performed using a communication connection”, “interactive user interface”, “specialized services tracking device”, “in one of a fixed or mobile configuration and optionally wall mountable” which are additional elements that are recited at a high level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instruction to apply the exception using generic computer components. See: MPEP 2106.05(f).
The additional elements are merely incidental or token additions to the claim that do not alter or affect how the process steps or functions in the abstract idea are performed (e.g., the “processor” language is incidental to what it is “configured” to perform). Therefore, the claimed additional elements do not add meaningful limitations to the indicated claims beyond a general linking to a technological environment. See: MPEP 2106.05(h).
The claims recite the additional element of “data input portion interfacing directly with the human caregiver prior to the human caregiver providing a service to the claimant so as to input a first data set into the data input portion” and “data input portion from the human caregiver through an interactive interface of the data input portion”, “electronically transmitting the collected data”, “wherein the transmitting the collected data to the servicing entity is performed using a data processing entity, and wherein: the data processing entity inputting the collected data from the data input portion; the data processing entity processing the collected data to generate processed collected data; and the data processing entity outputting the processed collected data to the servicing entity” which are considered limitations directed to insignificant extra-solution activity that does not amount to an inventive concept because the limitations do not impose meaningful limits on the claim such that is it not nominally or tangentially related to the invention. In the claimed context, the claimed displaying limitations are incidental to the performance of the recited abstract idea. See: MPEP 2106.05(g).
The combination of these additional elements is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Hence, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A Prong Two: NO).
Step 2B:
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, using the additional elements to perform the abstract idea amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic components cannot provide an inventive concept. See: MPEP 2106.05(f).
Further, the claimed additional elements, identified above, are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are generic components that are not integrated into the claim because they are merely incidental or token additions to the claim that do not alter or affect how the process steps or functions in the abstract idea are performed. Therefore, the claimed additional elements do not add meaningful limitations to the indicated claims beyond a general linking to a technological environment. See: MPEP 2106.05(h).
Further, the claimed additional elements, identified above, are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are generic components that are configured to perform well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the industry. See: MPEP 2106.05(d). Said additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and provide conventional functions that do not add meaningful limits to practicing the abstract idea. The originally filed specification supports this conclusion at Figure 1, and
-paragraph 54 recites “FIG. 12 is a diagram showing a user interface portion 32 of a data input portion 30 in accordance with one embodiment of the invention. The user interface portion 32 includes a check-in button 82 and a checkout button 84. Further, the user interface portion 32 includes numerical buttons 86. The numerical buttons 86 may be used by a caregiver to enter the caregiver's identification "caregiver code". The buttons 82, 84 and 86 may be used to practice the process of FIG. 9 including steps 300 to 380. The user interface portion 32 of FIG. 12 also includes a "directions" panel 89, which provides directions for use of the data input portion 30”.
-paragraph 90, where “it is appreciated that the systems of the invention or portions of the systems of the invention may be in the form of a "processing machine," such as a general purpose computer, for example. As used herein, the term "processing machine" is to be understood to include at least one processor that uses at least one memory. The at least one memory stores a set of instructions. The instructions may be either permanently or temporarily stored in the memory or memories of the processing machine. The processor executes the instructions that are stored in the memory or memories in order to process data. The set of instructions may include various instructions that perform a particular task or tasks, such as those tasks described above in the flowcharts. Such a set of instructions for performing a particular task may be characterized as a program, software program, or simply software”.
-paragraph 92 where “the processing machine used to implement the invention may be a general purpose computer. However, the processing machine described above may also utilize any of a wide variety of other technologies including a special purpose computer, a computer system including a microcomputer, mini-computer or mainframe for example, a programmed microprocessor, a micro-controller, a peripheral integrated circuit element, a CSIC (Customer Specific Integrated Circuit) or ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) or other integrated circuit, a logic circuit, a digital signal processor, a programmable logic device such as a FPGA, PLD, PLA or PAL, or any other device or arrangement of devices that is capable of implementing the steps of the process of the invention”.
-paragraph 102 recites “"user interfaces" may be utilized to allow a user to interface with the processing machine or machines that are used to implement the invention. As used herein, a user interface includes any hardware, software, or combination of hardware and software used by the processing machine that allows a user to interact with the processing machine. A user interface may be in the form of a dialogue screen for example. A user interface may also include any of a mouse, touch screen, keyboard, voice reader, voice recognizer, dialogue screen, menu box, list, checkbox, toggle switch, a pushbutton or any other device that allows a user to receive information regarding the operation of the processing machine as it processes a set of instructions and/or provide the processing machine with information. Accordingly, the user interface is any device that provides communication between a user and a processing machine. The information provided by the user to the processing machine through the user interface may be in the form of a command, a selection of data, or some other input”.
The claims recite the additional element of “data input portion interfacing directly with the human caregiver prior to the human caregiver providing a service to the claimant so as to input a first data set into the data input portion” and “”data input portion from the human caregiver through an interactive interface of the data input portion”, “wherein the transmitting the collected data to the servicing entity is performed using a data processing entity, and wherein: the data processing entity inputting the collected data from the data input portion; the data processing entity processing the collected data to generate processed collected data; and the data processing entity outputting the processed collected data to the servicing entity” which are considered limitations directed to insignificant extra-solution activity that does not amount to an inventive concept because the limitations do not impose meaningful limits on the claim such that is it not nominally or tangentially related to the invention. In the claimed context, the claimed displaying limitations are incidental to the performance of the recited abstract idea. See: MPEP 2106.05(g).
Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination, the claims simply instruct the additional elements to implement the concept described above in the identification of abstract idea with routine, conventional activity specified at a high level of generality in a particular technological environment.
Hence, the claims as a whole, considering the additional elements individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (Step 2B: NO).
Dependent claim(s) 7-9, 12-16, 18, 21-23 when analyzed as a whole, considering the additional elements individually and/or as an ordered combination, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitation(s) fail(s) to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. These claims fail to remedy the deficiencies of their parent claims above, and are therefore rejected for at least the same rationale as applied to their parent claims above, and incorporated herein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINALD R REYES whose telephone number is (571)270-5212. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:30 M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Shahid R. Merchant can be reached on (571) 270-1360. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
REGINALD R. REYES
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3684
/REGINALD R REYES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3684