DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The following is a Final Office Action in response to communications received on 2/17/2026. Claims 1-24, 29 are cancelled, 25-28, 30-42 are pending, claims 35-42 are added, and claims 25, 27, 28, 32 are amended.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 1 and 2 as filed to not contain reference numbers or characters for the elements referenced in the drawings. The examiner also notes, as such, no reference characters or numbers are present in the specification that correspond to the drawings. Of particular note, the collector engine, extraction engine, validation and safeguard engine, analysis engine, AI engine, Response Engine and Notification engine of Figures 1-2 are not in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 25-28 and 30-42 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.
As to claim 25, the following limitations are found to not be supported by the disclosure:
plurality of user input clients, each user input client configured to receive the natural language order messages in a distinct communication protocol. The Figures 1-2 do not illustrate natural language processing order messages in a distinct communication protocol. The specification at most discloses free text of the consumer app and web portal which is not an equivalent to natural language.
a collector engine configured to standardize the natural language order messages received via the distinct communication protocols and generate standard format natural language messages. Figure 1 shows the collector engine, however the collector engine is not recited in the specification and there is no support for standardizing the natural language order message to generate standard format natural language order messages. As shown in the Figure 1, the collector engine can receive inputs, but no further details are provided as to formatting or standardizing data.
an extraction engine configured to tokenize each standard format natural language order message to form a plurality of message tokens. In concert with the above mentioned lack of support, the extraction engine is not mentioned in the specification and only in Figure 1. From Figure 1, the only details are that the user input is tokenized. There is again not discussion of tokenize each standard format natural language order message to form a plurality of message tokens.
and comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored business names to identify the nearest matching business name from among the subset of the plurality of businesses in the business database. The specification in [0025] discloses the SOOP engine read each line of text and attempts to match the text to know commands or variable, but in concert with the above issues, the specification and drawings do not disclose comparing message tokens to the stored business data to find the nearest match.
identifying one or more desired products from among the stored menu items of the desired business by comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored keywords in the business database to identify the nearest matching menu items of the desired business. In concert with the above issues, the specification and drawings do not disclose comparing message tokens to the stored business data/menu items to find the nearest match. The closest disclosure is in [0018] which discloses the SOOP service tries to match keywords from each item ordered to nearest matching menu item.
Claims 25-28 and 30-42 are also rejected as they depend from claim 25 and do not cure the deficiencies of claim 25.
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.
The claims 25-28, 30-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: The claims 25-28, 30-42 are a system. Thus, each independent claim, on its face, is directed to one of the statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. §101.
Step 2A Prong 1: The independent claim 25 recites:
An online ordering platform for receiving and distributing online orders for a plurality of businesses, comprising:
one or more database servers comprising: a business database that stores: a business name and business address of each of a plurality of businesses;
and menu items of each of the plurality of businesses, wherein each menu item is associated with one or more stored keywords; and
a customer database that stores a customer identifier and a customer address of a customer;
one or more messaging servers configured to receive order messages, input by the customer in a natural language format, via each of a plurality of user input clients, each user input client configured to receive the natural language order messages in a distinct communication protocol
a collector engine configured to standardize the natural language order messages received via the distinct communication protocols and generate standard format natural language messages;
an extraction engine configured to tokenize each standard format natural language order message to form a plurality of message tokens;
an artificial intelligence (Al) engine, in communication with the one or more database servers, the one or more messaging servers, the collector engine, and the extraction engine, the Al engine configured to identify an order from a customer by:
identifying a desired business by;
identifying a location of the customer;
identifying a subset of the plurality of businesses by using a location service to filter the business database based on the identified location of the customer;
and comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored business names to identify the nearest matching business name from among the subset of the plurality of businesses in the business database;
identifying one or more desired products from among the stored menu items of the desired business by comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored keywords in the business database to identify the nearest matching menu items of the desired business;
storing the identified order and a control code associated with the identified order in an order management system;
transmitting an order summary comprising the desired business and the one or more desired products to the customer;
and providing functionality for the customer to send a confirmation message confirming the identified order or a modification request to modify the identified order;
a business application for the desired business, in network communication with the Al engine, configured to output the customer identifier of the customer and information indicative of the one or more desired products.
These limitations, except for the italicized portions, under their broadest reasonable interpretations, recite certain methods of organizing human activity for managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) as well as commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations). The claimed invention recites steps for identifying an order of a customer and processing the order from the customer. The steps under its broadest reasonable interpretation specifically fall under sales activities. The Examiner notes that although the claim limitations are summarized, the analysis regarding subject matter eligibility considers the entirety of the claim and all of the claim elements individually, as a whole, and in ordered combination.
Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of
An online ordering platform for receiving and distributing online orders for a plurality of businesses, comprising:
one or more database servers comprising: a business database that stores: a business name and business address of each of a plurality of businesses;
and menu items of each of the plurality of businesses, wherein each menu item is associated with one or more stored keywords; and
a customer database that stores a customer identifier and a customer address of a customer;
one or more messaging servers configured to receive order messages, input by the customer in a natural language format, via each of a plurality of user input clients, each user input client configured to receive the natural language order messages in a distinct communication protocol
a collector engine configured to standardize the natural language order messages received via the distinct communication protocols and generate standard format natural language messages;
an extraction engine configured to tokenize each standard format natural language order message to form a plurality of message tokens;
an artificial intelligence (Al) engine, in communication with the one or more database servers, the one or more messaging servers, the collector engine, and the extraction engine, the Al engine configured to identify an order from a customer by:
identifying a desired business by;
identifying a location of the customer;
identifying a subset of the plurality of businesses by using a location service to filter the business database based on the identified location of the customer;
and comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored business names to identify the nearest matching business name from among the subset of the plurality of businesses in the business database;
identifying one or more desired products from among the stored menu items of the desired business by comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored keywords in the business database to identify the nearest matching menu items of the desired business;
storing the identified order and a control code associated with the identified order in an order management system;
transmitting an order summary comprising the desired business and the one or more desired products to the customer;
and providing functionality for the customer to send a confirmation message confirming the identified order or a modification request to modify the identified order;
a business application for the desired business, in network communication with the Al engine, configured to output the customer identifier of the customer and information indicative of the one or more desired products.
The additional elements of emphasized above are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application – MPEP 2106.05(f).
Accordingly, these additional elements when considered individually or as a whole do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The independent claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong two, the additional elements in the claims amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using a generic computer component.
Even when considered as an ordered combination, the additional elements of claim 25 does not add anything that is not already present when they are considered individually. Therefore, under Step 2B, there are no meaningful limitations in claim 25 that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself (see MPEP 2106.05).
As such, independent claim 25 is ineligible.
Dependent claims 26-28, 30-42 when analyzed as a whole, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the additional recited limitations fail to establish that the claims are not directed to the same abstract idea of Independent Claim 25 without significantly more.
Claim 26 recites, wherein the Al engine identifies the desired business based in part on the business address of the desired business and the customer address of the customer. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 27 recites further comprising: providing functionality for the customer to specify a label for a favorite business from the plurality of the businesses, wherein the Al engine identifies the desired business by parsing the natural language order message and recognizing the label specified by the customer for the favorite business. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 28 recites, wherein outputting the information indicative of the one or more desired products comprises outputting at least a portion of the natural language order message as input by the customer. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 30 recites wherein the menu items of the desired business are received via an application programming interface. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The application programming interface is recited at a high level of generality and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 31 recites the business application for the desired business is a point-of-sale system; and the application programming interface outputs the information indicative of the one or more desired products to the point-of-sale system. The additional elements of the business application as a point of sale system and the corresponding application programming interface are recited at a high level of generality and do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 32 recites wherein the Al engine is further configured to: parse the natural language order message to determine whether the online order is for pickup or delivery. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 33 recite wherein, in response to a determination that the online order is for delivery, the platform is further configured to: identify directions from the business address to the customer address; and provide functionality to print the directions or forward the directions to a navigation application. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The navigation application is recited at a high level of generality.
Claim 34 recited wherein the plurality of user input clients includes a web portal, a mobile application, a short message service (SMS) client, an email client, an instant messaging client, or a virtual assistant. The user input clients listed in the claims are recited at a high level of generality and when implemented in claim 25 merely implement the abstract idea and do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 35 recites further comprising: a validation and safeguard engine that validates each natural language order message against a database of recognized profanity words. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The a validation and safeguard engine is recited at a high level of generality.
Claim 36 recites wherein the Al engine identifies the location of the customer by identifying the customer address of the customer stored in the customer database. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 37 recites wherein the location of the customer is a delivery address specified by the customer. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 38 recites wherein, in response to a modification request, the Al engine uses the control code associated with the identified order to access the identified order stored in the order management system. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 39 recites further comprising: a web portal, in communication with one or more database servers, that provides functionality for each businesses to specify the menu items of the business stored in the business database. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The communication of the web portal to a database server is recited at a high level of generality.
Claim 40 recites further comprising: an application programming interface (API) that provides functionality for each business to specify the menu items of the business stored in the business database. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The API functionality is recited at a high level of generality.
Claim 41 recites wherein the API is adapted to receive data indicative of the menu items of a business from a point-of-sale (POS) system or portal of the business. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The API functionality in communication with the POS is recited at a high level of generality.
Claim 42 recites wherein the POS system or portal of the business is the business application for the desired business, in network communication with the Al engine, configured to output the customer identifier of the customer and information indicative of the one or more desired products. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The POS in communication with the AI engine is recited at a high level of generality.
For these reasons, claims 25-28, 30-42 are rejected under 35 USC 101.
Subject Matter Free of Prior Art
Claim 25 is determined to have overcome the prior art of rejection and are free of prior art, however the claims remain rejected under 35 USC 101 and 35 USC 112(a), as set forth above. All dependent claims are also free of prior art by virtue of dependency, but remain rejected under 35 USC 101.
Taking amended claim 25 as a representative claim, the claims as amended are found to overcome the prior art rejection for the reasons set forth below.
Claim 1 now recites the additional claimed features of:
one or more messaging servers configured to receive order messages, input by the customer in a natural language format, via each of a plurality of user input clients, each user input client configured to receive the natural language order messages in a distinct communication protocol,
a collector engine configured to standardize the natural language order messages received via the distinct communication protocols and generate standard format natural language messages;
an extraction engine configured to tokenize each standard format natural language order message to form a plurality of message tokens;
an artificial intelligence (Al) engine, in communication with the one or more database servers, the one or more messaging servers, the collector engine, and the extraction engine, the Al engine configured to identify an order from a customer by:
identifying a desired business by;
identifying a location of the customer;
identifying a subset of the plurality of businesses by using a location service to filter the business database based on the identified location of the customer;
and comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored business names to identify the nearest matching business name from among the subset of the plurality of businesses in the business database;
identifying one or more desired products from among the stored menu items of the desired business by comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored keywords in the business database to identify the nearest matching menu items of the desired business;
storing the identified order and a control code associated with the identified order in an order management system;
The closest prior art was found to be as follows:
Bansal (previously cited) discloses a third party cited that is used to process a quick order transaction. Merchants are able to upload menu items and prices and users can place their orders using a quick order method from applications such as email, texting application, tweet handles, and other applications over a network where TweetEat process the handles within the messages (see [0040]). When a match from the request and the menu items is found, the order is processed (see [0035-36]) and the process proceeds to checkout application 355. However, the reference does not disclose at least a collector engine configured to standardize the natural language order messages received via the distinct communication protocols and generate standard format natural language messages; an extraction engine configured to tokenize each standard format natural language order message to form a plurality of message tokens; an artificial intelligence (Al) engine, in communication with the one or more database servers, the one or more messaging servers, the collector engine, and the extraction engine, the Al engine configured to identify an order from a customer by: identifying a desired business by; identifying a location of the customer; identifying a subset of the plurality of businesses by using a location service to filter the business database based on the identified location of the customer; and comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored business names to identify the nearest matching business name from among the subset of the plurality of businesses in the business database; identifying one or more desired products from among the stored menu items of the desired business by comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored keywords in the business database to identify the nearest matching menu items of the desired business; storing the identified order and a control code associated with the identified order in an order management system, as required by the claimed invention.
Tam (previously cited) discloses fuzzy logic used to perform matching operations (see [0036]) from parsed email content to extract values such as a source merchant (see [0040]) and finding a substantial match. However, the reference does not disclose one or more messaging servers configured to receive order messages, input by the customer in a natural language format, via each of a plurality of user input clients, each user input client configured to receive the natural language order messages in a distinct communication protocol, at least a collector engine configured to standardize the natural language order messages received via the distinct communication protocols and generate standard format natural language messages; an extraction engine configured to tokenize each standard format natural language order message to form a plurality of message tokens; an artificial intelligence (Al) engine, in communication with the one or more database servers, the one or more messaging servers, the collector engine, and the extraction engine, the Al engine configured to identify an order from a customer by: identifying a desired business by; identifying a location of the customer; identifying a subset of the plurality of businesses by using a location service to filter the business database based on the identified location of the customer; and comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored business names to identify the nearest matching business name from among the subset of the plurality of businesses in the business database; identifying one or more desired products from among the stored menu items of the desired business by comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored keywords in the business database to identify the nearest matching menu items of the desired business; storing the identified order and a control code associated with the identified order in an order management system, as required by the claimed invention.
Grosset (US 20140278364) discloses Concept identifier tool 22 may detect or identify a primary language of the data item headings in the data source (44), and may select a lexical set based on the detected primary language. Concept identifier tool 22 may then tokenize the data item headings (46), analyze the data item heading tokens (48), and match concept keywords with the data item headings based on the analysis of the data item heading tokens (50). Tokenizing the data item headings (46) and analyzing the data item heading tokens (48) may involve various techniques described in further detail below, and for example may be done in a way specific to the identified primary language. (see [0038]) Matching the concept keywords with the data item headings based on the analysis of the data item heading tokens (50) may include using a resulting set of clues from the analysis of the data item heading tokens to look up one or more concepts in the concept library, based on a business ontology, as potential candidates to explain the data item headings. Matching the concept keywords with the data item headings based on the analysis of the data item heading tokens (50) may also include concept identifier tool 22 validating potential matches between concepts and data item headings using other clues, such as data patterns, the actual values of data listed under the data item heading, surrounding context of the data, and other factors. Concept identifier tool 22 may conclude by identifying one or more concepts with each of the one or more data item headings it evaluates based on the concept keyword matches (52) (see [0039]). The reference also discloses near matching algorithms for finding the closest matches (see [0046]). However the reference does not disclose one or more messaging servers configured to receive order messages, input by the customer in a natural language format, via each of a plurality of user input clients, each user input client configured to receive the natural language order messages in a distinct communication protocol, an artificial intelligence (Al) engine, in communication with the one or more database servers, the one or more messaging servers, the collector engine, and the extraction engine, the Al engine configured to identify an order from a customer by: identifying a desired business by; identifying a location of the customer; identifying a subset of the plurality of businesses by using a location service to filter the business database based on the identified location of the customer; and comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored business names to identify the nearest matching business name from among the subset of the plurality of businesses in the business database; identifying one or more desired products from among the stored menu items of the desired business by comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored keywords in the business database to identify the nearest matching menu items of the desired business; storing the identified order and a control code associated with the identified order in an order management system as required by the claimed invention.
Barbieri (US 20140379450) discloses A selection module 210 is configured to identify the matchup based on determining that the query keyword token corresponds to at least one of a sale brand identification, a coupon brand identification, a product identification, a product category, or a product subcategory included in the matchup. The selection module 210 is also configured to determine that the sale valid-to date and the coupon valid-to date of the sale and coupon deals included in the matchup have not passed. By verifying that the sale and coupon valid-to dates have not passed, the selection module 210 identifies only matchups that are still valid and applicable to the particular search query (see [0061]). A user 336 may issue a search request for a deal matchup via an application server 334. The search request may include one or more search criteria, such as a brand name or a product name. The application server 334 may forward the user's query to a search index 332 (e.g., the selection module 210) to identify a matchup that corresponds to the search criteria comprised in the query. The search index 332 may communicate the search criteria to the token generator module 208 to parse the data of the search criteria and generate one or more query keyword tokens. In some example embodiments, the token generator module 208 may also generate deal data tokens based on the unstructured deal data 302 or the structured deal data 310. Then, the text in the query keyword tokens may be compared against the text in the deal data tokens during the process of selecting a matchup that corresponds to the user's search criteria (see [0075]).As described above, the system may alert the user when new deals or matchups have been transmitted to the user's pircular, or when the user is in the vicinity of a store listed in the user's list of favorites. A further alert may be sent to the user when the system determines that the user is within a pre-determined distance from the store and that the user's pircular comprises a deal or matchup that is applicable at the store. In some example embodiments, the pircular displays a map that includes an indication of a store location to assist the user in finding a store where the user may apply one or more matchups or coupons. In certain example embodiments, the system allows the user to email the user's circular using the email button 912. (see [0107]). However the reference does not disclose at least one or more messaging servers configured to receive order messages, input by the customer in a natural language format, via each of a plurality of user input clients, each user input client configured to receive the natural language order messages in a distinct communication protocol, a collector engine configured to standardize the natural language order messages received via the distinct communication protocols and generate standard format natural language messages; an artificial intelligence (Al) engine, in communication with the one or more database servers, the one or more messaging servers, the collector engine, and the extraction engine, the Al engine configured to identify an order from a customer by: storing the identified order and a control code associated with the identified order in an order management system, as required by the claimed invention.
Kaiser (US 20050289124) discloses processing natural language queries. Such methods and systems may receive a natural language query from a user and generate corresponding semantic tokens. Information may be retrieved from a knowledge base using the semantic tokens. Methods and systems may leverage an interpretation module to process and analyze the retrieved information in order to determine an intention associated with the natural language query (see Abstract and see example in Figure 1). However, the reference does not disclose one or more messaging servers configured to receive order messages, input by the customer in a natural language format, via each of a plurality of user input clients, each user input client configured to receive the natural language order messages in a distinct communication protocol, an artificial intelligence (Al) engine, in communication with the one or more database servers, the one or more messaging servers, the collector engine, and the extraction engine, the Al engine configured to identify an order from a customer by: identifying a desired business by; identifying a location of the customer; identifying a subset of the plurality of businesses by using a location service to filter the business database based on the identified location of the customer; and comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored business names to identify the nearest matching business name from among the subset of the plurality of businesses in the business database; identifying one or more desired products from among the stored menu items of the desired business by comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored keywords in the business database to identify the nearest matching menu items of the desired business; storing the identified order and a control code associated with the identified order in an order management system as required by the claimed invention.
The closest NPL was found to be "Netfood: A Software System for Food Ordering and Delivery" which discloses an order management software allowing a user to order food delivery from a plurality of restaurants at the same time. The user can view menus from the plurality of restaurants and select the items to order via an API. However, the reference does not disclose one or more messaging servers configured to receive order messages, input by the customer in a natural language format, via each of a plurality of user input clients, each user input client configured to receive the natural language order messages in a distinct communication protocol,a collector engine configured to standardize the natural language order messages received via the distinct communication protocols and generate standard format natural language messages; an extraction engine configured to tokenize each standard format natural language order message to form a plurality of message tokens; an artificial intelligence (Al) engine, in communication with the one or more database servers, the one or more messaging servers, the collector engine, and the extraction engine, the Al engine configured to identify an order from a customer by: identifying a desired business by; identifying a location of the customer; identifying a subset of the plurality of businesses by using a location service to filter the business database based on the identified location of the customer; and comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored business names to identify the nearest matching business name from among the subset of the plurality of businesses in the business database; identifying one or more desired products from among the stored menu items of the desired business by comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored keywords in the business database to identify the nearest matching menu items of the desired business; storing the identified order and a control code associated with the identified order in an order management system, as required by the claimed invention.
It was found that no references alone or in combination, neither anticipates, reasonable teaches, nor renders obvious the below noted features of Applicant’s invention. The features of claim 25 in combination that overcome the prior art are:
one or more messaging servers configured to receive order messages, input by the customer in a natural language format, via each of a plurality of user input clients, each user input client configured to receive the natural language order messages in a distinct communication protocol,
a collector engine configured to standardize the natural language order messages received via the distinct communication protocols and generate standard format natural language messages;
an extraction engine configured to tokenize each standard format natural language order message to form a plurality of message tokens;
an artificial intelligence (Al) engine, in communication with the one or more database servers, the one or more messaging servers, the collector engine, and the extraction engine, the Al engine configured to identify an order from a customer by:
identifying a desired business by;
identifying a location of the customer;
identifying a subset of the plurality of businesses by using a location service to filter the business database based on the identified location of the customer;
and comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored business names to identify the nearest matching business name from among the subset of the plurality of businesses in the business database;
identifying one or more desired products from among the stored menu items of the desired business by comparing the one or more message tokens against the stored keywords in the business database to identify the nearest matching menu items of the desired business;
storing the identified order and a control code associated with the identified order in an order management system;
Therefore, none of the cited references disclose or render obvious each and every feature of the claimed invention and the claimed invention is determined to be free of the prior art. Although individually the claimed features could be taught, any combination of references would teach the claimed limitations using a piecemeal analysis, since references would only be combined and deemed obvious based on knowledge gleaned from the applicant's disclosure. Such a reconstruction is improper (i.e., hindsight reasoning). See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). The examiner emphasizes that it is the interrelationship of the limitations that renders these claims free of the prior art/additional art.
Therefore, it is hereby asserted by the Examiner that, in light of the above, that the claims are free of prior art as the references do not anticipate the claims and do not render obvious any further modification of the references to a person of ordinary skill in art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the remarks directed to 35 USC 101, the rejection has been updated above in view of the claim amendment. The rejection is maintained and the examiner notes some of the additional elements are rejected under 35 USC 112(a) for lack of support in the disclosure.
With respect to A. Normalization of Disparate Communication Protocols, the rejection has treated the recited user input clients as additional elements, however there are no details in the disclosure or the specification as to how the natural language order messages are processed in the distinct communication protocols or how the collector engine standardized the natural language order messages received to a standard format natural language order messages. The limitations in the claims only recited the solution in a conclusionary manner (MPEP 2106.05(a)), not detailed steps for such processing. As such, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
With respect to B. Deterministic product identification process, the identification of the desired menu items is still recited in a manner that includes such limitations as part of the abstract idea. The recitation of the business database is at a high level of generality merely storing the appropriate data. As discussed above, as no further details are provided as to the tokenization of each standard format natural language order message, the message is also part of the abstract idea. The AI engine is merely implementing the identification of the order from a customer by using the data points of the tokens being compared to the nearest matching business information. There is not a level of technical detail that integrates the additional elements of the AI engine or the business database into a practical application nor enough technical detail for the standardization or tokenization of data to be transformed in such a way to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
With respect to C. Multi-step business identification process, the examiner does not find the remarks directed to the claims reciting a multi-step business process to be persuasive for the reasons set forth under remarks A and B. The steps of the process are merely directed to an abstract idea being implemented by additional elements recited at a high level of generality with little technical detail as to how these steps are accomplished. Again, the steps are recited in a conclusionary manner and do not improve the technology (MPEP 2106.05(a)). The same conclusion was reached for the same reasons when considering the dependent claims alone and in combination with claim 25.
With respect to D. Maintaining stateful context, the remarks are not found to be persuasive as the level of technical detail does not amount to more than the customer being able to review and modify their order. These limitations are part of the abstract idea, at the level of detail in which they are currently recited. The functionality does not recite more than data processing and storing using a code that is then presented to the end user to include options of modifying the order.
With respect to E. API Integration and Data Synchronization, the dependent claims 40-42 while reciting the additional elements of the AIP and POS, are merely using these as tools to process the information of each business. The functionality does not appear to be any more than the ability to input data and the POS can receive data about desired products. There is no level of detail recited beyond reciting the additional elements at a high level of generality for carrying out the abstract idea.
For at least these reasons, the claims remain rejected under 35 USC 101.
The remarks directed to prior art are determined to be moot. The prior art rejection has been withdrawn for the reasons set forth under "Subject Matter Free of Prior Art". However, the claims remain rejected under 35 USC 101 and 112(a).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA E. FRUNZI whose telephone number is (571)270-1031. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 7-4 (EST).
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, Marissa Thein can be reached at (571) 272-6764. 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.
VICTORIA E. FRUNZI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit TC 3689
/VICTORIA E. FRUNZI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689 7/14/2026
Prosecution Insights