DETAILED ACTION
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to Applicant's amendments and arguments and request for continued examination filed on December 18, 2025. Applicant has amended claims 1, 10 and 19 and added claim 21. Currently, claims 1-19, 21 are pending. The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/18/25 has been entered.
Response to Amendments
The 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections of claims 1-19 are maintained in light of applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 10 and 19.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1-19 are withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 10 and 19. Applicant’s amendments necessitated the new grounds for rejection in this office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks submitted on 12/18/25 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues on p. 8 of the remarks that the 101 rejection is improper. Examiner disagrees. Applicant argues on p. 8 that the claims are directed to receiving site data stored locally and converting the data into common format. Examiner notes those are additional elements related to implementing the abstract idea that is for managing attendance of students. Applicant further argues that the claims are integrated into practical application by improving the method of retrieving and normalizing locally stored data. Examiner disagrees and notes the improvement is to an abstract idea and that retrieving and normalizing locally stored data is considered an additional element that is linking the abstract idea to a specific computing environment. This is also true for the use of databases and legacy data processing and mobile applications. Applicant argues that the claims improve a technology or a technical field but managing student attendance is not considered a technical field but rather an abstract idea. Therefore, the 101 rejections are maintained. Applicant argues on p. 11 of the remarks that the 103 rejections are improper. Examiner notes these arguments are moot in light of the newly cited references. Therefore, the claims are still rejected under 103.
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 1-19, 21 are clearly drawn to at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter recited in 35 U.S.C. 101 (method, system and non-transitory medium). Claims 1-19, 21 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. Claims 1, 10 and 19 recite the abstract idea of determining one or more attributes associated with the legacy data and receiving site data based on the structure and the one or more attributes, wherein the site data comprises student information and attendance data and performing a comparison of the site data to prior data associated with the site-resident data and converting, based on a plurality of data transformation rules, the site data from an arbitrary format associated with the site location to a common format and dynamically determining an action based on an alert rule, wherein the action is selected from a plurality of actions based on the alert rule and the alert rule comprises a trigger associated with an attendance trend, wherein the attendance trend is identified based on the site data and transmitting the alert to a user based on the converted site data and the dynamically determined action, wherein the alert comprises the student information and the customization. The claims are directed to a type of management of student attendance data by converting data formats and sending alerts based on collected data. Under prong 1 of Step 2A, these claims are considered abstract because the claims are certain methods of organizing human activity including managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). The claims are considered organizing human activity because the claims show managing the attendance of students where attendance is a human activity and managing such attendance data by having alerts and sending related reports is a type of organizing of such data. Under prong 2 of Step 2A, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims (the judicial exception and any additional elements individually or in combination such as determining, via a site-resident data collection module, a database record structure associated with a legacy data processing system, wherein the site-resident data collection interfaces with the legacy data processing system at a site location and the site-resident data collection module comprises instructions executing within a computing environment of the site location and determining, via the sit-resident data collection module, a database schema associated with the legacy data processing system and the site data is hosted locally at the site location and based on the comparison, overwriting the prior data in the host database with the site data and testing the database record structure, the database schema and the one or more attributes with the test data to confirm that the site resident data collection module correctly determined the database record structure, the database scheme and the one or more attributes used by the legacy data processing system and receiving site data based on the database schema and in response to the trigger, receiving inputs to a user interface on a first mobile application, where the inputs comprises a customization for an alert and a second mobile application and receiving, via the second mobile application, confirmation from the user in response to the alert and a system comprising one or more processors and a memory coupled with the one or more processors, the memory storing executable instructions that when executed by the one or more processors cause the one or more processors to effectuate operations and a non-transitory computer-readable medium embodying a program that when executed by at least one computing device causes the at least one computing device to perform steps) are not an improvement to a computer or a technology, the claims do not apply the judicial exception with a particular machine, the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing nor do the claims apply the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment such that the claims as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. These limitations at best are merely implementing an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f). Under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements individually or in combination such as determining, via a site-resident data collection module, a database record structure associated with a legacy data processing system, wherein the site-resident data collection interfaces with the legacy data processing system at a site location and the site-resident data collection module comprises instructions executing within a computing environment of the site location and determining, via the sit-resident data collection module, a database schema associated with the legacy data processing system and the site data is hosted locally at the site location and based on the comparison, overwriting the prior data in the host database with the site data and testing the database record structure, the database schema and the one or more attributes with the test data to confirm that the site resident data collection module correctly determined the database record structure, the database scheme and the one or more attributes used by the legacy data processing system and receiving site data based on the database schema and in response to the trigger, receiving inputs to a user interface on a first mobile application, where the inputs comprises a customization for an alert and a second mobile application and receiving, via the second mobile application, confirmation from the user in response to the alert and a system comprising one or more processors and a memory coupled with the one or more processors, the memory storing executable instructions that when executed by the one or more processors cause the one or more processors to effectuate operations and a non-transitory computer-readable medium embodying a program that when executed by at least one computing device causes the at least one computing device to perform steps (as evidenced by para [0040]-[0051], [0083]-[0086], [0231] of applicant’s own specification) are well understood, routine and conventional in the field. Dependent claims 4, 6, 9, 13, 15, 18, 21 also do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements either individually or in combination are merely an extension of the abstract idea itself by further showing providing a student overview page including information associated with one or more concerns associated with a student and determining one or more student attendance trends on a periodic bases wherein the alert comprises the one or more student attendance trends and wherein the alert comprises a chart and wherein the chart is copied to a clipboard associated with the user and the selectin is associated with a predetermined threshold and determining a value in the site data falls below the predetermined threshold. Dependent claims 2-3, 5, 7-8, 11-12, 14, 16-17, 21 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements individually or in combination such as wherein the action comprises sending a text message, scheduling a conference based on a reply to a text message, wherein the alert comprises text message corresponding with a student and a dashboard that comprises a drill down feature enabling access to detailed information and a virtual meeting type and scheduling based on the virtual meeting type, a virtual meeting and receiving a selection from a plurality of selections on a user interface from the first mobile application (as evidenced by para [0040]-[0051], [0083]-[0086], [0231] of applicant’s own specification) are well understood, routine and conventional in the field.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8, 10-13, 15, 17, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruby et al. (US 2003/0187849 A1) (hereinafter Ruby) in view of Keitch (US 2005/0233294 A1) in view of Creamer et al. (US 2009/0197234 A1) (hereinafter Creamer) in view of Greenberg (US 2010/0281123 A1).
Claims 1, 10 and 19:
Ruby, as shown, discloses the following limitations of claims 1, 10 and 19:
A method (and corresponding system and non-transitory computer readable medium – see para [0013], showing equivalent computing functionality) performed by one or more computing devices (see para [0013], showing equivalent computing functionality and structure), the method comprising: determining, via a site-resident collection module (see para [0015]-[0016], domain entity controllers), a database record structure associated with a legacy data processing system (see para [0004], " A selected embodiment of the invention is an information management and reporting system which operates concurrently with a plurality of different, operational legacy database systems. The system is accessible by multiple users from remote locations for reviewing information from the legacy databases and generating reports from these database systems. The information management and reporting system includes a plurality of common format databases which are associated respectively with each of the legacy database systems. A plurality of database mappers are associated respectively with each of the legacy database systems. Each of the database mappers reads data from multiple fields of the corresponding legacy database system and writes the data read from these systems into a common format database associated with the corresponding legacy database system. A plurality of applications are stored in association with each of the legacy database systems. Each of the applications accesses the corresponding common format database for data that is used by the application. Each of the applications are accessible by the multiple users through a communication medium from remote locations.") wherein the site-resident data collection module interfaces with the legacy data processing system at a site location and the site-resident data collection module comprises instructions executing within a computing environment of the site location (Fig 1, showing the legacy system communicating with the xml service and the domain entity controllers associated with the modules and common database),
determining a database, via the site-resident data collection module, schema associated with the legacy data processing system (see para [0004], "A selected embodiment of the invention is an information management and reporting system which operates concurrently with a plurality of different, operational legacy database systems. The system is accessible by multiple users from remote locations for reviewing information from the legacy databases and generating reports from these database systems. The information management and reporting system includes a plurality of common format databases which are associated respectively with each of the legacy database systems. A plurality of database mappers are associated respectively with each of the legacy database systems. Each of the database mappers reads data from multiple fields of the corresponding legacy database system and writes the data read from these systems into a common format database associated with the corresponding legacy database system. A plurality of applications are stored in association with each of the legacy database systems. Each of the applications accesses the corresponding common format database for data that is used by the application. Each of the applications are accessible by the multiple users through a communication medium from remote locations." and see para [0022]-[0028]);
determining, via the site-resident data collection module, one or more attributes associated with the legacy data processing system (see para [0024]-[0028], where the property data can be considered attributes for the legacy system);
performing a comparison of the site data to prior data stored in a host database associated with the site-resident data collection module (see para [0021], "The entity transfer 30 can read all of the files from the legacy system database 24 and transfer the data from these files through the network 32, XML service 34 and controllers 36 to overwrite the previous information in the common format database 28, or if supported by the legacy system database 24, only read and transfer those data entries that have changed or been added since the last read of data from the database 24.");
based on the comparison, overwriting the prior data in the host database with the site data (see para [0021], "The entity transfer 30 can read all of the files from the legacy system database 24 and transfer the data from these files through the network 32, XML service 34 and controllers 36 to overwrite the previous information in the common format database 28, or if supported by the legacy system database 24, only read and transfer those data entries that have changed or been added since the last read of data from the database 24.");
converting, based on a plurality of data transformation rules, the site data from an arbitrary format associated with the site location to a common format (see para [0013], "The local system 20 includes an operating legacy database system which includes a legacy application system 22 and a legacy system database 24. Examples of such legacy systems include mainframe computers utilizing database software such as provided by Oracle and SAP." where using Oracle or SAP can be considered arbitrary decision and see para [0014], "The legacy system interconnects with a group of overlay programs which write data to and read data from a common format database 28. The layout of data in the common format database 28 is the same in all of the multiple local systems which can be accessed by the users 12-16. Each of the local overlay programs includes an entity transfer 30 which reads data fields from the legacy system database 24 and maps these fields into a format that is common across the common format databases, such as 28. The entity transfer 30 further converts the data read from the legacy system database 24 into common XML (Extensible Markup Language) documents which are communicated through a network 32 to an XML service 34.");
Ruby, however, does not specifically disclose wherein the site data comprises student information and attendance data. In analogous art, Keitch discloses the following limitations:
testing the database record structure, the database schema and the one or more attributes with test data to confirm that the site-resident data collection module correctly determined the database record structure, the database schema, and the one or more attributes used by the legacy data processing system (see para [0048]-[0049], "In step 314, this file is then dropped into Excel.RTM. in order to execute the absence logic in FIG. 5 and for verification. In steps 316 and 318, the file is opened and the report data is inserted into the Excel.RTM. spreadsheet. In step 320, the absence logic, shown in FIG. 5 is run, and in step 322, the total absences to date for the school year is generated for each student in the database. In step 324, a verification logic function is run, in order to verify the student absence totals correspond correctly with the student names. In step 326, the Excel.RTM. spreadsheet is adjusted in order to satisfy the logic function. In this example, a verified record is indicated by a "1" and an unverifiable record is indicated by a "2" in the verification column." where verification of data that is dropped into an excel file and where Fig 1 shows the data coming from school servers to school district server can be considered to show the testing of database data is obvious where verification is equivalent to testing given broadest reasonable interpretation);
receiving, via the site-resident data collection module, site data based on the structure, the database schema, and the one or more attributes, wherein the site data comprises student information and attendance data and the site data is hosted locally at the site location (see para [0028], "Returning now to FIG. 1, and viewing FIG. 1 in combination with the flowchart shown in FIG. 4, School A (representing one or more schools within a school district), enters Daily Attendance Record 100 into School A Computer Server 110 in step 200." and see para [0031], “If today's attendance records have been entered into School Computer Server 110, the system downloads Daily Attendance Record 100 into Memory 132 as shown in step 206. Daily Attendance Record 100 comprises student daily absence records n.sub.1 through n.sub.T as shown in the example in Table 1.);
dynamically determining an action based on an alert rule, wherein the action is selected from a plurality of actions based on the alert rule (Fig. 7, showing a flowchart for different actions based on rules such as what happens if if total absences are less than 10 or equal 15 which can be considered to show selecting actions based on rules given broadest reasonable interpretation and see para [0046], "FIGS. 8 and 9, respectively, illustrate examples of either manually (by a school official) or automatically generated response letters for responses 2 and 3 in the table below. As illustrated in the table below, and in FIGS. 7-9, possible responses include, but are not limited to: (1) an Informal Truancy Hearing when a student's Total Unexcused Absences equal 5; (2) a Need Medical Excuse letter (FIG. 9) once the student's Total Chargeable Absences equal 15; and (3) a parental ten-day warning letter (FIG. 8) sent once the student's Total Chargeable Absences equal 10." where a letter or hearing are different types of actions based on rules related to attendance) and the alert rule comprises a trigger associated with an attendance trend (see para [0037], "The Truancy Database, as illustrated in FIG. 6, also includes information on total absences. As shown in FIG. 6, and as discussed in the example above, total absences are reflected in the Truancy Database 136 as Total Unexcused Absences and Total Chargeable Absences. However, it is envisioned that the present system and method can be tailored according to the absence designations and policies of individual school districts. Truancy Database 136 may also optionally include the daily absence records, in standardized format, as converted from the school's Daily Attendance Records 100." and see para [0043], " Once the total absences have been updated for the day, the system executes the second part of the absence logic and determines whether the Total Unexcused Absences and Total Chargeable Absences have reached a designated threshold requiring a response. Normally, the threshold is set at total absences which school district policy or state law designate as an unacceptable level of truancy or absenteeism. However, it is envisioned that each school district will have its own policies which designate the particular threshold number of absences that require a response." and see para [0045], "These responses shown in FIG. 7 can be generated in a variety of ways, including, but not limited to, email notification, automatic letter generation, or notification of school official or truant officer, who then carries out the responses in accordance with his or her job responsibilities. For example, response 1 (informal hearing) would be generated by automatic email notification of the hearing officer, who then takes the remaining steps shown in FIG. 7.") wherein the attendance trend is identified based on the site data (see para [0028], "Returning now to FIG. 1, and viewing FIG. 1 in combination with the flowchart shown in FIG. 4, School A (representing one or more schools within a school district), enters Daily Attendance Record 100 into School A Computer Server 110 in step 200."); and
transmitting the alert to a user…based on the converted site data and the dynamically determined action, wherein the alert comprises the student information (see para [0045]-[0046], " These responses shown in FIG. 7 can be generated in a variety of ways, including, but not limited to, email notification, automatic letter generation, or notification of school official or truant officer, who then carries out the responses in accordance with his or her job responsibilities. For example, response 1 (informal hearing) would be generated by automatic email notification of the hearing officer, who then takes the remaining steps shown in FIG. 7. FIGS. 8 and 9, respectively, illustrate examples of either manually (by a school official) or automatically generated response letters for responses 2 and 3 in the table below. As illustrated in the table below, and in FIGS. 7-9, possible responses include, but are not limited to: (1) an Informal Truancy Hearing when a student's Total Unexcused Absences equal 5; (2) a Need Medical Excuse letter (FIG. 9) once the student's Total Chargeable Absences equal 15; and (3) a parental ten-day warning letter (FIG. 8) sent once the student's Total Chargeable Absences equal 10.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Ruby with Kietch because integrating attendance data provides a real world use that enhances the tracking of student truancy via automatic systems (see Kietch, para [0003]-[0007]).
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the method for tracking attendance and detecting truancy as taught by Kietch in the system for management and reporting system for use with multiple disparate databases of Ruby, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Ruby and Kietch, however, do not specifically disclose in response to the trigger, receiving inputs to a user interface on a first mobile application, wherein the inputs comprise a customization for an alert.
In analogous art, Creamer discloses the following limitations:
in response to the trigger, receiving inputs to a user interface on a first mobile application, wherein the inputs comprise a customization for an alert (see para [0074], " SMS 165 also enables performance tracking functions. In addition to the previously described online discussion grading functions, in one embodiment VSS 115, via SMS 165, CDR 150 and PSP 195, provides a comprehensive, customizable and flexible performance tracking and reporting mechanism. The performance tracking module of SMS 165 automatically determines the performance tracking and reporting requirements for a student based upon a multitude of factors including predefined rules associated with federal requirements, state requirements, degree requirements, school requirements, the student's past performance, the student's current classes, etc. The performance module accesses CDR 150 data to assess student performance indicators such as the grade in a class, overall grade point average, grade point average in a particular academic discipline, standardized testing scores, grade trends, attendance indicators, attendance trends, etc. In one embodiment, the module determines when a performance report is required based upon a timeframe, the student performance indicators, performance tracking requirements, a student preference, a parent preference, or a guidance counselor preference. When a performance report is required, the module may generate and format a performance report and distribute it to a student, parent, guidance counselor, third-party system, the state government or the federal government. Furthermore, the performance tracking mechanism provides data and calculations to PSP 195 to present in the portal's progress tracking interface." where it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that preferences can be considered customization and using SMS shows integration with mobile applications would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art and see para [0073]);
transmitting the alert to a user via a second mobile application…wherein the alert comprises the student information and the customization (see para [0025], " In one embodiment, with reference to FIG. 1, system 100 includes a user 105 interfacing with a VSS 115 by way of a client 110. Client 110 comprises any hardware and/or software suitably configured to facilitate requesting, retrieving, updating, analyzing, entering and/or modifying data. The data may include verification data, authentication data, instructional data, demographic data, testing data, transaction data, performance and reporting data or any information discussed herein. Client 110 includes any device (e.g., personal computer), which communicates (in any manner discussed herein) with the VSS 115 via any network discussed herein. Browser applications comprise Internet browsing software installed within a computing unit or system to conduct online communications and transactions. These computing units or systems may take the form of personal computers, mobile phones, personal digital assistants, mobile email devices, laptops, notebooks, hand held computers, portable computers, kiosks, and/or the like. Practitioners will appreciate that the client 110 may or may not be in direct contact with the VSS 115. For example, the client 110 may access the services of the VSS 115 through another server, which may have a direct or indirect connection to Internet server 125." and see para [0074], "SMS 165 also enables performance tracking functions. In addition to the previously described online discussion grading functions, in one embodiment VSS 115, via SMS 165, CDR 150 and PSP 195, provides a comprehensive, customizable and flexible performance tracking and reporting mechanism. The performance tracking module of SMS 165 automatically determines the performance tracking and reporting requirements for a student based upon a multitude of factors including predefined rules associated with federal requirements, state requirements, degree requirements, school requirements, the student's past performance, the student's current classes, etc. The performance module accesses CDR 150 data to assess student performance indicators such as the grade in a class, overall grade point average, grade point average in a particular academic discipline, standardized testing scores, grade trends, attendance indicators, attendance trends, etc. In one embodiment, the module determines when a performance report is required based upon a timeframe, the student performance indicators, performance tracking requirements, a student preference, a parent preference, or a guidance counselor preference. When a performance report is required, the module may generate and format a performance report and distribute it to a student, parent, guidance counselor, third-party system, the state government or the federal government. Furthermore, the performance tracking mechanism provides data and calculations to PSP 195 to present in the portal's progress tracking interface." where it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that preferences can be considered customization and using SMS shows integration with mobile applications would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Ruby and Keitch with Creamer because using customization enables a more targeted solution for the stakeholders (see Creamer, para [0003]-[0005]).
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the method for a virtual school taught by Creamer in the Ruby and Keitch combination, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Ruby, Keitch and Creamer, however, do not specifically disclose receiving, via the second mobile application, confirmation from the user in response to the alert. In analogous art, Greenberg discloses the following limitations:
receiving, via the second mobile application, confirmation from the user in response to the alert (see para [0026], "The message center 16 can also include a feedback module 24 for receiving feedback from one or more members of a user group. The feedback 24 module can include any suitable combination of hardware, firmware or software adapted to receive messages from the one or more members of the user group in any suitable media, including at least email, voicemail, text-to-speech, fax and/or text (SMS or MMS) messages. The feedback can include a confirmation of receipt of a message, particularly if the message is an emergency message. Thus for example if an emergency message is directed to parents of a group of schoolchildren, then the receiving parents can confirm receipt of the message thereby acknowledging the particular situation. Feedback messages can be directed at least in part to a database 26, which can be configured for automatically updating a status of one or more user groups, messages, lists, and schedules. The database 26 can include sufficient memory and storage for partitioning data among message types, user groups, schedules, lists, and feedback as well as other database configurations desired by the administrator.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Ruby, Keitch and Creamer with Greenberg because including a confirmation adds a useful layer to the communication protocol (see Greenberg, para [0002]-[0006]).
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the system for targeted communication as taught by Greenberg in the Ruby, Keitch and Creamer combination, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 2-4, 6, 8, 11-13, 15, 17:
Ruby and Keitch do not specifically disclose wherein the action comprises sending a text message. In analogous art, Creamer discloses the following limitations:
wherein the action comprises sending a text message (see para [0073], "Coordinating the educational and administrative activities of a school is complex and requires effective communication. VSS 115 includes an automated alert module configured to send automated alerts and/or messages. In one embodiment, administrators use the automated alert module to format messages and deliver them to a targeted set of recipients. In one embodiment, students and parents access messages and send messages by accessing the functions of the automated alert module via PSP 195. Automated alerts may be system messages delivered to a user via a VSS 115 UI, email messages, text messages, short message service (SMS) messages or automated phone messages. Furthermore, automated alerts may be manually entered by a user or may be automatically generated by VSWE 147. In one embodiment the automated alert module is configured to distribute messages to a targeted subset of users including a single user, a user role (e.g. all instructors), a class, a degree program, an academic department, an administrative department, a school, or all users associated with a standardized test." and see para [0031], [0072], [0074])
scheduling a conference based on a reply to the text message (see para [0031], "integrated component of VSS 115 that allows staff to manage and track students enrolled in classes, or otherwise accessing educational content or instruction, provided by the online educational system provider. SMS 165 is comprised of multiple software applications and/or computer modules which are configured to automate a plurality of student management functions including admissions, student registration, course registration, course planning, student counseling, course scheduling, performance tracking, attendance tracking, and assessment reporting. Enrolled students (as well as potential students) and their progress are managed by SMS 165." and see para [0069], " in one embodiment guidance staff access an interface that lists students assigned to them, provides a log (e.g., an audit trail) of guidance related interactions with the student and provides access to student data and the student admissions and/or enrollment functions discussed previously. In an embodiment, instructors view a list of courses that they are assigned to and may view a listing of students, drill down to and edit gradebook entries for a particular student, access student assignments (e.g., by downloading files submitted by the student in the LMS), send messages to a student, recommend a student for counseling, send a message to a parent or guardian, etc." where an audit trail of interactions can be considered to show such specific information would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention)
providing a student overview page including information associated with one or more concerns associated with a student (ee para [0074], "SMS 165 also enables performance tracking functions. In addition to the previously described online discussion grading functions, in one embodiment VSS 115, via SMS 165, CDR 150 and PSP 195, provides a comprehensive, customizable and flexible performance tracking and reporting mechanism. The performance tracking module of SMS 165 automatically determines the performance tracking and reporting requirements for a student based upon a multitude of factors including predefined rules associated with federal requirements, state requirements, degree requirements, school requirements, the student's past performance, the student's current classes, etc. The performance module accesses CDR 150 data to assess student performance indicators such as the grade in a class, overall grade point average, grade point average in a particular academic discipline, standardized testing scores, grade trends, attendance indicators, attendance trends, etc. In one embodiment, the module determines when a performance report is required based upon a timeframe, the student performance indicators, performance tracking requirements, a student preference, a parent preference, or a guidance counselor preference. When a performance report is required, the module may generate and format a performance report and distribute it to a student, parent, guidance counselor, third-party system, the state government or the federal government. Furthermore, the performance tracking mechanism provides data and calculations to PSP 195 to present in the portal's progress tracking interface.")
determining one or more student attendance trends on a periodic basis, wherein the alert comprises the one or more attendance trends (see para [0031], [0071], showing tracking and reporting attendance indicators, attendance trends based on a timeframe via the SMS)s
wherein the alert comprises a virtual meeting type and further comprising scheduling based on the virtual meeting type, a virtual meeting (see para [0036], showing classes are virtual classes and see para [0067], showing classes are scheduled within the SMS)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Ruby and Keitch with Creamer because using text messages enables a system that enables staff members to more effectively coordinate activity (see Creamer, para [0003]-[0005]).
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the method for a virtual school taught by Creamer in the Rub and Keitch combination, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 5, 7, 14, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg, as applied above, and further in view of Whoreley et al. (US 2015/0120362 A1) (hereinafter Whoreley).
Claims 5, 7, 14, 16:
Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg, however, do not specifically disclose wherein the alert comprises text message correspondence with a student. In analogous art, Whoreley discloses the following limitations:
Ruby and Keitch do not specifically disclose wherein the alert comprises text message correspondence with a student. In analogous art, Whoreley discloses the following limitations:
wherein the alert comprises text message correspondence with a student (see para [0059], ". The dashboard display 210 for the student or parent may easily identify the number of new notifications regarding the student's class attendance and the date on which the most recent notification was transmitted (on button 212)." and see para [0063], showing the notifications can be text messages)
providing a student oversight dashboard, where the student oversight dashboard comprises a drill down feature enabling access to detailed information for a specific topic (see para [0055], " For example, as shown in FIG. 7, an athletic coach at an institution, such as interested party user 136, may log into the attendance summary mobile application 170 and see relevant information for members of a team associated with the coach on an exemplary attendance summary dashboard display 180. The coach may be interested in monitoring class attendance for all members of a relevant team, including, for example, student athlete user 138 and additional student athlete users. After logging into the attendance summary mobile application 170 the coach may be able to quickly and easily determine how many team members had unexcused absences from class that day, how many team members had unexcused absences in the past two weeks, and how many members of the team are considered "high risk." In addition, the coach may be able to drill down to view details for each team member and information regarding identified team trends. The coach may also be able to access and modify user specific account information.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg with Whoreley because including the text correspondence in the overview enables more effective attendance monitoring by having more accurate data available (see Whoreley, para [0003]-[0005]).
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the system for monitoring class attendance taught by Whoreley in the Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg combination, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg, as applied above, and further in view of Burling et al. (US 2009/0172581 A1) (hereinafter Burling).
Claims 9 and 18:
Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg do not specifically disclose wherein the alert comprises a chart and wherein the chart is copied to a clipboard associated with the user. In analogous art, Burling discloses the following limitations:
wherein the alert comprises a chart and wherein the chart is copied to a clipboard associated with the user (see para [0062], ". The user then copies the highlighted data to the clipboard 201 using the copy function (e.g., ctrl-c). The user then pastes the highlighted data from the clipboard to the insertion box or copy box 202. When the user selects "process", the parser parses the copied data into the appropriate target fields 204" and see abstract, para [0063]-[0064] where it would be obvious to one ordinary skill in the art that the data selected could be chart data)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg with Burling because enabling copying and pasting to a clipboard allows selecting more data without worrying about making errors when replicating thereby enhancing functionality of an interface (see Burling, para [0003]-[0008]).
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the method for multiple field pasting taught by Burling in the Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg combination, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg, as applied above, and further in view of James-Hatter et al. (US 2015/0050637 A1) (hereinafter James-Hatter)
Claim 21:
Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg do not specifically disclose receiving a selection from a plurality of selections on a user interface from the first mobile application, wherein the selection is associated with a predetermined threshold; and determining a value in the site data falls below the predetermined threshold. In analogous art, James-Hatter discloses the following limitations:
receiving a selection from a plurality of selections on a user interface from the first mobile application, wherein the selection is associated with a predetermined threshold; and determining a value in the site data falls below the predetermined threshold (see para [0008], "The method includes receiving at a computer processor student data transmitted from an education institution, third party data, a set of predetermined thresholds, and an activity guide containing a list of potential targeted actions. The student data comprises data pertaining to a student's attendance, discipline referrals, and math and reading grades. The student data and third party data are linked into a collected data and stored in a memory device. At least a subset of the collected data is evaluated and classified by determining if the subset meets each of the predetermined thresholds. The classifications of the collected data are stored and displayed with the collected data. A performance score is calculated for the student. Finally, a targeted strategy for the student is provided by identifying a set of targeted actions from the received activity guide based on the student's classification(s), and displaying this list to authorized users." and see para [0030], "The first computer 102 supplies the student data 110 for subsequent processing. In some embodiments the first computer 102 is associated with an educational institution that is a private or public school. In other embodiments, the educational institution is a school district. It yet other embodiments, the educational institution is any organization capable of providing student data 110. Student data 110 can be provided via wired or wireless transmission, or may be transferred in the form of a CD-ROM, CD-R, CD-RW, thumb drive, floppy drive, portable hard drive, or other permanent storage device that is useable to electronically transfer data from computer 102 to computer 112, each of which is generally referred to as a "transmission" herein." and see para [0035], "FIG. 3A-3C represents one embodiment of tired set of multiple predetermined thresholds 122 that may be established in the areas of attendance, tardies, discipline referrals, reading and math. In this embodiment, the thresholds are tiered, with different thresholds categories for students classified as "succeeding" 306, "intervention" 304 and "improvement" 302 (for students showing improvement or sustaining success as compared to the prior evaluation period). While three classifications are provided in the embodiment shown in FIG. 3A-3C, any number of classifications may be defined by the user. Each threshold classification 302, 304, and 306 contains a goal area 308, a period for evaluation 310, and a thresholds 312. In some embodiments, the goal area 308 can be comprised of any type of collected data 110 and 120. As shown in FIG. 3A, the example goal areas are Attendance 308a, Tardies 308b, Discipline Referrals 308c, and Reading 308d and Math 308e grades. Each goal area 308a-308e has a defined evaluation period 310 for each of the student classifications 302, 304 and 306. FIG. 3A-3C illustrates examples of evaluation periods 310. For the improvement classification 302, the evaluation period 310 requires a comparison of current and previous quarters collected data (a data trend). For the intervention classification 304 listed in FIG. 3B, only data from the current quarter is evaluated (current data). In some embodiments, the data periods 310 for the intervention Classification 304 can cover cumulative periods, or a mix of cumulative and current quarters. A mix of cumulative and current quarter periods are used for the evaluation period 310 for the succeeding classification 306 (cumulative data and current data). Here, the cumulative period may be from the beginning of the school year, from the beginning of the students participating in an afterschool or mentoring program, or may be cumulative over some other period. The thresholds 312 are compared to all collected data 110 and 120 in order to classify a student as succeeding 306, intervening 304, or improving 302." and see para [0046], [0050], [0065])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg with James-Hatter because adding such thresholds to be selected enables more control over the type of warning system implemented (see James-Hatter, para [0002]-[0008]).
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the system for early warning for student achievement in schools as taught by James-Hatter in the Ruby, Kietch, Creamer and Greenberg combination, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nasir et al. (US 2012/0161971 A1), a system to determine whether to assign, to the user device, a late status or an absent status based on the location of the user device, the assigned location, and the period of time; assign a late status when the location of the user device does not match the assigned location when the period of time begins; send, to another user device, a notification that the user device is late to the assigned location based on the assigning of the late status; assign an absent status when the location of the user device does not match the assigned location during the period of time; and send to the other user device, another notification that the user device was absent from the assigned location based on the assigning of the absent status
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUJAY KONERU whose telephone number is (571)270-3409. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30 AM to 5 pm.
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, Patricia Munson can be reached on 571- 270-5396. 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.
/SUJAY KONERU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624