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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/31/2021, 6/28/2022, 8/10/2023, 3/6/2024, 8/28/2024, 11/22/2024, 3/26/2025 and 6/4/2025 was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-20 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, 13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite “receiving claim attribute data from a plurality of users for a plurality of legal claims, wherein a respective legal claim corresponds to a compensation claim by a respective user, and wherein the claim attribute data for the respective legal claim comprises data corresponding to a legal claim type for the respective legal claim, a monetary value for the respective legal claim, or combinations thereof; receiving data for the plurality of legal claims from at least a subset of the plurality of users, wherein the data for the respective legal claim comprises data corresponding to one or more locations associated with the respective legal claim; and generating a legal claim exchange for a plurality of legal claim units based on the claim attribute data and the data, wherein a respective legal claim unit corresponds to a contractual right to the respective legal claim available for purchase by the plurality of users.”
The recited limitations above are a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation done by a human but for the recitation of generic computer components under mental steps (human using pen and paper). That is, other than reciting “processor”, nothing in the claim element precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind. For example, “receiving”, “receiving” and “generating” in the context of this claim encompasses the user to manually determine a claim attribute data, receiving claims from users and generating claim units for purchase.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims only recite the following additional elements- a “processor”, “a memory device” and a “non-transitory computer readable medium” to perform the above recited steps. The computer elements recited at a high-level of generality (generic computer elements performing a generic computer function of receiving information, identifying solutions and determining what should be presented to a user) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, the additional elements recited do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using the computer elements to perform the steps of claims 1, 13 and 17 amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
The limitations of the dependent claims 2-12, 14-16 and 18-20, further describe the identified abstract idea. In addition, the limitations of claims 2-4, 8-10, 12, 14-16 and 20 define how the claims are purchased and managed which further describes the abstract idea. The generic computer component of claims 5-7, 11 and 18-19 (device, interface) merely serve as the generic computer component and the functions performed by the generic computer components essentially amount to the abstract idea identified above. None of the dependent claims when taken separately in combination with each dependent claims parent claim overcome the above analysis and are therefore similarly rejected as being ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Simpson (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0151816).
As to claims 1, 13 and 17, Simpson teaches a method, a system and a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising:
receiving claim attribute data from a plurality of users for a plurality of legal claims, wherein a respective legal claim corresponds to a compensation claim by a respective user, and wherein the claim attribute data for the respective legal claim comprises data corresponding to a legal claim type for the respective legal claim, a monetary value for the respective legal claim, or combinations thereof; (para 100 and 512, show that there are different levels for contracts with different characteristics (i.e. claim type))
receiving device data for the plurality of legal claims from at least a subset of the plurality of users, wherein the device data for the respective legal claim comprises data corresponding to one or more locations associated with the respective legal claim; (para 7, the system determines the origin location through the GUI user input)
generating a legal claim exchange for a plurality of legal claim units based on the claim attribute data and the device data, wherein a respective legal claim unit corresponds to a contractual right to the respective legal claim available for purchase by the plurality of users. (para 100, 156 and 316)
As to claims 2 and 14, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 13 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
wherein the legal claim type for the respective legal claim comprises a Medicare secondary payer claim, an automobile injury claim, an opioid claim, a products liability claim, a personal injury claim, a patent infringement claim, a workman's compensation claim, a commercial litigation claim, a breach of contract claim, a breach of warranty claim, a libel claim, a slander claim, a nuisance claim, a debt collection claim, a malpractice claim, a property damage claim, a class action claim, a tort claim, a negligence claim, or combinations thereof. (para 753 and 767)
As to claims 3 and 15, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 13 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
wherein the monetary value for the respective legal claim corresponds to a monetary amount previously paid by the respective user for the respective legal claim. (para 316)
As to claim 4, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
wherein the respective user comprises an individual, a corporation, a business, an insurance company, an employer, or combinations thereof. (para 7)
As to claims 5 and 18, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 17 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
wherein the device data comprises data acquired using one or more mobile computing devices of at least the subset of the plurality of users. (para 7)
As to claims 6 and 19, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 17 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
wherein the device data comprises accelerometer data, satellite navigation data, recorded video data, photographic data, audio data, or combinations thereof. (para 156)
As to claim 7, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
wherein the device data comprises data acquired at a time proximate to a time associated with the legal claim, data acquired after the time associated with the legal claim, or combinations thereof. (para 585)
As to claims 8 and 20, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 17 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
wherein the data corresponding to the one or more locations associated with the respective legal claim comprises data acquired at a first location proximate to an injury location associated with the respective legal claim. (para 585)
As to claims 9 and 16, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 13 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
wherein the contractual right to the respective legal claim available for purchase by the plurality of users comprises a right to receive reimbursement for a monetary amount previously paid by the respective user for the respective legal claim, a right to receive compensatory damages associated with the respective legal claim, a right to receive punitive damages associated with the respective legal claim, or combinations thereof. (para 163)
As to claim 10, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
receiving transaction input data from the plurality of users, wherein the transaction input data comprises data corresponding to one or more bid prices and one or more offer prices for the plurality of legal claim units, acceptance of a respective bid price or a respective offer price, or combinations thereof. (para 156, 293 and 447)
As to claim 11, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claim 10 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
generating an interface on a computing device, wherein the interface is configured to receive the transaction input data, and wherein the transaction input data comprises fixed input data, visual input data, audio input data, or combinations thereof. (para 447)
As to claim 12, Simpson teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Simpson further teaches:
generating a priority queue of the plurality of legal claim units using the legal claim exchange, wherein the priority queue orders the plurality of legal claim units. (para 131 and fig. 3)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZEINA ELCHANTI whose telephone number is (313)446-6561. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 PM 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, Jeffrey Zimmerman can be reached at 571-272-4602. 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.
/ZEINA ELCHANTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628
Prosecution Insights