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 .
Remarks
This action is in response to the amendments received on 5/27/25. Claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15-22 are pending in the application. Claim 22 has been added.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-13, and 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parker et al. (US 2002/0052774) and further in view of Jarville et al. (US 2012/0284324) and McCabe et al. (US 2009/0292786).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-13, and 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCabe et al. (US 2009/0292786) and further in view of Parker et al. (US 2002/0052774) and Jarville et al. (US 2012/0284324).
With respect to claim 1, McCabe teaches a system comprising:
a database system including a processor and a memory, the database system implemented using a server system, the database system configurable to cause:
initiating execution of a set of computer-readable instructions configurable to generate a report (McCabe, pa 0015, The web signing server 104 is a web server on the Internet that preferably hosts the application logic to correlate data transmitted by the embedded control in the signable document 122 with signing template 120 rule sets. An electronic signature service 106, such as the existing DocuSign service, executes the signing template instructions through the web signing server.);
during execution of a first subset of the set of computer-readable instructions associated with a first stage of report generation, applying at least a first template, the first template being a survey template (McCabe, pa 0016, At block 202 a document originator creates a signing template file that contains information about how a signable document is to be signed.);
during the first stage of report generation, accessing a parent record to obtain an email address and generating at least a portion of a first report using at least a first template based, at least in part, on results of applying the first template by sending a signature request using the email address via a network (McCabe, pa 0024, a business creates a signable document for the company 401k signing sheet and emails it to multiple employees. Each employee opens the file and fills in the form, clicking a button that may say "Sign." The web signing server responds by presenting a web interface that authenticates and presents the document for signature for each employee and collects the signature and any data provided. Examiner note: one of ordinary skill in the art would have known that a business could have employee email addresses on file to provide “accessing a parent record”), the first template including a signature document template (McCabe, pa 0017, In one embodiment, at block 204, the document originator may create a signable document that is to be distributed to recipients for signing or viewing.);
ascertaining a result of the first stage of report generation (McCabe, pa 0034, monitor the progress of each electronic envelope/document as it passes through the workflow. For example, using techniques described elsewhere herein, elements of the system 100 are operable to determine when a tab or other activatable control within a document has been activated (e.g., a document has been electronically signed and/or initialed);
determining whether the first stage of report generation is successfully completed based, at least in part, on application of a first condition to the result of the first stage of report generation, the first condition determining whether the number of signatures exceeds a completion threshold (McCabe, pa 0031, As further illustrated in FIG. 3, the page 300 includes a field 320 allowing the user to select from among a number of workflow events (e.g., recipient delivered, recipient signed, etc.) pertaining to all, or a user-selectable set, of the recipients to whom envelopes/documents have been distributed in association with the account. As such, if, for example, the user selected only the "Recipient Sent" and "Recipient Signed" identifiers in field 320, the user would receive progress reports only upon the occasion of an envelope having been sent to a particular recipient or set of recipients and upon the occasion of the envelope having been digitally signed by a particular recipient or set of recipients);
instantiating a data structure associated with the set of computer readable instructions, the data structure including one or more records of a relational database (McCabe, Fig. 4 & pa 0034, envelope information such as status, name of signer, etc.);
updating a first indicator of a data structure associated with the set of computer-readable instructions such that the first indicator indicates whether the first stage of report generation is successfully completed according to application of the first condition (McCabe, pa 0034, the web signing server 104 functions to monitor the progress of each electronic envelope/document as it passes through the workflow. For example, using techniques described elsewhere herein, elements of the system 100 are operable to determine when a tab or other activatable control within a document has been activated (e.g., a document has been electronically signed and/or initialed).);
initiating execution of a second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions associated with a second stage of the report generation based, at least in part, on a value of the first indicator (McCabe, pa 0034, Upon determining that a selected event has occurred with respect to an electronic document, the web signing server 104 prepares and publishes a report of the event to the destination designated by the user in field 340 of page 300. FIG. 4 illustrates a webpage 400 associated with the designated report destination listing the envelopes for which selected events have occurred);
the first indicator including a stage identifier identifying a stage of the report generation (McCabe, Fig. 4 & pa 0034, envelope information such as status, name of signer, etc.).
McCabe doesn't expressly discuss the stage identifier identifying a parent flow that called a sub-flow, during the second stage of report generation, by the second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions, generating at least a second portion of the first report using at least a second template based, at least in part, on results of the first stage of report generation and the first indicator in the data structure, wherein the second template is selected based, at least in part, on application of a condition to a result of the first stage of report generation.
Parker teaches during execution of a first subset of the set of computer-readable instructions associated with a first stage of report generation, applying at least a first template, the first template being a survey template (Parker, pa 0022, In FIG. 2, process 18 generates (34) a survey and distributes (36) the survey to clients 14 and 16. Respondents at clients 14 and 16 complete the survey and provide their responses to server 12 over network 10. Server 12 receives (38) the responses and analyzes ( 40) the responses. When analyzing the responses, process 18 validates them by, e.g., determining if there are appropriate correlations between responses.);
updating a first indicator of a data structure associated with the set of computer-readable instructions such that the first indicator indicates whether the first stage of report generation is successfully completed according to application of the first condition (Parker, pa 0023, Process 18 displays ( 42) the results of the analysis to a proprietor of the survey and determines ( 44) if a follow-up survey is to be run. If a follow-up survey is run, process 18 is repeated for the follow-up survey.);
initiating execution of a second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions associated with a second stage of the report generation based, at least in part, on a value of the first indicator (Parker, pa 0024, process 18 may run a high-level survey initially and then follow-up with one or more specific surveys to obtain more specific information about problems or questions identified through the high-level survey & pa 0070, Clicking on "Recommend Next Survey" option 292 provides recommendation for a focus survey(s) to run based on the analysis of the general area survey responses. That is, engine 30 performs a statistical analysis of the responses to the general area survey and determines, based on that statistical analysis, which, if any, focus survey(s) should be run to further analyze any potential problems uncovered by the general area survey);
the first indicator including a stage identifier identifying a stage of the report generation (Parker, pa 0023, Process 18 displays ( 42) the results of the analysis to a proprietor of the survey and determines ( 44) if a follow-up survey is to be run. If a follow-up survey is run, process 18 is repeated for the follow-up survey.), the stage identifier identifying a parent flow that called a sub-flow (Parker, pa 0031, Referring now to FIG. 4, engine 30 generates and displays GUI 72 to a survey proprietor. GUI 72 is the initial screen that is generated by engine 30 when running a survey in accordance with process 18.)
during the second stage of report generation, by the second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions, generating at least a second portion of the first report using at least a second template based, at least in part, on results of the first stage of report generation and the first indicator in the data structure, wherein the second template is selected based, at least in part, on application of a condition to a result of the first stage of report generation (Parker, pa 0070, Clicking on "Recommend Next Survey" option 292 provides recommendation for a focus survey(s) to run based on the analysis of the general area survey responses. That is, engine 30 performs a statistical analysis of the responses to the general area survey and determines, based on that statistical analysis, which, if any, focus survey(s) should be run to further analyze any potential problems uncovered by the general area survey & pa 0071, By providing different levels of surveys, engine 30 is able to identify and focus-in on potential problems relating to a proprietor's business or any other subject matter that is appropriate for a survey. By running the surveys and performing the data collection and analysis automatically (i.e., without human intervention), surveys can be run in real-time, allowing a business to focus-in on problems quickly and efficiently. An added benefit of automatic data collection and analysis is that displays of the data can be updated continuously, or at predetermined intervals, to reflect receipt of new survey responses.).
Parker doesn't expressly discuss providing the data structure by the first subset of the set of computer-readable instructions via an application programming interface (API) corresponding to the second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions.
Jarville teaches providing the data structure by the first subset of the set of computer-readable instructions via an application programming interface (API) corresponding to the second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions (Jarville, pa 0091, Upon completion of the questionnaire/survey, the user's response data is typically desired to be sent to a surveyor's server 113. In one embodiment, when the respondent clicks the next button at the end of the survey, the mobile survey application 101B opens a connection via network 102 to a web service and transfers the response data 105A as an XML record to the intermediary web service. This batches responses and processes the data combines it with any required panel and profiling variable responses and passes this to the Confirmit data transfer web API, which pipes the data into the Confirmit installation of the surveyor's choice.).
It 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 to have modified Parker with the teachings of Jarville because allows the use of survey authoring environments that are known (Jarville, pa 0081).
With respect to claim 2, McCabe in view of Parker and Jarville teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: during execution of a third subset of the set of computer-readable instructions associated with a third stage of report generation, applying at least a third template such that one or more additional portions of the first report are generated (Parker, pa 0071, By providing different levels of surveys, engine 30 is able to identify and focus-in on potential problems relating to a proprietor's business or any other subject matter that is appropriate for a survey. By running the surveys and performing the data collection and analysis automatically (i.e., without human intervention), surveys can be run in real-time, allowing a business to focus-in on problems quickly and efficiently. An added benefit of automatic data collection and analysis is that displays of the data can be updated continuously, or at predetermined intervals, to reflect receipt of new survey responses.).
With respect to claim 3, McCabe in view of Parker and Jarville teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: during execution of a third subset of the set of computer-readable instructions associated with a third stage of report generation, applying at least a third template such that a second report is generated (Parker, pa 0071, By providing different levels of surveys, engine 30 is able to identify and focus-in on potential problems relating to a proprietor's business or any other subject matter that is appropriate for a survey. By running the surveys and performing the data collection and analysis automatically (i.e., without human intervention), surveys can be run in real-time, allowing a business to focus-in on problems quickly and efficiently. An added benefit of automatic data collection and analysis is that displays of the data can be updated continuously, or at predetermined intervals, to reflect receipt of new survey responses.).
With respect to claim 4, McCabe in view of Parker and Jarville teaches the method of claim 1, a configuration including one or more operations of the first stage and one or more operations of the second stage (Parker, pa 0023, Process 18 displays ( 42) the results of the analysis to a proprietor of the survey and determines ( 44) if a follow-up survey is to be run. If a follow-up survey is run, process 18 is repeated for the follow-up survey).
With respect to claim 5, McCabe in view of Parker and Jarville teaches the method of claim 1, the method further comprising: selecting at least a portion of the second template based, at least in part, on the result of the first stage of report generation; wherein generating the second portion of the first report is performed using the selected portion of the second template (Parker, pa 0070, Clicking on "Recommend Next Survey" option 292 provides recommendation for a focus survey(s) to run based on the analysis of the general area survey responses. That is, engine 30 performs a statistical analysis of the responses to the general area survey and determines, based on that statistical analysis, which, if any, focus survey(s) should be run to further analyze any potential problems uncovered by the general area survey).
With respect to claim 6, McCabe in view of Parker and Jarville teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining whether the first stage of report generation is successfully completed comprises: determining whether at least a first signature has successfully been obtained via the first template; and updating the data structure such that the data structure indicates whether the first signature has been successfully obtained (Parker, pa 0046, The Report Card is a non-survey-specific display that brings important indicator trends, movement, and values to the user's attention. Any data from any survey that has run may appear on the report card. Engine 30 can automatically derive this data from user responses).
With respect to claims 8-13, the limitations are essentially the same as claims 1-6, and are thus rejected for the same reasons.
With respect to claims 15-20, the limitations are essentially the same as claims 1-6, and are thus rejected for the same reasons.
With respect to claim 21, McCabe in view of Parker and Jarville teaches the system of claim 1, the data structure pertaining to a work order in a field service context (McCabe, Fig. 4 & pa 0034, envelope information such as status, name of signer, etc. Examiner note: This data could relate to a work order in a field service context. The type of data does not change the functionality of the claims and therefore provides non-functional descriptive material).
With respect to claim 22, McCabe in view of Parker and Jarville teaches the system of claim 1, the database system further configurable to cause: configuring the first condition (McCabe, pa 0031, As further illustrated in FIG. 3, the page 300 includes a field 320 allowing the user to select from among a number of workflow events (e.g., recipient delivered, recipient signed, etc.) pertaining to all, or a user-selectable set, of the recipients to whom envelopes/documents have been distributed in association with the account. As such, if, for example, the user selected only the "Recipient Sent" and "Recipient Signed" identifiers in field 320, the user would receive progress reports only upon the occasion of an envelope having been sent to a particular recipient or set of recipients and upon the occasion of the envelope having been digitally signed by a particular recipient or set of recipients).
Response to Amendment
35 U.S.C. 112
With regard to claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15-20, the amendments to the claims have overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection. The 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection to claims 2, 5, 9, 12,16, and 19 are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 101
With regard to claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15-20, the arguments have overcome the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection. The 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection to claims 2, 5, 9, 12,16, and 19 are withdrawn.
35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant argues that the cited art does not disclose providing a data structure via API by the first subset of the set of computer-readable instructions to the second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions so that the second subset of the computer-readable instructions can use the indicator to determine which stage of the report generation is being executed and operate accordingly. As such, the cited art does not teach interaction between two different subsets of a set of computer-readable instructions configurable to generate a report. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The API described in Jarville enables interaction between systems that process survey data (pa 0091). Jarville states, “The survey responses stored in Confirmit can be easily exported into standard data deliverable formats enabling data processing to work with the data seamlessly using existing systems and processes.” See pa 0093. Together with McCabe in view of Parker, interaction between instructions via API provides use of known survey authoring environments (Jarville, pa 0081).
Applicant argues that Parker does not teach execution of two different subsets of a set of computer-readable instructions, where a second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions is associated with a second stage of the report generation, where execution of the second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions has been initiated. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Parker discusses that process 18 may run a high-level survey initially and then follow-up with one or more specific surveys to obtain more specific information about problems or questions identified through the high-level survey (pa 0023). This indicates two or more stages of report generation, where the first high-level survey determines information to obtain through a second follow-up survey. This provides two different subsets of a set of computer-readable instructions where a second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions is associated with a second stage of the report generation, where execution of the second subset of the set of computer-readable instructions has been initiated.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BRITTANY N ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3566. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 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, Sherief Badawi can be reached on 571-272-9782. 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.
/BRITTANY N ALLEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2169