DETAILED ACTION
This rejection is in response to Amendments filed on 01/07/2026.
Claims 1-3, 9-11, 17-18 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claims 4-8, 12-16, and 19-33 are cancelled.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 12, filed 01/07/2026, with respect to 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections to claims 1-3, 9-11, and 17-18 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections to claims 1-3, 9-11, and 17-18 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 01/07/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to applicant’s arguments filed 01/07/2026 on pages 12-14 that the claims are patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claims have been amended to recite technical solutions to a technical problem by providing a specific data structure to store the electronic record before enabling specific verification and restriction workflow that alters computer operations and avoids redundant back and forth communication similar to Examples 42 and 37, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Another consideration when determining whether a claim integrates a judicial exception into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or recites significantly more than a judicial exception in Step 2B is whether the additional elements amount to more than a recitation of the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) or are more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
It is unclear to one of ordinary skill in the art how storing data in an electronic record that is used to verify and restrict permissions makes the claims patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 or provides a technical improvement to the computer. Merely using a computing device to store data and use the stored data for verification and restrictions for retail operations for a shopping group does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or recite significantly more than a judicial exception in Step 2B.
Example 37 is considered patent eligible because the combination of the features provided a robust face detection model that can detect faces in distorted images while limiting false positives. The claims in Example 37 which involve training neural networks for facial detection are not analogous to the instant claims that include storing data, verifying data, and restricting permissions for retail transactions.
Example 42 is considered patent eligible because although the claims recite an abstract idea, the combination of the additional elements allow remote users to share information in real time in a standardized format regardless of the format that was input by the user. The steps of storing data and providing access to users alone did not make this Example 42 patent eligible. The claims in example 42 includes additional steps regarding storing information, providing remote access over a network, converting updated information that was input by a user in a non-standardized form to a standardized format, automatically generating a message whenever updated information is stored, and transmitting the message to all of the users that integrated the judicial exception into a practical application.
With respect to applicant’s arguments filed 01/07/2026 on pages 15-16 that Dogin does not teach storing, …, a mapping of the unique identifier of each invited member to the different specific permissions assigned to that invited member, the mapping configured for reuse across multiple transactions associated with the virtual shopping group, verifying, …, the different specific permissions by evaluating the mapping using the retrieved unique identifiers prior to enabling execution of a corresponding retail operation by an invited member, and automatically restricting, …, access to retail operations based on the verified permissions such that only invited members possessing an associated permission are permitted to perform the corresponding retail operation, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive because applicant attacks the Dogin reference individually when the rejection is based on a combination of references of Dogin, Nissan, and Embree. Dogin is not relied upon to teach the entire limitation.
With respect to applicant’s arguments filed 01/07/2026 on pages 16-17 that Nissan does not teach storing, …, a mapping of the unique identifier of each invited member to the different specific permissions assigned to that invited member, the mapping configured for reuse across multiple transactions associated with the virtual shopping group, verifying, …, the different specific permissions by evaluating the mapping using the retrieved unique identifiers prior to enabling execution of a corresponding retail operation by an invited member, and automatically restricting, …, access to retail operations based on the verified permissions such that only invited members possessing an associated permission are permitted to perform the corresponding retail operation, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive because applicant attacks the Nissan reference individually when the rejection is based on a combination of references of Dogin, Nissan, and Embree. Nissan is not relied upon to teach the entire limitation.
With respect to applicant’s arguments filed 01/07/2026 on pages 17-19 that Embree does not teach storing, …, a mapping of the unique identifier of each invited member to the different specific permissions assigned to that invited member, the mapping configured for reuse across multiple transactions associated with the virtual shopping group, verifying, …, the different specific permissions by evaluating the mapping using the retrieved unique identifiers prior to enabling execution of a corresponding retail operation by an invited member, and automatically restricting, …, access to retail operations based on the verified permissions such that only invited members possessing an associated permission are permitted to perform the corresponding retail operation, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive because applicant attacks the Embree reference individually when the rejection is based on a combination of references. Embree is not relied upon to teach the entire limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
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 1-3, 9-11, 17-18 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.
Independent claims 1, 9, and 17 recite: “wherein the verifying and automatically restricting reduce redundant communications between the first computing device, the invited-member computing devices, and merchant fulfillment systems during order processing,” which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. The specification does not describe “redundant communications” or that the specific steps of “verifying” and “restricting” reduce the redundant communications. Applicant’s specification in paragraph [0020] describes a general outcome or benefit that streamlined communications can reduce the amount of communications to and from mobile computing devices. However, the specification does not specifically state that verifying and restricting reduce redundant communications. Applicant’s specification in paragraph [0011] describes verifying that the person picking up the order is authorized to pick up the order but does not state that verification reduces redundant communications. Applicant’s specification in paragraph [0064] describes that the system can restrict a user to only permitting a set number of
other users to utilize a discount status but does not state that this restriction reduces redundant communications. Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 9-11, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 9 and 17 recite: wherein the unique identifier indicates that the invited member is associated with the virtual shopping group; storing, within the electronic record, a mapping of the unique identifier of each invited member to the different specific permissions assigned to that invited member, the mapping configured for reuse across multiple transactions associated with the virtual shopping group; verifying, by the one or more computing devices, the different specific permissions by evaluating the mapping using the retrieved unique identifiers prior to enabling execution of a corresponding retail operation by an invited member, rendering said claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the invited member, each invited member, that invited member is the same or different from an invited member. Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
There is insufficient antecedent basis for the following limitations in
Claims 1, 9, and 17 recite:
that invited member;
the retrieved unique identifiers;
the verified permissions.
Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
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 1-3, 9-11, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Under Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test, it must be considered whether the claims are directed to one of the four statutory classes of invention. See MPEP § 2106. In the instant case, claims 1-3 are directed to a method, claims 9-11 and are directed to a system, and claims 17-18 are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium each of which falls within one of the four statutory categories of inventions (process/apparatus). Accordingly, the claims will be further analyzed under revised step 2:
Under step 2A (prong 1) of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test, it must be considered whether the claims are “directed to” an abstract idea by referring to the groupings of subject matter. One of the enumerated groupings is defined as certain methods of organizing human activity that includes fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2).
Regarding representative independent claim 1, the abstract idea includes:
receiving, …, identifying information for an account associated with a first user and identifying information for a plurality of invited members including at least a second user and a third user, wherein the identifying information for the account associated with each invited member is provided by the first user…;
transmitting, …and in response to receiving the identifying information for the invited members, a notification to each of the invited members indicating that the invited members have been invited to join a shopping group initiated by the first user;
receiving, …, a communication indicating acceptance, by the second user, of the invitation to join a virtual shopping group initiated by the first user;
receiving, …, information indicating different specific permissions assigned by the first user to different invited members with respect to the shopping group, the different specific permissions selected from a set of permissions that includes: (i) application of a discount associated with a status of the first user, (ii) return of one or more items of an order, (iii) pickup of the order,(iv) modification of the order, (v) contribution of payment, and (vi) tracking of fulfillment status, wherein the second user has one or more different specific permissions than the third user;
associating respective identifiers for each of the invited members with an electronic record for the shopping group;
associating the different specific permissions of the invited members with corresponding identifiers within the electronic record for the shopping group, comprising: using the identifying information for each invited member provided by the first user to identify a profile for the invited member, the profile being a profile associated with the merchant; and retrieving a unique identifier for each invited member from the profile for the invited member, wherein the unique identifier is based on information from the profile, wherein the unique identifier indicates that the invited member is associated with the virtual shopping group;
verifying, …, the different specific permissions by evaluating the mapping using the retrieved unique identifiers prior to enabling execution of a corresponding retail operation by an invited member;
automatically restricting, …, access to retail operations based on the verified permissions such that only invited members possessing an associated permission are permitted to perform the corresponding retail operation, wherein the verifying and automatically restricting reduce redundant communications between the first …, the invited-member …, and merchant fulfillment systems during order processing;
receiving, …, an indication of a first item to add to a virtual shopping cart associated with the shopping group;
receiving, …, an indication of a second item to add to the virtual shopping cart;
applying, …and based on the status associated with the first user, the discount to at least one of the items in the virtual shopping cart in accordance with the assigned permissions;
transmitting information on an order placed in association with the virtual shopping cart for the shopping group to …a fulfillment location associated with a merchant, wherein the information on the order comprises the indication of the first item and the indication of the second item based on the virtual shopping cart associated with the shopping group.
The above-recited limitations set forth an arrangement for a transaction involving multiple parties. This arrangement amounts to certain methods of organizing human activity associated with sales activities and commercial interactions involving a first user inviting invitees to join a shopping group, the first user granting different permission for invitees, associating and retrieving identifiers with shopping group of invitees, multiple invitees adding items to shopping cart, and transmitting the order made by the multiple invitees to a merchant, and transmitting a notification indicating one or more items of the order being returned. Such concepts have been considered ineligible certain methods of organizing human activity by the Courts. See MPEP § 2106.04.
The Step 2A (prong 2) of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test, is the next step in the eligibility analyses and looks at whether the abstract idea is integrated into a practical application. This requires an additional element or combination of additional elements in the claims to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. See MPEP § 2106.
In this instance, the claims recite the additional elements such as:
A computer implemented method comprising: (Claim 1);
…by at one or more computing devices and from a first computing device…is provided …via a user interface of the first computing device…;… by the one or more computing devices…: …by the one or more computing devices associated with the invited members…; … by the one or more computing devices; storing, within the electronic record, a mapping of the unique identifier of each invited member to the different specific permissions assigned to that invited member, the mapping configured for reuse across multiple transactions associated with the virtual shopping group;… by the one or more computing devices…; …, by the one or more computing devices…between the first computing device, the invited-member computing devices…;… by the one or more computing devices and from the first computing device…; … by the one or more computing devices associated with one of the invited members…; …by the one or more computing devices…,;… to a computing device at …; and displaying, by the computing device at the fulfillment location, information associated with the order based on receiving the information on the order (Claim 1, 9, and 17);
from the first computing device (Claims 3 and 11);
A system comprising: one or more processors; and computer memory containing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the system to perform operations comprising: (Claim 9);
A non-transitory computer-readable medium containing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the performance of operations comprising (Claim 17).
However, these elements do not amount to an improvement in the functioning of a computer or any other technology or technical field, apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine, or apply or use 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 claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
Independent claims and dependent claims also fail to recite elements which amount to an improvement in the functioning of a computer or any other technology or technical field, apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine, or apply or use 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 claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. For example, independent claims and dependent claims are directed to the abstract idea itself and do not amount to an integration according to any one of the considerations above.
Step 2B is the next step in the eligibility analyses and evaluates whether the claims recite additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (i.e., “significantly more”) than the recited judicial exception. According to Office procedure, revised Step 2A overlaps with Step 2B, and thus, many of the considerations need not be re-evaluated in Step 2B because the answer will be the same. See MPEP § 2106.
In Step 2A, several additional elements were identified as additional limitations:
A computer implemented method comprising: (Claim 1);
…by at one or more computing devices and from a first computing device…is provided …via a user interface of the first computing device…;… by the one or more computing devices…: …by the one or more computing devices associated with the invited members…; … by the one or more computing devices; storing, within the electronic record, a mapping of the unique identifier of each invited member to the different specific permissions assigned to that invited member, the mapping configured for reuse across multiple transactions associated with the virtual shopping group;… by the one or more computing devices…; …, by the one or more computing devices…between the first computing device, the invited-member computing devices…;… by the one or more computing devices and from the first computing device…; … by the one or more computing devices associated with one of the invited members…; …by the one or more computing devices…,;… to a computing device at …; and displaying, by the computing device at the fulfillment location, information associated with the order based on receiving the information on the order (Claim 1, 9, and 17);
from the first computing device (Claims 3 and 11);
A system comprising: one or more processors; and computer memory containing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the system to perform operations comprising: (Claim 9);
A non-transitory computer-readable medium containing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the performance of operations comprising (Claim 17).
These additional limitations, including the limitations in the independent claims and dependent claims, do not amount to an inventive concept because the recitations above do not amount to an improvement in the functioning of a computer or any other technology or technical field, apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine, or apply or use 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 claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. In addition, they were already analyzed under Step 2A and did not amount to a practical application of the abstract idea.
For these reasons, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-3, 9-11, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dogin et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0111139 A1, hereinafter “Dogin”) in view of Nissan et al. (US Pub. No. 20120084135 A1, hereinafter “Nissan”) in further view of Embree (US Pub. No. 2019/0164167 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 17
Dogin discloses a computer implemented method comprising:
receiving, by at one or more computing devices and from a first computing device, identifying information for an account associated with a first user and identifying information for a plurality of invited members including at least a second user and a third user, wherein the identifying information for the account associated with each invited member is provided by the first user via a user interface of the first computing device (Dogin, [0059]: a log-on screen is displayed on the user's computer 125A. The user can be required to log on by using a user name and password; [0079]: the cart owner could send a notification or invite out to a known person or group of people to invite them to look at the item(s) and offer up an item(s) to swap with; [0067]: the number of people who have wide access to one or more sections of an individual person's cart (e.g. twenty to thirty people));
transmitting, by the one or more computing devices and in response to receiving the identifying information for the invited members, a notification to each of the invited members indicating that the invited members have been invited to join a shopping group initiated by the first user (Dogin, [0069]: The registration process for the global shopping carts 300 will include a name and address validation check, authentication of an e-mail address or cell phone number, credit card or bank account validation and a response to a visual access challenge such as that provided by Captcha or similar services. Multiple layers of validation checks are necessary to ensure authentication of the person to be granted access; [0073]: access to that portion of the cart can be granted to the owner of another cart to use as a template. One advantage to the recipient carts is that access could be granted to the invitee list for that portion of the cart; [0124]: A message is sent to others inviting them to participate in each category or theme via e-mail, or via social media interface 208 of FIG. 2; [0079]: invite a group of people);
receiving, by the one or more computing devices associated with the invited members, a communication indicating acceptance, by the second user, of the invitation to join a virtual shopping group initiated by the first user (Dogin,[0070]: invitee registers to gain access and permission to global shopping cart; [0128]: invitee creates profile and logs in and adds comments and agrees to share payment for items and user is notified of invitee’s activity);
receiving, by the one or more computing devices, information indicating different specific permissions assigned by the first user to different invited members with respect to the shopping group, the different specific permissions selected from a set of permissions that includes: (iv) modification of the order, (v) contribution of payment, and (vi) tracking of fulfillment status, …(Dogin, [0070]: The access of an invitee may be terminated or limited by the owner of global shopping cart 300 at any time; [0091]: spending limit; [0065]: Limited access is granted as partial or full rights and provide different rights to the user of global shopping cart including the right to make purchases; [0066]: invitees can be granted different levels of access based on security levels; [0124]: user defines security and access levels for each shopping category or theme and defines access rights for others and a message is sent to others inviting them to participate in each category or theme; [0057]: an invitee has the possibility of access to and serving, not only the creator of the global shopping cart 300, but also family, friends, invitees and anyone else, including other invitees, who is given access to the global shopping cart 300; [0070]: in accordance with the privileges granted, the invitee may be able to view one or more items, add items, change items, remove items; [0075]: person who has been granted access to the cart can check shipping status),
associating respective identifiers for each of the invited members with an electronic record for the shopping group (Dogin, [0086]: The global shopping cart of this disclosure utilizes state of the art security in storing the log-in credentials and provide for ‘remember me’ capability; [0059]: After opening a browser, a log-on screen is displayed on the user's computer 125A. The user can be required to log on by using a user name and password; [0058]: The invitee can log on with, for example, a user name, password to access global shopping cart; [0091]: If global shopping cart 300 is shared, the profiles of more than one person can be stored, such as that of family members authorized to use global shopping cart);
using the identifying information for each invited member provided by the first user to identify a profile for the invited member, the profile being a profile associated with the merchant (Dogin, [0060]: user profiles that merchant can access; [0091]: Referring back to FIG. 2, profile data 222 stores the data for the profile or profiles created at 204. As noted above, a user profile with the characteristics of the user. If global shopping cart 300 is shared, the profiles of more than one person can be stored, such as that of family members authorized to use global shopping cart 300; [0100]: store data related to merchant which is a partner; [0101]: store partner data and profile data; [0117]: At 405, the merchant registers in the same manner as any invitee registers in global shopping cart; [0119]: providing a merchant with access to the task, category or theme established in global shopping cart 300; [0120]: a merchant can be asked to provide a tax identification number that can be validated by, for example, the acquiring bank with which the merchant conducts business. Policies can be provided when a merchant logs on to the global shopping cart); and
receiving, by the one or more computing devices and from the first computing device, an indication of a first item to add to a virtual shopping cart associated with the shopping group; receiving, by the one or more computing devices associated with one of the invited members, an indication of a second item to add to the virtual shopping cart (Dogin, [0070]: accordance with the privileges granted, the invitee may be able to view one or more items, add items, change items, remove items; [0125]: At 1020, the user of global shopping cart 300 can add items to be purchased. At 1025, the user can receive feedback from the invitees. The invitees can conveniently add an item to global shopping cart 300; [0079]: the cart owner could send a notification or invite out to a known person or group of people to invite them to look at the item(s); [0058]: invitee device; [0048]: mobile shopping cart is designed to operate with the resources available on a device);
applying, by the one or more computing devices…, the discount to at least one of the items in the virtual shopping cart…(Dogin, [0111]: Coupon and promotional codes can be authenticated and processed and a particular promotion can automatically be uploaded to global shopping cart; [0098]: the owner of global shopping cart has the opportunity to decide whether to make the purchase at a time that takes advantage of the promotion or discount or wait; [0114]: The value of rewards or promotions is subtracted from the sum to compute the final price owed);
transmitting information on an order placed in association with the virtual shopping cart for the shopping group to a computing device at a fulfillment location associated with a merchant, wherein the information on the order comprises the indication of the first item and the indication of the second item based on the virtual shopping cart associated with the shopping group (Dogin, [0126]: At 1035, the user selects the final set of items to be purchased for a particular theme. At 1040, a confirmation of the items to be purchased is made by the user. At 1050, the user selects a payment method. At 1055, authorization requests are submitted for the various sources. At 1060, the transaction or transactions are complete; [0085]: the cart owner can purchase an in-store item and check out; [0057]: invitees given access to global shopping cart to allow purchases by the group; [0087]: payment at point of sale); and
displaying, by the computing device at the fulfillment location, information associated with the order based on receiving the information on the order (Dogin, [0141]: data accessed to be displayed (e.g. transaction data and history); [0092]: shopping history includes data on items that have been purchased; [0085]: the cart owner can purchase an in-store item and check out in the aisle; [0056]: mobile device to make purchase).
Dogin does not explicitly teach:
(i) application of a discount associated with a status of the first user, (ii) return of one or more items of an order, (iii) pickup of the order,… wherein the second user has one or more different specific permissions than the third user; associating the different specific permissions of the invited members with corresponding identifiers within the electronic record for the shopping group, comprising:
retrieving a unique identifier for each invited member from the profile for the invited member, wherein the unique identifier is based on information from the profile, wherein the unique identifier indicates that the invited member is associated with the virtual shopping group;
storing, within the electronic record, a mapping of the unique identifier of each invited member to the different specific permissions assigned to that invited member, the mapping configured for reuse across multiple transactions associated with the virtual shopping group;
verifying, by the one or more computing devices, the different specific permissions by evaluating the mapping using the retrieved unique identifiers prior to enabling execution of a corresponding retail operation by an invited member;
automatically restricting, by the one or more computing devices, access to retail operations based on the verified permissions such that only invited members possessing an associated permission are permitted to perform the corresponding retail operation, wherein the verifying and automatically restricting reduce redundant communications between the first computing device, the invited-member computing devices, and merchant fulfillment systems during order processing;
applying, … and based on the status associated with the first user, the discount…in accordance with the assigned permissions;
However, Nissan teaches that it is known to include:
(i) application of a discount associated with a status of the first user, (ii) return of one or more items of an order,… wherein the second user has one or more different specific permissions than the third user; associating the different specific permissions of the invited members with corresponding identifiers within the electronic record for the shopping group, comprising (Nissan [0148]: assign permissions to other users for permission; [0149]: permission assigned to one or more users include adding coupon or rebate; [0126]: coupons and rebates; [0164]: coupons associated with an account and a user; [0063]: both users (e.g. purchaser and gift recipient) are authorized to returns for gifts with receipt; [0130]: group gift; [0131]: user specifies recipient of gift which allows recipient to return gift using their account ID; [0132]:When tagged as a gift, the transaction record may be updated to receive details about the recipient of the gift, including any account identifier for the recipient; [0153]: examine relationship and permission level between user and related account to allow third party to process a return; [0073]: Server 110 allows for different access and read/write privileges to a requesting party (e.g. the merchant, the purchaser or a third party) depending on authorizations provided to that party; [0144]: different levels of authorization; [0152]: Specific users may be provided with different permissions);
retrieving a unique identifier for each invited member from the profile for the invited member, wherein the unique identifier is based on information from the profile, wherein the unique identifier indicates that the invited member is associated with the virtual shopping group (Nissan, [0132]: receive account identifier for the gift recipient; [0042]: account associated with account identifier; [0130]: a group gift from several users to another user; [0147] As an account tracks transactions of a user, a set of accounts of related users may be grouped together with a primary account for the bundle; [0162]: bundle of items holds an account identifier);
….the different specific permissions assigned to that invited member…;…the different specific permissions…(Nissan [0148]: assign permissions to other users for permission; [0149]: permission assigned to one or more users include adding coupon or rebate; [0073]: different access and privileges);
applying, … and based on the status associated with the first user, the discount…in accordance with the assigned permissions (Nissan [0148]: assign permissions to other users for permission; [0149]: permission assigned to one or more users include adding coupon or rebate; [0126]: coupons and rebates; [0164]: coupons associated with an account and a user);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the second user’s profile and permissions of Dogin with a unique identifier of the second user, permission of the second user to apply discounts and return items as taught by Nissan because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Dogin would continue to teach the second user’s profile and specific permissions except that a unique identifier of each invited member, permission of the invited member to apply a discount and return items is taught according to the teachings of Nissan in order to process receipts, discounts, and returns of items. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Nissan, [0001 -0004]).
However, Embree teaches:
(iii) pickup of the order (Embree, [0040]: creates are linked record for a second user's information, if a second user will be retrieving the product on behalf of the user; [0019]: the user 234 can present information related to a second user who can pick up the order; [0020]: If the first user designates a second user, the relevant identification information for the second user can be input to the user service terminal);
storing, within the electronic record, a mapping of the unique identifier of each invited member to the … permissions assigned to that invited member, the mapping configured for reuse across multiple transactions associated with the virtual shopping group (Embree, [0016] The one or more databases 112A, 112B can be in communication with the server and can contain information for identifying, verifying, and/or authenticating the first user and the second user. As described herein, the identifying information can be stored in the database after being input via the user service terminal 106. The databases 112A, 112B can store generated QR codes associated with the first user as well as the associated GUID; [0023] At step 210, the server 102 generates a Global Unique Identifier (GUID). The GUID is generated to identify the restriction record in the system 238. The GUID can be linked to the restriction record or alternatively, the GUID can be added to the restriction record; [0024] At step 212, the server stores the restriction record in the databases 112A, 112B. The age restriction record can include the GUID as well as the PIN or password; [0025] At step 214 the GUID and universal resource locator (URL) is encoded into a QR code at the server 102. The GUID and the URL identify the specific restriction record and as well as its location in memory; [0013]: first user allowed to generate QR code that is then used by second user; [0021]: PIN or password valid indefinitely);
verifying, by the one or more computing devices, the … permissions by evaluating the mapping using the retrieved unique identifiers prior to enabling execution of a corresponding retail operation by an invited member (Embree, [0030] At step 224, the server 102 of the system 100 retrieves a record based on URL and GUID. The server 102 accesses the databases 112A, 112B and accesses the restriction record corresponding to the URL and GUID. The server 102 returns user information for the associate 236 to verify; [0031]: At step 226, the customer information is verified. The system receives input from the associate 236 and compares it against the customer information previously provided; [0032]: At step 228, the user 234 enters PIN or password. The PIN or password provides a two factor authentication in conjunction with the scanned QR code, that the user 234 has been properly verified; [0043]: looks up the identified user record in the persistent storage 334. The validation process controller 332 validates that the expiration date for the user information is still valid, and then passes a positive or negative response to the GUI 324 of the point of sale system 306. In the event of a positive response, allowing the transaction to complete, the validation process controller 332 can additionally provide the user or the second user acting on behalf of the user);
automatically restricting, by the one or more computing devices, access to retail operations based on the verified permissions such that only invited members possessing an associated permission are permitted to perform the corresponding retail operation, wherein the verifying and automatically restricting reduce redundant communications between the first computing device, the invited-member computing devices, and merchant fulfillment systems during order processing (Embree, [0013]: The user service terminal 106 can allow the first user to designate a conditions that when met, allow or disallow the second user from completing the transaction; [0033] At step 230, the system 238 approves the transaction including the restricted item. The system 238 validates that the PIN or password is correct in conjunction with the associated QR code; [0034]: At step 232, the transaction including the restricted item is completed. For example, upon receipt of approval from the system 238, the transaction is complete by releasing any restricted items included in the transaction to the user 234 or the second user acting on behalf of the user 234; [0011]: The server 102 can be programmed to perform actions central to supporting identity verification and can be communicatively connected to external (third party) systems and subsystems 116 via a network 114; [0012] A user mobile device 104 can be in communication with the server via the network to receive, transport, and display QR codes; [0014] A point-of-sale terminals 108 can perform and control a transaction on the system 100);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the different permissions of Dogin and Nissan, with permissions that are stored, verified, and restricted to pick up an order as taught by Embree because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Dogin and Nissan would continue to teach specific permissions except that now permissions that are stored, verified, and restricted is taught according to the teachings of Embree in order to authorize a second user to pick up an order on behalf of another user. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Embree, [0019] and [0048]).
Regarding claims 2, 10, and 18
The combination of Dogin, Nissan, and Embree teaches the method of claim 1, wherein associating the identifier for the second user with the electronic record for the shopping group comprises: entering the unique identifier for the second user into a group member field within the electronic record for the shopping group (Nissan, [0110]: enter the user’s account identification; [0111]: user’s ID is entered to identify record for item to be returned).
The motivation to combine Dogin, Nissan, and Embree is the same as set forth above in claim 1.
Regarding claims 3 and 11
The combination of Dogin, Nissan, and Embree teaches method of claim 2, further comprising: receiving, from the first computing device, information indicating that the second user is permitted to pick up orders associated with the shopping group; and in response to receiving the information indicating that the second user is permitted to pick up orders associated with the shopping group, associating a permission to pick up orders with the unique identifier for the second user within the electronic record for the shopping group (Embree, [0040]: creates are linked record for a second user's information, if a second user will be retrieving the product on behalf of the user; [0019]: the user 234 can present information related to a second user who can pick up the order. The registration information related to the second user can include government identification information from a government issued identification; [0020]: The user's picture can be stored with a record of the registration in the databases 112A or 112B (FIG. 1). If the first user designates a second user, the relevant identification information for the second user can be input to the user service terminal by the registration associate 236 and a picture of the second user can be captured by the camera associated with the system).
The motivation to combine Dogin, Nissan, and Embree is the same as set forth above in claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is cited as non-patent literature, "Designing an Expert System for Online Shopping Cart Management," related to online shopping cart management of budget as well as patent publication Kilroy (US Pub. No. 20120185355 A1) related to shared shopping experience between multiple users and Shestakov et al. (US Pub. No. 2007/0038566 A1) related to generating an automatic authorization of a shopping cart created during a procedure of electronic procurement of items depending on values stored in a database table.
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 LATASHA DEVI RAMPHAL whose telephone number is (571)272-2644. The examiner can normally be reached 11 AM - 7:30 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 A Smith can be reached on 5712726763. 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.
/LATASHA D RAMPHAL/Examiner, Art Unit 3688
/Jeffrey A. Smith/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3688
Prosecution Insights