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 .
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 an abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 1 recites “store: a plurality of user profiles, wherein each user profile comprises information associated with resources that are currently owned by a user; resource allocation information that identifies resources that are available; and resource allocation requirements comprising rules for determining whether a user qualifies for a resource” and “receive, by the processor a resource request, wherein the resource request identifies: a first user; a first resource that is currently assigned to the first user; and a second resource that the first user is requesting; obtain, by the processor, information for the first resource from a first user profile that is associated with the first user; determine, by the processor, that additional information not included in the first user profile is needed for the first resource; request, by the processor, the additional information from a third party; receive, by the processor, the additional information from the third party and add the additional information to the information associated with the first resource, determine, by the processor, the first user qualifies for the second resource based on the information associated with the first resource and the resource allocation requirements for the second resource; obtain, by the processor, the first resource from the first user, wherein obtaining the first resource temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource; associate, by the processor, the first resource with the resource management device in the resource allocation information, associate, by the processor, the second resource with the first user for a predetermined period of time; determine, by the processor, the first user has returned the second resource within the predetermined period of time; remove, by the processor, the association between the second resource and the first user in response to determining that the first user has returned the second resource; and release the first resource to the first user, wherein releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user from owning the first resource”.
The limitation of “store: a plurality of user profiles, wherein each user profile comprises information associated with resources that are currently owned by a user; resource allocation information that identifies resources that are available; and resource allocation requirements comprising rules for determining whether a user qualifies for a resource” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “store” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually keeping a record of a plurality of user profiles, wherein each user profile comprises information associated with resources that are currently owned by a user; resource allocation information that identifies resources that are available; and resource allocation requirements comprising rules for determining whether a user qualifies for a resource.
The limitation of “receive, by the processor, a resource request, wherein the resource request identifies: a first user; a first resource that is currently assigned to the first user; and a second resource that the first user is requesting” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “receive” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually receiving a resource request, wherein the resource request identifies: a first user; a first resource that is currently assigned to the first user; and a second resource that the first user is requesting.
The limitation of “obtain, by the processor, information for the first resource from a first user profile that is associated with the first user” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “obtaining” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually retrieving information for the first resource from a first user profile that is associated with the first user.
The limitation of “determine, by the processor, the first user qualifies for the second resource based on the information associated with the first resource and the resource allocation requirements for the second resource” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “determine” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually decides that the first user qualifies for the second resource based on the information associated with the first resource and the resource allocation requirements for the second resource.
The limitation of “obtain, by the processor, the first resource from the first user, wherein obtaining the first resource temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “obtain” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually taking back the resource from the first user to temporarily suspend the first user from checking out the first resource.
The limitation of “associate, by the processor, the second resource with the first user for a predetermined period of time” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “associate” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually noting that the second resource is checked out by the first user for a predetermined period of time.
The limitation of “determine, by the processor, the first user has returned the second resource within the predetermined period of time” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “determine” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually detecting that the first user has returned the second resource within the predetermined period of time.
The limitation of “remove, by the processor, the association between the second resource and the first user in response to determining that the first user has returned the second resource” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “remove” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually noting that the second resource has been returned by the first user.
The limitation of “release, by the processor, the first resource to the first user, wherein releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user from owning the first resource” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “release” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually giving back the first resource to the first user to allow the first user to check out the first resource again.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim does not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 1 recites the additional elements of (a) a memory to store data and (b) a processor configured to perform the steps. However, the memory and processor are recited at a high level of generality and are generic computer components such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Considering the claim as a whole, looking at the elements individually and in an ordered combination, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application using the considerations set forth above.
The claim does 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 elements of (a) and (b) are recited at a high level of generality and are generic computer components such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Thus, the claimed elements, either individually, or in the ordered combination do not add significantly more to the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 2-7 further clarify the concept recited in claim 1 however this clarification still falls under the concept recited in claim 1 and does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Dependent claims 2-7 are rejected for at least the reason stated above with respect to claim 1.
Claim 8 although not using the exact claim language, contains similar elements as recited in claim 1 and is also rejected for similar reasons. Dependent claims 9-14 further clarify the concept recited in claim 8 however this clarification still falls under the concept recited in claim 8 and does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Dependent claims 9-14 are rejected for at least the reason stated above with respect to claim 8.
Claim 15 although not using the exact claim language, contains similar elements as recited in claim 1 and is also rejected for similar reasons. Claim 15 additionally recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions to cause a processor to perform the steps. However, the medium is recited at a high level of generality and is a generic computer component such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Dependent claims 16-20 further clarify the concept recited in claim 15 however this clarification still falls under the concept recited in claim 15 and does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Dependent claims 16-20 are rejected for at least the reason stated above with respect to claim 15.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dehenre et al (2023/0126408) in view of Dintenfass et al (2017/0323384) in view of Eppstein et al (8179809) in view of Kemme et al (2021/0136077).
For claim 1, Dehenre teaches a resource management device (104 as shown in fig.1 and 3), comprising: a memory (114 as shown in fig.1 and 3) operable to store: a plurality of user profiles (136 as shown in fig.1), wherein each user profile comprises information associated with resources (such as device locations and token values) that are currently owned by a user (par.7, lines 2-10); resource allocation information (116 as shown in fig.1) that identifies resources that are available (par.21, lines 1-5); and resource allocation requirements (part of device 104 as shown in fig.1 and 3 includes the resources requirements) comprising rules for determining whether a user qualifies for a resource (par.28, lines 4-12) (the device 104 as shown in fig.4 requirements such as the location and token values that match predetermined locations and values); and a processor (302 as shown in fig.3) operably coupled to the memory (114 as shown in fig.3); wherein the resource management device is configured to: receive, by the processor, a resource request (par.7, lines 1-3, the device, which is the processor, is to receive a resource request), wherein the resource request identifies (par.7, lines 6-8, the device identification system that identify request based on the user and resource): a first user (par.7, lines 6-10)(abstract, lines 1-2); a first resource that is currently assigned to the first user (par.7, lines 7-10)(abstract, lines 1-2); and a second resource that the first user is requesting (par.8, lines 2-6); obtain, by the processor, information associated with the first resource from a first user profile that is associated with the first user (par.8, lines 2-6); determine, by the processor, the first user qualifies for the second resource based on the information associated (associating based on distance of the resources share) with the first resource (par.28, lines 5-12)(the user can qualify to access more than one resources based the resources that distance within threshold, and if the one of the resources is outside the threshold, then the request of access will be rejected and if the resource is within the distance of the threshold, then the request of access will be granted), and the resource allocation requirements (requirements of distances and time) for the second resource (par.8, lines 2-6) (associating the resources based on if the location is within the distance or the values); obtain, by the processor, the first resource from the first user (the system 104 obtain information from user device 102 such as information about the location)(par.7, lines 2-7 and par.27, lines 1-6), associate, by the processor, the first resource with the resource management device in the resource allocation information (Dehenre teaches that an association between the user, the location information for the first resource, a first resource identifier for the first resource, and the first token value. The device is further configured to associate the resource allocation with a first time interval indicating a deadline for using the resource allocation as Dehenre teaches in par.7), associate, by the processor, in the first user profile the second resource with the first user for a predetermined period of time (138 as shown in fig.1)(par.8, lines 5-9 and par.31, lines 8-12)(the device 104 allocates resources in time period).
Dehenre fails to teach determine, by the processor, that additional information not included in the first user profile is needed for the first resource; request, by the processor, the additional information from a third party; receive, by the processor, the additional information from the third party and add the additional information to the information associated with the first resource, wherein the determining, by the processor, that the first user qualifies for the second resource is based at least in part on the additional information for the first resource; wherein obtaining the first resource temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource; update, by the processor, the first user profile to indicate that the first user is temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource; determine, by the processor, the first user has returned the second resource within the predetermined period of time; remove, by the processor, in the first user profile the association between the second resource and the first user in response to determining that the first user has returned the second resource; and release, by the processor, in the first user profile the first resource to the first user, wherein releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user from owning the first resource, and removes the association of the first resource with the resource management device in the resource allocation information.
Dintenfass teaches, similar allocation system, determine, by the processor, that additional information not included in the first user profile is needed for the first resource (Dintenfass teaches that the other financial institution systems and/or third-party systems, in some embodiments, provide additional information about the users 9, user's resources and liabilities, or the like, which may be used by the retirement planning systems 10, or the like as Dintenfass teaches in par.49); request, by the processor, the additional information from a third party (the system includes one or more third party systems 192 (e.g., a partner, agent, or contractor associated with a financial institution), one or more other financial institution systems 194 (e.g., a credit bureau, third party banks, and so forth), and one or more external systems and requests that the financial institution evaluates the customer's retirement resources and liabilities as Dintenfass teaches in par.30 and 72); receive, by the processor, the additional information from the third party and add the additional information to the information associated with the first resource (the process 800 continues by comparing the requirements identified in block 804 to the user's resource availability, resource requirements for medical may comprise an estimate of future requirements for medical expenses or the like associated with an aging individual, and the model presents a potential outcome if the user decides to relocate to a different home, assisted living, or the like and the required expenses associated therewith as Dintenfass teaches in par.51-55) wherein the determining, by the processor, that the first user qualifies for the second resource is based at least in part on the additional information for the first resource (Dintenfass teaches after the financial institution determines the user's estimated available resource amount and estimated age parameter the financial institution (e.g., the retirement planning systems 10 and/or the retirement planning application 17), through the retirement planning interface 400, may display and indication whether or not the desired available resource amount and/or the desired age parameter meets the estimated available resource amount and/or the estimated age parameter in the plan status section 412. The plan resource summary section 414 may illustrate the user's current or estimated future resource inflows, resource outflows, and the available resource amount (e.g., safe to spend amount) that the use may spend on top of meeting the user's expenses. For example, the available resource amount in the plan resource summary section 414 may display what the user's current available resource amount is for the current time period (e.g., the current month) as Dintenfass teaches in par. 95 to 102). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date to modify the allocation system of Dehenre to include the additional information from the third party and add the additional information to the information associated with the first resource as taught and suggested by Dintenfass for the purpose of determining optimized efficient resource usage, a system can provide an optimization resource usage plan and having improve resource usage planning, such as retirement planning, for users (e.g., customers) and allows the users to factor in different variables (e.g., age, spending amounts over time, events that may affect retirement planning, or the like) (Dintenfass, par.3-4). Dehenre, as modified by Dintenfass, does not explicitly teaches wherein obtaining the first resource temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource; update, by the processor, the first user profile to indicate that the first user is temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource; determine, by the processor, the first user has returned the second resource within the predetermined period of time; remove, by the processor, in the first user profile the association between the second resource and the first user in response to determining that the first user has returned the second resource; and release, by the processor, in the first user profile the first resource to the first user, wherein releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user from owning the first resource, and removes the association of the first resource with the resource management device in the resource allocation information.
Eppstein teaches, similar allocation system, wherein obtaining the first resource temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource (col.76, lines 12-30 and col.77, lines 57-66); determine the first user has returned the second resource within the predetermined period of time (col.77, lines 58-68); remove in the first user profile the association (de-allocating between them) between the second resource (the second resources such as 3GHZ when de-allocating from apparatus which means that the device removed from the device) and the first user in response to determining that the first user has returned the second resource (col.86, lines 67-68 to col.87, lines 1-38); and release in the first user profile the first resource to the first user, wherein releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user from owning the first resource (col.86, lines 67-68 to col.87, lines 1-38) (the examiner notes that the allocation system allocate the first resource such as the CPU with 4 GHZ intel premium 4 to original after the removing the second resource 3 GHZ intel premium 4 from the CPU) and removes the association of the first resource with the resource management device in the resource allocation information (Eppstein teaches that the service provider can remove, such that the resources can be suspended for any of a number of reasons, including but not limited to: de-allocating the resources from one apparatus for subsequent allocation to another apparatus (as described more fully below in the "Preempting Resource Requirements" section); de-allocating the resources at the request of the service provider, such as to perform maintenance, install upgrades, or remove the resources from the computing grid; de-allocating the resources at the request of the user of the apparatus, such as to reduce the cost of the user's apparatus by returning the resources for use to the service provider; or de-allocating the resources at the request of another entity, such as an application a previously allocated firewall from another IDC, such that the firewall is returned to the idle pool and thereby made available for allocation to another IDC as Eppstein teaches in col.51, lines 25-40 and col.76,lines 30-45). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date to modify the allocation system of Dehenre and Dintenfass to include temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource and releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user from owning the first resource as taught and suggested by Eppstein so that another resource, which may or may not be the same as the resource that was de-allocated, can be allocated to the apparatus based on the stored state information with an acceptable loss of state (Eppstein, abstract). Dehenre, as modified by Dintenfass and Eppstein, does not explicitly teaches update, by the processor, the first user profile to indicate that the first user is temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource.
Kemme teaches, similar system, update the first user profile to indicate that the first user is temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource (Kemme teaches that modifying the user access to the corresponding resource may include one or more of granting the user access to the corresponding resource, suspending user access to the corresponding resource for a period of time in par.5). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date to modify the allocation system of Dehenre, as modified by Dintenfass and Eppstein to include temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource as taught and suggested by Kemme for the purpose of limiting the user's access to the corresponding resource to a certain duration of time, changing a level of user access to the corresponding resource, changing which portions of the corresponding resource that the user is authorized to access, or revoking the user's access to the corresponding resource (Kemme, par.10).
For claim 2, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches wherein: the resource request further identifies a resource type for the first resource (determining resource type information based on the physical locations and its associating with the resources withing the network device)(par.21, lines 5-12); and the request by the processor for additional information for the first resource is based on the resource type of the first resources (par.21, lines 5-12 additional information such as name or code or token values and any additional information such as time interval for using the resources to identify and determining if the user is qualifies to access the resources as Dehenre teaches in par.21, lines 3-14 and par.34, lines 5-10).
For claim 3, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches wherein the information for the first resource comprises a value (token values such as currency or credits) that is associated with the first resource (par.18, lines 1-3).
For claim 4, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches wherein: the processor (104 which includes processor) is further configured to determine the first user is not associated with any other resources in the resource allocation information (par.43, lines 1-3 and par.44, lines 1-6).
Dehenre fails to teach releasing, by the processor, the first resource to the first user is based at least in part on determining that the first user is not associated with any other resources in the resource allocation information.
Eppstein further teaches releasing, by the processor, the first resource to the first user is based at least in part on determining that the first user is not associated with any other resources in the resource allocation information (col.76, lines 45-68) . Therefore, It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date to modify the allocation system of Dehenre to include releasing the first resource to the first user is based at least in part on determining that the first user is not associated with any other resources in the resource allocation information as taught and suggested by Eppstein so that another resource, which may or may not be the same as the resource that was de-allocated, can be allocated to the apparatus based on the stored state information with an acceptable loss of state (Eppstein, abstract).
For claim 5, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches wherein determining, by the processor, the first user qualifies for the second resource comprises: determining, by the processor, a first value for the first resource (par.8, lines 1-7 and par.18, lines 1-8)(each token values correspond to specific resources); determining, by the processor, a second value for the second resource (par.7, lines 1-7 and par.18, lines 1-8)(each token values correspond to specific resources); and determining, by the processor, that the first value is greater than or equal to the second value (par.46, lines 1-5)(this teaches some of values either higher or smaller than the other values).
For claim 6, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches wherein the first resource is a physical object (par.16, lines 7-12).
For claim 7, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches wherein the first resource is a digital object (par.16, lines 7-12).
For claim 8, Dehenre teaches a resource allocating method, comprising: receiving a resource request (element 112 as shown in fig.1 and 3 which part of the processor par.23, lines 1-4), wherein the resource request identifies (using user identifier 136 as shown in fig.1): a first user (par.7, lines 6-10)(abstract, lines 1-2); a first resource that is currently assigned to the first user (par.7, lines 6-10)(abstract, lines 1-2); and a second resource that the first user is requesting (par.8, lines 2-6) (associating the resources based on if the location is within the distance or the values); obtaining, by a processor of a resource management device, information associated with the first resource from a first user profile that is associated with the first user (par.7, lines 7-10 and par.18, lines 1-5)(abstract, lines 1-2); determining, by the processor, that the first user qualifies for the second resource based on the information associated with the first resource and resource allocation requirements for the second resource (par.8, lines 2-6 and par.18, lines 1-5) (associating the resources based on if the location is within the distance or the values), wherein the resource allocation requirements comprises rules for determining whether a user qualifies for a resource (par.18, lines 1-5 and par.28, lines 3-10)(the system uses either location distance or token values to determine if the location distance or values are within required distance or values); obtaining, by the processor, the first resource from the first user (par.7, lines 2-6), associate, by the processor, the first resource with the resource management device in the resource allocation information (Dehenre teaches that an association between the user, the location information for the first resource, a first resource identifier for the first resource, and the first token value. The device is further configured to associate the resource allocation with a first time interval indicating a deadline for using the resource allocation as Dehenre teaches in par.7), associating, by the processor, in the first user profile the second resource with the first user for a predetermined period of time (138 as shown in fig.1)(par.8, lines 5-9 and par.31, lines 8-12)(the device 104 allocates resources in time period).
Dehenre fails to teach determining, by the processor, that additional information not included in the first user profile is needed for the first resource; request, by the processor, the additional information from a third party; receiving, by the processor, the additional information from the third party and add the additional information to the information associated with the first resource, wherein the determining, by the processor, that the first user qualifies for the second resource is based at least in part on the additional information for the first resource; wherein obtaining the first resource temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource; updating, by the processor, the first user profile to indicate that the first user is temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource; determining, by the processor, the first user has returned the second resource within the predetermined period of time; removing, by the processor, in the first user profile the association between the second resource and the first user in response to determining that the first user has returned the second resource; and releasing, by the processor, in the first user profile the first resource to the first user, wherein releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user from owning the first resource, and removes the association of the first resource with the resource management device in the resource allocation information.
Dintenfass teaches, similar allocation system, determining, by the processor, that additional information not included in the first user profile is needed for the first resource (Dintenfass teaches that the other financial institution systems and/or third-party systems, in some embodiments, provide additional information about the users 9, user's resources and liabilities, or the like, which may be used by the retirement planning systems 10, or the like as Dintenfass teaches in par.49); requesting, by the processor, the additional information from a third party (the system includes one or more third party systems 192 (e.g., a partner, agent, or contractor associated with a financial institution), one or more other financial institution systems 194 (e.g., a credit bureau, third party banks, and so forth), and one or more external systems and requests that the financial institution evaluates the customer's retirement resources and liabilities as Dintenfass teaches in par.30 and 72); receiving, by the processor, the additional information from the third party and add the additional information to the information associated with the first resource (the process 800 continues by comparing the requirements identified in block 804 to the user's resource availability, resource requirements for medical may comprise an estimate of future requirements for medical expenses or the like associated with an aging individual, and the model presents a potential outcome if the user decides to relocate to a different home, assisted living, or the like and the required expenses associated therewith as Dintenfass teaches in par.51-55) wherein the determining, by the processor, that the first user qualifies for the second resource is based at least in part on the additional information for the first resource (Dintenfass teaches after the financial institution determines the user's estimated available resource amount and estimated age parameter the financial institution (e.g., the retirement planning systems 10 and/or the retirement planning application 17), through the retirement planning interface 400, may display and indication whether or not the desired available resource amount and/or the desired age parameter meets the estimated available resource amount and/or the estimated age parameter in the plan status section 412. The plan resource summary section 414 may illustrate the user's current or estimated future resource inflows, resource outflows, and the available resource amount (e.g., safe to spend amount) that the use may spend on top of meeting the user's expenses. For example, the available resource amount in the plan resource summary section 414 may display what the user's current available resource amount is for the current time period (e.g., the current month) as Dintenfass teaches in par. 95 to 102). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date to modify the allocation system of Dehenre to include the additional information from the third party and add the additional information to the information associated with the first resource as taught and suggested by Dintenfass for the purpose of determining optimized efficient resource usage, a system can provide an optimization resource usage plan and having improve resource usage planning, such as retirement planning, for users (e.g., customers) and allows the users to factor in different variables (e.g., age, spending amounts over time, events that may affect retirement planning, or the like) (Dintenfass, par.3-4). Dehenre, as modified by Dintenfass, does not explicitly teaches wherein obtaining the first resource temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource; updating, by the processor, the first user profile to indicate that the first user is temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource; determining, by the processor, the first user has returned the second resource within the predetermined period of time; removing, by the processor, in the first user profile the association between the second resource and the first user in response to determining that the first user has returned the second resource; and releasing, by the processor, in the first user profile the first resource to the first user, wherein releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user from owning the first resource, and removes the association of the first resource with the resource management device in the resource allocation information.
Eppstein teaches, similar allocation system, wherein obtaining the first resource temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource (col.76, lines 12-30); determining, by the processor, the first user has returned the second resource within the predetermined period of time (col.77, lines 58-68); removing, by the processor, in the first user profile the association between the second resource and the first user in response to determining that the first user has returned the second resource (col.86, lines 67-68 to col.87, lines 1-38); and releasing, by the processor, in the first user profile the first resource to the first user, wherein releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user from owning the first resource (col.86, lines 67-68 to col.87, lines 1-38) (the examiner notes that the allocation system allocate the first resource such as the CPU with 4 GHZ intel premium 4 to original after the removing the second resource 3 GHZ intel premium 4 from the CPU), and removes the association of the first resource with the resource management device in the resource allocation information (Eppstein teaches that the service provider can remove, such that the resources can be suspended for any of a number of reasons, including but not limited to: de-allocating the resources from one apparatus for subsequent allocation to another apparatus (as described more fully below in the "Preempting Resource Requirements" section); de-allocating the resources at the request of the service provider, such as to perform maintenance, install upgrades, or remove the resources from the computing grid; de-allocating the resources at the request of the user of the apparatus, such as to reduce the cost of the user's apparatus by returning the resources for use to the service provider; or de-allocating the resources at the request of another entity, such as an application a previously allocated firewall from another IDC, such that the firewall is returned to the idle pool and thereby made available for allocation to another IDC as Eppstein teaches in col.51, lines 25-40 and col.76,lines 30-45).. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date to modify the allocation system of Dehenre to include temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource and releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user from owning the first resource as taught and suggested by Eppstein so that another resource, which may or may not be the same as the resource that was de-allocated, can be allocated to the apparatus based on the stored state information with an acceptable loss of state (Eppstein, abstract). Dehenre, as modified by Dintenfass and Eppstein, does not explicitly teaches updating, by the processor, the first user profile to indicate that the first user is temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource.
Kemme teaches, similar system, updating, by the processor, the first user profile to indicate that the first user is temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource (Kemme teaches that modifying the user access to the corresponding resource may include one or more of granting the user access to the corresponding resource, suspending user access to the corresponding resource for a period of time in par.5). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date to modify the allocation system of Dehenre to include temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource as taught and suggested by Kemme for the purpose of limiting the user's access to the corresponding resource to a certain duration of time, changing a level of user access to the corresponding resource, changing which portions of the corresponding resource that the user is authorized to access, or revoking the user's access to the corresponding resource (Kemme, par.10).
For claim 9, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches further comprising: identifying a resource type for the first resource (par.21, lines 5-12); requesting additional information for the first resource based on the resource type of the first resource (par.21, lines 5-12 additional information such as name or code); and the requesting by the processor for additional information for the first resource is based on the resource type of the first resources (par.21, lines 5-12 additional information such as name or code or token values and any additional information such as time interval for using the resources to identify and determining if the user is qualifies to access the resources as Dehenre teaches in par.21, lines 3-14 and par.34, lines 5-10).
For claim 10, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches wherein the information for the first resource comprises a value (token values such as currency or credits) that is associated with the first resource (par.18, lines 1-3).
For claim 11, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches further comprising: determining, by the processor, the first user is not associated with any other resources in the resource allocation information (par.43, lines 1-3 and par.44, lines 1-6).
Dehenre fails to teach wherein releasing, by the processor, the first resource to the first user is based at least in part on determining, by the processor, that the first user is not associated with any other resources in the resource allocation information.
Eppstein further teaches releasing, by the processor, the first resource to the first user is based at least in part on determining, by the processor, that the first user is not associated with any other resources in the resource allocation information (col.76, lines 45-68) . Therefore, It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date to modify the allocation system of Dehenre to include releasing the first resource to the first user is based at least in part on determining that the first user is not associated with any other resources in the resource allocation information as taught and suggested by Eppstein so that another resource, which may or may not be the same as the resource that was de-allocated, can be allocated to the apparatus based on the stored state information with an acceptable loss of state (Eppstein, abstract).
For claim 12, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches wherein determining, by the processor, the first user qualifies for the second resource comprises: determining, by the processor, a first value for the first resource (par.8, lines 1-7 and par.18, lines 1-8)(each token values correspond to specific resources); determining, , by the processor, a second value for the second resource (par.7, lines 1-7 and par.18, lines 1-8)(each token values correspond to specific resources); and determining, by the processor, that the first value is greater than or equal to the second value (par.46, lines 1-5)(this teaches some of values either higher or smaller than the other values).
For claim 13, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches wherein the first resource is a physical object (par.16, lines 7-12).
For claim 14, Dehenre, in view of Dintenfass, Eppstein and Kemme, further teaches wherein the first resource is a digital object (par.16, lines 7-12).
For claim 15, Dehenre teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium (114 as shown in fig.1) that when executed by a processor of a resource management device causes the resource management device ( 302 as shown in fig.3) (par.7, lines 1-2) to: receive, by the processor, a resource request (element 112 as shown in fig.1 and 3 which part of the processor par.23, lines 1-4), wherein the resource request identifies: a first user (par.7, lines 6-10)(abstract, lines 1-2); a first resource that is currently assigned to the first user (par.7, lines 6-10)(abstract, lines 1-2); and a second resource that the first user is requesting (par.8, lines 1-7)(abstract, lines 1-2); obtain, by the processor, information associated with the first resource from a first user profile that is associated with the first user (par.7, lines 6-10 and par.18, lines 1-8)(abstract, lines 1-2) (associating the resources based on if the location is within the distance or the values); determine the first user qualifies for the second resource based on the information associated with the first resource and resource allocation requirements for the second resource (par.7, lines 6-10, par.8, lines 1-7 and par.18, lines 1-8)(abstract, lines 1-2) (associating the resources based on if the location is within the distance or the values), wherein the resource allocation requirements comprise rules for determining whether a user qualifies for a resource (par.28, lines 4-12) (the device 104 as shown in fig.4 requirements such as the location and token values that match predetermined locations and values); obtain, by the processor, the first resource from the first user (par.7, lines 1-6), associate, by the processor, the first resource with the resource management device in the resource allocation information (Dehenre teaches that an association between the user, the location information for the first resource, a first resource identifier for the first resource, and the first token value. The device is further configured to associate the resource allocation with a first time interval indicating a deadline for using the resource allocation as Dehenre teaches in par.7), associate, by the processor, in the first user profile the second resource with the first user for a predetermined period of time (138 as shown in fig.1)(par.8, lines 5-9 and par.31, lines 8-12)(the device 104 allocates resources in time period).
Dehenre fails to teach determine, by the processor, that additional information not included in the first user profile is needed for the first resource; request, by the processor, the additional information from a third party; receive, by the processor, the additional information from the third party and add the additional information to the information associated with the first resource, wherein the determining, by the processor, that the first user qualifies for the second resource is based at least in part on the additional information for the first resource; wherein obtaining the first resource temporarily suspends the first user from owning the first resource; update, by the processor, the first user profile to indicate that the first user is temporarily suspended from accessing the first resource; determine, by the processor, the first user has returned the second resource within the predetermined period of time; remove, by the processor, in the first user profile the association between the second resource and the first user in response to determining that the first user has returned the second resource; and release, by the processor, in the first user profile the first resource to the first user, wherein releasing the first resource to the first user removes the temporary suspension of the first user